The Absurdity of U.S. News College Rankings - Per Malcolm Gladwell

[Anonymous]

This thread is truly odd even for dcum

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.

That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.

But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.

You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.

How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.

I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.

High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.

That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.

But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.

You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.

How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.

I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.

High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.

The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.

That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.

But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.

You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.

How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.

I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.

High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.

The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)

I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.

That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.

But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.

You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.

How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.

I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.

High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.

The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)

I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.

DP here. Many schools require a Naviance exit survey. Yes people can lie. But why would they? Most people want to be helpful and understand the value since they used the data themselves. For many high performing schools there is also a relationship between guidance and admissions for fact checking where it matters.

So yes it depends on the school. But Naviance is the best data you get, even if not perfect.

On a personal note, I think your name calling of PP was unwarranted and you should apologize. We're just trying to have a helpful discussion, even if opinions differ, and that does not help. In fact it hurts your otherwise insightful post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.

That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.

But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.

You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.

How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.

I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.

High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.

The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)

I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.

if this is true, then Naviance is useless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.

That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.

But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.

You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.

How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.

I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.

High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.

The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)

I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.

You may feel insecure to turn down the survey, most students are honest enough and willing to help future students. It may surprise your tiny heart that Naviance is quite accurate and is the best of all the available data concerning college acceptance distribution. If parchment does get a hold of some of the data as someone suggested, their comparison charts then are highly useful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.

That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.

But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.

You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.

How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.

I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.

High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.

The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)

I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.

You may feel insecure to turn down the survey, most students are honest enough and willing to help future students. It may surprise your tiny heart that Naviance is quite accurate and is the best of all the available data concerning college acceptance distribution. If parchment does get a hold of some of the data as someone suggested, their comparison charts then are highly useful.

ok white people. In a school that has few URMs, or anything else that is atypical responding is self-identifying. (Every kid knows who went to Standford for a good 5 years. Then you know the metrics and can figure out every other school the kid applied too. That is very personal. if you are applying to state school maybe you are not personally identifying but for top schools you are) Why would you out your kid. Naviance is not a useful tool for any kids that is not average for the school they attend. If they are an athlete, URM, musician, poet...its not predictive anyway. Why should I feel insecure all my kids went top 10? and had multiple offers? I just don't feel I have to submit personal identifying data. When I went top10 we did not have Naviance and guess what we still went to college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.

That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.

But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.

You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.

How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.

I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.

High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.

The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)

I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.

You may feel insecure to turn down the survey, most students are honest enough and willing to help future students. It may surprise your tiny heart that Naviance is quite accurate and is the best of all the available data concerning college acceptance distribution. If parchment does get a hold of some of the data as someone suggested, their comparison charts then are highly useful.

I am glad you know most kids in the US and that you know that they are caring and honest. I would never make such a claim. I know my kids, their friends, my friend's kids, and relatives. I do not feel I can make statements about all kids in the US. I also think its interesting that you know about the hearts of kids through the US. How did you get to know everyone? Did you meet kids in every state and all the high schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.

That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.

But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.

You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.

How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.

I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.

High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.

The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)

I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.

DP here. Many schools require a Naviance exit survey. Yes people can lie. But why would they? Most people want to be helpful and understand the value since they used the data themselves. For many high performing schools there is also a relationship between guidance and admissions for fact checking where it matters.

So yes it depends on the school. But Naviance is the best data you get, even if not perfect.

On a personal note, I think your name calling of PP was unwarranted and you should apologize. We're just trying to have a helpful discussion, even if opinions differ, and that does not help. In fact it hurts your otherwise insightful post.

For the second time, that poster was annoying because they repeated the same thing like it was new. It is rude to tell someone they are wrong and say the same thing. The post said nothing and was only made so the poster could pretend to be smart. It reminded me of being in a work meeting with someone saying the obvious, counselor know where kids apply because they do recommendations and they encourage kids to inform about decisions. So they have the data??? What about that makes any sense. I encourage people to give me a million dollars so I have a million dollars?? I do not think the statement added any value to the conversation except for the poster to have an ego boost. I thought the poster was an idiot and I am not insecure or heartless. If you want to treat Naviance like it's the bible please do. Just remember when admission decisions come out and do not be surprised if it's not accurate for your kid. This happens every year. Why? because the data set may not be as accurate as you think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.

That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.

But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.

You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.

How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.

I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.

High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.

The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)

I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.

You may feel insecure to turn down the survey, most students are honest enough and willing to help future students. It may surprise your tiny heart that Naviance is quite accurate and is the best of all the available data concerning college acceptance distribution. If parchment does get a hold of some of the data as someone suggested, their comparison charts then are highly useful.

ok white people. In a school that has few URMs, or anything else that is atypical responding is self-identifying. (Every kid knows who went to Standford for a good 5 years. Then you know the metrics and can figure out every other school the kid applied too. That is very personal. if you are applying to state school maybe you are not personally identifying but for top schools you are) Why would you out your kid. Naviance is not a useful tool for any kids that is not average for the school they attend. If they are an athlete, URM, musician, poet...its not predictive anyway. Why should I feel insecure all my kids went top 10? and had multiple offers? I just don't feel I have to submit personal identifying data. When I went top10 we did not have Naviance and guess what we still went to college.

Why would you "out" your kid? Why would I "out" my kid who got into Stanford? I would out them from the mountaintop! How insulting for you to think they should be embarrassed of their accomplishments in any way!

Naviance scattergrams show a dot, with no personal identifying information. So you are not "outing" anyone. Anybody who can figure out it is your kid already knows the deal about your kid, don't they?

The main reason to do it -- and this is important -- because it helps other students, whether you think it does or not. That's how data works. When you have all of the data, the outliers self-identify. It's easy, actually, the more data you have. When people like you leave out the data because of your personal issues, that hurts everyone. But I guess you don't care about that.

It's certainly your choice, and you are certainly entitled to make a selfish one, if that is your concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On a personal note, I think your name calling of PP was unwarranted and you should apologize. We're just trying to have a helpful discussion, even if opinions differ, and that does not help. In fact it hurts your otherwise insightful post.

For the second time, that poster was annoying because they repeated the same thing like it was new. It is rude to tell someone they are wrong and say the same thing. The post said nothing and was only made so the poster could pretend to be smart. It reminded me of being in a work meeting with someone saying the obvious, counselor know where kids apply because they do recommendations and they encourage kids to inform about decisions. So they have the data??? What about that makes any sense. I encourage people to give me a million dollars so I have a million dollars?? I do not think the statement added any value to the conversation except for the poster to have an ego boost. I thought the poster was an idiot and I am not insecure or heartless. If you want to treat Naviance like it's the bible please do. Just remember when admission decisions come out and do not be surprised if it's not accurate for your kid. This happens every year. Why? because the data set may not be as accurate as you think.

You called the person names, and that is childish and uncalled for. If that's who you want to be, fine. I think you can be better.

Also, as I posted above, if the Naviance data is not accurate and not helpful, it's because people don't participate to make it useful. So if your accusation is correct it is because of people like you. At our school, everyone contributes, including our many athletes and URMs. We're in this process together as a community. It works. Try it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.

That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.

But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.

You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.

How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.

I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.

High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.

The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)

I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.

You may feel insecure to turn down the survey, most students are honest enough and willing to help future students. It may surprise your tiny heart that Naviance is quite accurate and is the best of all the available data concerning college acceptance distribution. If parchment does get a hold of some of the data as someone suggested, their comparison charts then are highly useful.

ok white people. In a school that has few URMs, or anything else that is atypical responding is self-identifying. (Every kid knows who went to Standford for a good 5 years. Then you know the metrics and can figure out every other school the kid applied too. That is very personal. if you are applying to state school maybe you are not personally identifying but for top schools you are) Why would you out your kid. Naviance is not a useful tool for any kids that is not average for the school they attend. If they are an athlete, URM, musician, poet...its not predictive anyway. Why should I feel insecure all my kids went top 10? and had multiple offers? I just don't feel I have to submit personal identifying data. When I went top10 we did not have Naviance and guess what we still went to college.

Why would you "out" your kid? Why would I "out" my kid who got into Stanford? I would out them from the mountaintop! How insulting for you to think they should be embarrassed of their accomplishments in any way!

Naviance scattergrams show a dot, with no personal identifying information. So you are not "outing" anyone. Anybody who can figure out it is your kid already knows the deal about your kid, don't they?

The main reason to do it -- and this is important -- because it helps other students, whether you think it does or not. That's how data works. When you have all of the data, the outliers self-identify. It's easy, actually, the more data you have. When people like you leave out the data because of your personal issues, that hurts everyone. But I guess you don't care about that.

It's certainly your choice, and you are certainly entitled to make a selfish one, if that is your concern.

It does not help other students in a small sample because each person is unique. In big schools with robust data, it is very helpful. when you have one or two kids getting into the school you need the back story to make sense of the dots. For example, the kid with an unusually low GPA for X School was a starting pitcher that went pro and the kid who was rejected with great credentials had been suspended for drinking twice. If there were 50 or 100 kids that applied or got into X school it would be helpful. I am talking about schools with under 100-200 for the graduating class. Finally, at base, I don't care and I generally reject anything that requires my kids to experience discomfort for the education of others. Simply put, their job is to be students and kid not some kind of teacher for other students. I will always be more concerned about their privacy than a mass of unknown people. i guarantee there are others like me. If you call that selfish I own it. I definitely felt put on display at the independent schools I attended and as a result I have chosen not to do that with my kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On a personal note, I think your name calling of PP was unwarranted and you should apologize. We're just trying to have a helpful discussion, even if opinions differ, and that does not help. In fact it hurts your otherwise insightful post.

For the second time, that poster was annoying because they repeated the same thing like it was new. It is rude to tell someone they are wrong and say the same thing. The post said nothing and was only made so the poster could pretend to be smart. It reminded me of being in a work meeting with someone saying the obvious, counselor know where kids apply because they do recommendations and they encourage kids to inform about decisions. So they have the data??? What about that makes any sense. I encourage people to give me a million dollars so I have a million dollars?? I do not think the statement added any value to the conversation except for the poster to have an ego boost. I thought the poster was an idiot and I am not insecure or heartless. If you want to treat Naviance like it's the bible please do. Just remember when admission decisions come out and do not be surprised if it's not accurate for your kid. This happens every year. Why? because the data set may not be as accurate as you think.

You called the person names, and that is childish and uncalled for. If that's who you want to be, fine. I think you can be better.

Also, as I posted above, if the Naviance data is not accurate and not helpful, it's because people don't participate to make it useful. So if your accusation is correct it is because of people like you. At our school, everyone contributes, including our many athletes and URMs. We're in this process together as a community. It works. Try it.

I don't need to be better but you do. You are very judgy and kind of holier than thou. You actually personally know everyone contributes to Naviance??? Naviance predicts Harvard, Princeton and Yale??? I can guarantee it does not. It predicts schools that have massive numbers of students who apply... otherwise know as robust data. You are not my mother and there is no need for you to tell me "I think you can be better." What is that?? Who do you think you are?? So rude and jerky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On a personal note, I think your name calling of PP was unwarranted and you should apologize. We're just trying to have a helpful discussion, even if opinions differ, and that does not help. In fact it hurts your otherwise insightful post.

For the second time, that poster was annoying because they repeated the same thing like it was new. It is rude to tell someone they are wrong and say the same thing. The post said nothing and was only made so the poster could pretend to be smart. It reminded me of being in a work meeting with someone saying the obvious, counselor know where kids apply because they do recommendations and they encourage kids to inform about decisions. So they have the data??? What about that makes any sense. I encourage people to give me a million dollars so I have a million dollars?? I do not think the statement added any value to the conversation except for the poster to have an ego boost. I thought the poster was an idiot and I am not insecure or heartless. If you want to treat Naviance like it's the bible please do. Just remember when admission decisions come out and do not be surprised if it's not accurate for your kid. This happens every year. Why? because the data set may not be as accurate as you think.

You called the person names, and that is childish and uncalled for. If that's who you want to be, fine. I think you can be better.

Also, as I posted above, if the Naviance data is not accurate and not helpful, it's because people don't participate to make it useful. So if your accusation is correct it is because of people like you. At our school, everyone contributes, including our many athletes and URMs. We're in this process together as a community. It works. Try it.

DP I really resent your post. If you do not want people to actually personally hate you, you might not want to talk to them like a child. Your post was so offensive. Who do you want to be?? "I think you can be better"?? you called a person names os I am going to call you Childish-- that is calling someone a name-- but its grown up when you all knowing one do it??? What kind of person are you???