Big 3 (or thereabouts) College Results - Class of 2021

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:STA sends about 20 percent of its class to Ivies, 20 percent to top ranked SLACS, and about 20 percent of its class to Chicago and Tulane.

The "Big 3" don't tell you how many of those students are recruited athletes, donor families, highly connected or under represented minorities. Take those numbers with a grain of salt.

I think the issue isn't URM, or recruited athletes or donor families, those can come from public too. It is the issue of legacy. I think it is telling how many students get into MIT, if any, as MIT does not use legacy as an element of consideration within their admissions.

Exactly this: Legacy
The low MIT numbers show that.

No, it doesn’t. It’s about culture. STA follows a liberal arts curriculum and is most appealing for boys and parents who value that. This population is not interested in sending their boys to MIT.

In addition, to be competitive at MIT or any of the schools that specialize in STEM, you need a different approach to STEM than is offered by STA.

Our son is very strong in STEM and, as STA parents, we are conscious that he will need to make a choice soon. If he wants to focus on STEM, we’ll need to think about magnet schools.

We are HYP alums who would prefer that our son take the liberal arts route, but friends who are on faculty at prestigious STEM schools have told us he will be at a disadvantage in STEM fields if he attends Harvard or Yale.

Princeton has a respected school of engineering, so that might be a compromise, but if he wants to work in computer science, even Princeton will disadvantage him.

The best Ivy for STEM is Cornell, but Big 3 schools send grads to Stanford, Cal, Georgia Tech, Carnegie Mellon, Harvey Mudd and even to MIT, occasionally.

True, they send more to Dartmouth, Yale, Harvard and def U of Chicago, but I think PP is a bit out of date.

STEM is the future much more so than it was 15- 20 years ago, there are waaay to many Lawyers and these schools change with the times.

Count the SE Asians in each class. That is a good indicator of what the academics are like and how things are trending

And yet so many colleges cap the STEM admits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:STA sends about 20 percent of its class to Ivies, 20 percent to top ranked SLACS, and about 20 percent of its class to Chicago and Tulane.

The "Big 3" don't tell you how many of those students are recruited athletes, donor families, highly connected or under represented minorities. Take those numbers with a grain of salt.

I think the issue isn't URM, or recruited athletes or donor families, those can come from public too. It is the issue of legacy. I think it is telling how many students get into MIT, if any, as MIT does not use legacy as an element of consideration within their admissions.

Exactly this: Legacy
The low MIT numbers show that.

No, it doesn’t. It’s about culture. STA follows a liberal arts curriculum and is most appealing for boys and parents who value that. This population is not interested in sending their boys to MIT.

In addition, to be competitive at MIT or any of the schools that specialize in STEM, you need a different approach to STEM than is offered by STA.

Our son is very strong in STEM and, as STA parents, we are conscious that he will need to make a choice soon. If he wants to focus on STEM, we’ll need to think about magnet schools.

We are HYP alums who would prefer that our son take the liberal arts route, but friends who are on faculty at prestigious STEM schools have told us he will be at a disadvantage in STEM fields if he attends Harvard or Yale.

Princeton has a respected school of engineering, so that might be a compromise, but if he wants to work in computer science, even Princeton will disadvantage him.

The best Ivy for STEM is Cornell, but Big 3 schools send grads to Stanford, Cal, Georgia Tech, Carnegie Mellon, Harvey Mudd and even to MIT, occasionally.

True, they send more to Dartmouth, Yale, Harvard and def U of Chicago, but I think PP is a bit out of date.

STEM is the future much more so than it was 15- 20 years ago, there are waaay to many Lawyers and these schools change with the times.

Count the SE Asians in each class. That is a good indicator of what the academics are like and how things are trending

PP, I wasn't speaking for all Big 3s. I was speaking for STA, as the first poster suggested that STA kids only get into Ivies and SLACs because of their legacy status and presented the lack of STA admits to MIT as evidence. Well, you can't get in if you don't apply. STA does send kids to STEM schools, but they are a minority.

Your reference to SE Asians is stereotyping of the worst sort. Most of the SE Asians grads from STA go on to Ivies and SLACs. I'd say you're the one who is out of date.

STEM is so not the future compared to 15-20 years ago. Most of the STEM functions currently done by humans will be outsourced to AI in another 15-20 years. People who can think creatively and solve problems will be the ones employed. Many STEM types will be retraining.

As in Engineers....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
PP, I wasn't speaking for all Big 3s. I was speaking for STA, as the first poster suggested that STA kids only get into Ivies and SLACs because of their legacy status and presented the lack of STA admits to MIT as evidence. Well, you can't get in if you don't apply. STA does send kids to STEM schools, but they are a minority.

Your reference to SE Asians is stereotyping of the worst sort. Most of the SE Asians grads from STA go on to Ivies and SLACs. I'd say you're the one who is out of date.

STEM is so not the future compared to 15-20 years ago. Most of the STEM functions currently done by humans will be outsourced to AI in another 15-20 years. People who can think creatively and solve problems will be the ones employed. Many STEM types will be retraining.

As in Engineers....

Nah. Most engineers can't think their way out of a paper box. AI will take over most engineering-based problem solving and do it faster and better than humans. At which point, being able to think creatively and solve problems that involve people will be the only comparative advantage humans will have left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
PP, I wasn't speaking for all Big 3s. I was speaking for STA, as the first poster suggested that STA kids only get into Ivies and SLACs because of their legacy status and presented the lack of STA admits to MIT as evidence. Well, you can't get in if you don't apply. STA does send kids to STEM schools, but they are a minority.

Your reference to SE Asians is stereotyping of the worst sort. Most of the SE Asians grads from STA go on to Ivies and SLACs. I'd say you're the one who is out of date.

STEM is so not the future compared to 15-20 years ago. Most of the STEM functions currently done by humans will be outsourced to AI in another 15-20 years. People who can think creatively and solve problems will be the ones employed. Many STEM types will be retraining.

As in Engineers....

Nah. Most engineers can't think their way out of a paper box. AI will take over most engineering-based problem solving and do it faster and better than humans. At which point, being able to think creatively and solve problems that involve people will be the only comparative advantage humans will have left.

You obviously know nothing about engineers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you are calling Michigan weak academically?

I wouldn't think OP is calling Michigan weak academically.

However, on a side note we decided NOT to apply after the armed protest at the State House and the plot to kidnap the Gov. We decided the MW hasn't changed enough in the last 40 years and have zero interest in DC having a "proud boy" as a roomie

I know the admissions office is weeping over your decision

My husband and I both attended schools in the Midwest. College towns are far more liberal than the surrounding areas. The Proud Boys aren’t the people you’d find there.

I attended University of Illinois a few decades ago coming from Main Line Philadelphia and I was shocked at the deep seated racism and anti-semetism at the school. Some examples:
* sororities and and fraternities were segregated and did not pledge across perceived " different race" lines - this included SE Asians ( Pakistanis ). We had no social mixers with Sammy, for example because ummmm " dating leads to marriage .. and I am not sure the alumni and our parents would approve of that " full stop

* I often dined with teammates who were AA. I once had a strange guy appear in my dorm doorway to " warn me" that " That kinda thing.... isn't tolerated here " He dissapeared after giving me his " message"

* People would make jokes every time Angie and Jesse kissed on camera in All My Children... it was a mystery to me what they found so funny so I asked . " the lips" was the response.... these were college aged girls who had all gotten above 1300 on SAT and all went on to work as CPA's or Ad Execs or in Finance in Chicago.

They always said the same thing when I challenged them , " I am not a racist ...Its just the way we were raised"

How many decades ago?! Another U of I grad here, and that’s definitely not the way things were when I attended. (I may be younger than you though.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG 15:19, you need to post this on the Colleges forum since someone asked about UIUC recently.
I agree with you 100% esp. about the sorority-fraternity nonsense. The worst, most foul-mouthed unapologetic racists weren't from Berwyn but Bannockburn.

Right. Because PPs experience circa 1988 is so relevant now.

A couple decades ago would make it more like 2000

Except PP said a few, not a couple. Try to keep up, dear.

[Anonymous]

Creative types for content will do well. My friend just sold his creative business for 7.5 billion. The engineers got paid salaries.

[Anonymous]

I heard that at least one student from GDS got into MIT EA. Can anyone else verify?

[Anonymous]

I understand that Potomac’s class of 2021 is doing extremely well in terms of acceptances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I understand that Potomac’s class of 2021 is doing extremely well in terms of acceptances.

Do tell...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that Potomac’s class of 2021 is doing extremely well in terms of acceptances.

Do tell...

I am excited for those Potomac kids. I wish I could say the same about our Big 3. There have been a few admits to Ivies, NW and Chicago, but a ton of unexpected rejections and deferrals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
PP, I wasn't speaking for all Big 3s. I was speaking for STA, as the first poster suggested that STA kids only get into Ivies and SLACs because of their legacy status and presented the lack of STA admits to MIT as evidence. Well, you can't get in if you don't apply. STA does send kids to STEM schools, but they are a minority.

Your reference to SE Asians is stereotyping of the worst sort. Most of the SE Asians grads from STA go on to Ivies and SLACs. I'd say you're the one who is out of date.

STEM is so not the future compared to 15-20 years ago. Most of the STEM functions currently done by humans will be outsourced to AI in another 15-20 years. People who can think creatively and solve problems will be the ones employed. Many STEM types will be retraining.

As in Engineers....

Nah. Most engineers can't think their way out of a paper box. AI will take over most engineering-based problem solving and do it faster and better than humans. At which point, being able to think creatively and solve problems that involve people will be the only comparative advantage humans will have left.

You obviously know nothing about engineers

No, they are a lawyer stuck in a paper box.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Creative types for content will do well. My friend just sold his creative business for 7.5 billion. The engineers got paid salaries.

Bloomberg was an electrical engineer. So was my father who sold his computer programming business for a chuck of change in the 90’s. And even if an engineer who works at JPL is has a salary position they might love their job and feel satisfied with what they do. More than most people can say...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about public vs private. It's geography. They're not picking the Whitman kid over GDS. They're picking the Idaho public school kid over both.

No, they’re not. More kids probably attend Ivy League schools from MoCo than from the entire state of Idaho.

No s##t. That's simple math. But your odds are better if you're the Idaho kid.

You’re just making sh*t up - what are the respective odds?

ONLY if that Idaho kid has the same extracurricular and promise/academic interest shown outside of grades based on stellar recs from teachers etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I interviewed a kid from the "Big 3" for my HYPS alma mater and I'm sad she got deferred. She seemed great!

Did she tell you she got deferred or does the school tell you that?

The school tells me. You can login to your alumni reviewer portal and check on the status of kids you’ve interviewed. They ask you to contact anyone who got in to say congrats; they ask you not to contact anyone who didn’t. Anyways, I just really liked this kid — one of the best two I’ve interviewed in about 10 years — so I was disappointed she ended up deferred. No doubt she’ll get in somewhere great though.

To the interviewer -- if you happen to be the woman who interviewed my daughter, she loved talking to you, too. She is disappointed, but still holding out hope that she'll get better news during the regular decision round. Thank you for rooting for her!

Statistically, I’m sure it’s someone else. But now I’m curious: Can you tell me anything about the interview/your daughter/anything I said during the interview that would allow me to know if it was her?

No Dog in this ...but my vote is the interviewer / alum call the AD and says, " this is the most outstanding kid I have interviewed in 10 years and I am so taken back that she was deferred that I am questioning whether my Alma Mater still holds out the same values and ethos when I was a student.... I am seriously considering no longer donating...

fingers crossed that gets her IN

Alum, do NOT do this, and if anyone affiliated with any private or public school asks you to do this, report their conduct to your admissions contact immediately.

PPP clearly has NO understanding of how admissions works. No decent self-respecting alum would have the stupidity to make that kind of threat. I have interviewed many students for two HYP schools. Many outstanding and incredible kids I've interviewed have been flat-out rejected. It's disappointing, but I know that the admissions staff are the only people who have knowledge of the entire applicant pool. They have to make tough decisions to create a class. It's not about the individual student. Their job is tough enough without my making it harder through moronic threats.

Further evidence that you “interviews” a) take yourselves far too seriously; b) don’t recognize written sarcasm and attempts at humor when you see them; snd c) actually believe that your little session at Starbucks has any impact whatsoever on whether or not a candidate is admitted.

Don’t you realize that your vaunted Ivy lets you play interviewer to keep you happy and connected, so the $$ keep coming?

It’s as if the alumni interview doesn’t matter at all...