Do great students sometimes get shut out?

[Anonymous]

It’s about the difference between a competitive candidate and a compelling candidate.

I just heard Duke’s AO speak about this on a recent podcast. Super helpful.

[Anonymous]

They always get shut out. It’s a gamble.

[Anonymous]

Shut out of top, but fallback was UT-Austin in state auto admit. They were good only bc they had a strong safety.

person 1 - 1600 SAT, rank 1 out of 600+, rejected all ivies, lots of AP, stanford, michigan, duke, chicago, northwestern, varsity sport

person 2 - 1580 SAT, top 5%, lots of AP, varsity sport, rejected UVA, UNC, Duke.

Have a good safety!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Shut out of top, but fallback was UT-Austin in state auto admit. They were good only bc they had a strong safety.

person 1 - 1600 SAT, rank 1 out of 600+, rejected all ivies, lots of AP, stanford, michigan, duke, chicago, northwestern, varsity sport

person 2 - 1580 SAT, top 5%, lots of AP, varsity sport, rejected UVA, UNC, Duke.

Have a good safety!

Should have mentioned - both were rejected everywhere but their safety

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shut out of top, but fallback was UT-Austin in state auto admit. They were good only bc they had a strong safety.

person 1 - 1600 SAT, rank 1 out of 600+, rejected all ivies, lots of AP, stanford, michigan, duke, chicago, northwestern, varsity sport

person 2 - 1580 SAT, top 5%, lots of AP, varsity sport, rejected UVA, UNC, Duke.

Have a good safety!

Should have mentioned - both were rejected everywhere but their safety

same for my high stats magnet kid. It was rough.

[Anonymous]

Imagine both of the above examples were public high school? That happens a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s about the difference between a competitive candidate and a compelling candidate.

I just heard Duke’s AO speak about this on a recent podcast. Super helpful.

Agree.
People think high stats gets you in. Look at what ppl are posting. Stats are irrelevant after a certain point. It does not get you “in”. Just gets your app read.

Lower (but still baseline) stats can get you in, if you are otherwise “compelling” (defined as geo diversity; major (way more relevant than people think); identity hooks; what you do inside and outside the classroom (evidenced by LOR and national awards); and most importantly, whether the school needs more of that type of person this year).

You want to be the type of student who fits into a specific bucket.

Apply widely bc you don’t know what buckets each school needs that year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s about the difference between a competitive candidate and a compelling candidate.

I just heard Duke’s AO speak about this on a recent podcast. Super helpful.

Agree.
People think high stats gets you in. Look at what ppl are posting. Stats are irrelevant after a certain point. It does not get you “in”. Just gets your app read.

Lower (but still baseline) stats can get you in, if you are otherwise “compelling” (defined as geo diversity; major (way more relevant than people think); identity hooks; what you do inside and outside the classroom (evidenced by LOR and national awards); and most importantly, whether the school needs more of that type of person this year).

You want to be the type of student who fits into a specific bucket.

Apply widely bc you don’t know what buckets each school needs that year.

This feels like a "Game of Luck."

[Anonymous]

Have your kid Apply to some places where there are fewer kids who match your kid’s profile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s about the difference between a competitive candidate and a compelling candidate.

I just heard Duke’s AO speak about this on a recent podcast. Super helpful.

Agree.
People think high stats gets you in. Look at what ppl are posting. Stats are irrelevant after a certain point. It does not get you “in”. Just gets your app read.

Lower (but still baseline) stats can get you in, if you are otherwise “compelling” (defined as geo diversity; major (way more relevant than people think); identity hooks; what you do inside and outside the classroom (evidenced by LOR and national awards); and most importantly, whether the school needs more of that type of person this year).

You want to be the type of student who fits into a specific bucket.

Apply widely bc you don’t know what buckets each school needs that year.

This feels like a "Game of Luck."

Luck and games. Private school kids play the game better. At least the hundreds of thousands of dollars they spent on tuition will let them overspend for college too.

[Anonymous]

A lot of you need to read up on this process. You all seem fixated on stats.

The stats don’t make you the better or best candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shut out of top, but fallback was UT-Austin in state auto admit. They were good only bc they had a strong safety.

person 1 - 1600 SAT, rank 1 out of 600+, rejected all ivies, lots of AP, stanford, michigan, duke, chicago, northwestern, varsity sport

person 2 - 1580 SAT, top 5%, lots of AP, varsity sport, rejected UVA, UNC, Duke.

Have a good safety!

Should have mentioned - both were rejected everywhere but their safety

same for my high stats magnet kid. It was rough.

That is brutal. And a good reminder that kids should apply to several targets.

[Anonymous]

I don’t know any kid who was “shut out”. I do know some families who were suprised their kid didn’t end up in the prestige-tier they expected. In both cases those kids are doing great (one at Pitt and one UMD), have had amazing accomplishments and internships, and are likely on the same “track” they always were on.
And by the way both kids were high stats with stellar ecs and one had what I thought was a crazy hook. The hook doesn’t go away even if you don’t get in where you expected and will serve this kid well in life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s about the difference between a competitive candidate and a compelling candidate.

I just heard Duke’s AO speak about this on a recent podcast. Super helpful.

Agree.
People think high stats gets you in. Look at what ppl are posting. Stats are irrelevant after a certain point. It does not get you “in”. Just gets your app read.

Lower (but still baseline) stats can get you in, if you are otherwise “compelling” (defined as geo diversity; major (way more relevant than people think); identity hooks; what you do inside and outside the classroom (evidenced by LOR and national awards); and most importantly, whether the school needs more of that type of person this year).

You want to be the type of student who fits into a specific bucket.

Apply widely bc you don’t know what buckets each school needs that year.

This feels like a "Game of Luck."

Luck and games. Private school kids play the game better. At least the hundreds of thousands of dollars they spent on tuition will let them overspend for college too.

Vicious cycle. Colleges know these families will overspend in the future, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shut out of top, but fallback was UT-Austin in state auto admit. They were good only bc they had a strong safety.

person 1 - 1600 SAT, rank 1 out of 600+, rejected all ivies, lots of AP, stanford, michigan, duke, chicago, northwestern, varsity sport

person 2 - 1580 SAT, top 5%, lots of AP, varsity sport, rejected UVA, UNC, Duke.

Have a good safety!

Should have mentioned - both were rejected everywhere but their safety

same for my high stats magnet kid. It was rough.

I always told my high stat magnet kid - be a MIT worthy kid who goes to UMD. And that's what happened. Did he apply to MIT? Heck, yes!! Harvard? Never. UMD - Absolutely!! Was it rough? Not at all. The money that UMD gave him and the money he saved by not going to MIT helped him to invest in the stock market. He is already ahead.