What does the future hold for kids applying in the next 5 years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Selectivity ≠ quality

How many kids whose dream school is Michigan really will hit the academic (or social or whatever) ceiling at Kansas (admit rate >90%)? 1%? 5%? Surely not 10%. Same is true for Williams rejects at St. Lawrence (admit rate almost 50%) or Whitman (admit rate >50%). Or Vandy rejects at Miami of Ohio (admit rate >90%). Or Carleton rejects at Wooster (admit rate >60%). Etc., etc., etc.

Kids (and especially their parents!) just need to recognize that they can be admitted to a school that will fit them and offer a great education--and get over that it might not appear on the first page of some ridiculous "ranking" list.

USNWR rankings drive the DCUM frenzy buddy.

[Anonymous]

OP here-again not aiming for T20 or Ivy League schools. My kids are above average but not spectacular. I just want them to be happy and do their best. But reading these threads makes it seem like even state schools are super competitive. And if kids can't get into UVA/WM/VT, then won't the next schools on the list (VCU, JMU, etc) become very competitive as well? I don't want to buy into the rat race (like checking off some list from a book that seems completely unrealistic for most kids) but I want my kids to be left in the dust.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here-again not aiming for T20 or Ivy League schools. My kids are above average but not spectacular. I just want them to be happy and do their best. But reading these threads makes it seem like even state schools are super competitive. And if kids can't get into UVA/WM/VT, then won't the next schools on the list (VCU, JMU, etc) become very competitive as well? I don't want to buy into the rat race (like checking off some list from a book that seems completely unrealistic for most kids) but I want my kids to be left in the dust.

*don't want

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The current situation is that colleges have become less predictable in whom they accept, in part due to test-optional admissions. It's not so much that college admission is more selective across the board, although it has certainly become so at the top universities and colleges, but that students are forced to widen their search and apply to more schools to ensure admission at one of them. And tuition increases every year, faster than salaries can keep up.

And that's a very bad thing. It puts the burden on the student and their family to navigate an extremely complex, non-transparent, process. Colleges and universities profit from the murkier admissions criteria ("holistic" and "equitable" my foot) to cherry-pick the class that suits them that year, to sculpt their brand and image. Profit, in the form of reputation and money, is the end goal, at the expense of individual students.

No other wealthy nation does this to its young people.

Disagree with this. There is an old article (maybe Economist) titled “the one shot society “ (about South Korea).

[Anonymous]

Let’s put this in perspective. The population of the U.S. is now up to 334 million. The 2nd Baby Boom has now reached college age and the number of HS graduates will continue to rise until it peeks in 2025. The cost of college has risen to the point that more and more parents are opting for State U, raising the standards and the quality of what state schools are offering. With rising population comes increased job and business opportunities for more college graduates than ever before.

An awareness that the population was outstripping the number of seats at top colleges provoked Newsweek to publish an article 16 years ago, “The New Ivies” ( https://newsweek.com/americas-25-new-elite-ivies-108771 ), suggesting that there was/is an expanded number of colleges and universities offering what the Ivies once offered. I see the same thing happening again.

Those who are wise will realize that top opportunities don’t exist only at the Top 20 colleges. They will get out in front of the curve, see which colleges are on the rise, and find opportunities for their kids at the new elite schools before the door has shut - as it already has at schools which are rejecting 99-95% of their applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read who gets in and why too, and while very insightful, I’m not sure it gives a magic formula.

What I took away from WGIAW it was:

Be very smart and get an A and 5 on BC Calc junior year (especially if female as this illustrates high quant IQ.)
Take the other hardest courses at your school and get As
Apply ED and EA
Be full pay
Be recruited for a sport
Most importantly, admission officers are human and make many seemingly random decisions

Anyway, this “recipe” is not possible for most kids. For my kids, we are going to do a lot of rolling and EA schools and be happy with those schools. We are not getting attached to any one perfect school. I am encouraging my kid to apply to schools they fit their areas of interest but have admission rates above 50%. Maybe they will try for one harder to get into school for ED but that will be balanced with others that are more likely.

PP. I don’t think the book gives a formula. I kind of gleaned one from the book and from anecdotes of friends and neighbors. It worked for us. Not saying it would work for others. But maybe it’s helpful for some who like to think in a “what helps” way. Lots of things don’t help. Some things do. Play those cards right and you improve your odds. That’s all I meant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The current situation is that colleges have become less predictable in whom they accept, in part due to test-optional admissions. It's not so much that college admission is more selective across the board, although it has certainly become so at the top universities and colleges, but that students are forced to widen their search and apply to more schools to ensure admission at one of them. And tuition increases every year, faster than salaries can keep up.

And that's a very bad thing. It puts the burden on the student and their family to navigate an extremely complex, non-transparent, process. Colleges and universities profit from the murkier admissions criteria ("holistic" and "equitable" my foot) to cherry-pick the class that suits them that year, to sculpt their brand and image. Profit, in the form of reputation and money, is the end goal, at the expense of individual students.

No other wealthy nation does this to its young people.

No, but their way is worse. Only the top 10% on one test will get into college in some Asian countries. That's it. If you didn't feel well on test day or were tired or stressed, oh well. I'd much prefer our way where there are schools for every student. My kid is having a pretty low-stress high school experience because we are realistic. He will end up at a SLAC surrounded by students who didn't kill themselves trying to get into top 20 schools. The rankings I care about are which schools retain the highest number of students, 4 year graduation rate and happiest students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The current situation is that colleges have become less predictable in whom they accept, in part due to test-optional admissions. It's not so much that college admission is more selective across the board, although it has certainly become so at the top universities and colleges, but that students are forced to widen their search and apply to more schools to ensure admission at one of them. And tuition increases every year, faster than salaries can keep up.

And that's a very bad thing. It puts the burden on the student and their family to navigate an extremely complex, non-transparent, process. Colleges and universities profit from the murkier admissions criteria ("holistic" and "equitable" my foot) to cherry-pick the class that suits them that year, to sculpt their brand and image. Profit, in the form of reputation and money, is the end goal, at the expense of individual students.

No other wealthy nation does this to its young people.

No, but their way is worse. Only the top 10% on one test will get into college in some Asian countries. That's it. If you didn't feel well on test day or were tired or stressed, oh well. I'd much prefer our way where there are schools for every student. My kid is having a pretty low-stress high school experience because we are realistic. He will end up at a SLAC surrounded by students who didn't kill themselves trying to get into top 20 schools. The rankings I care about are which schools retain the highest number of students, 4 year graduation rate and happiest students.

Yes, true. Even in European countries kids are tracked at an early age, eliminating possibilities for some before most even know who they are at that age. This remains the land of opportunity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a formula. People say it’s random, and that’s true on the margins. But there is a way to play it if you know the formula. The absolute best thing you can do for your 8-10the grader now is to buy Who Gets In and Why. I read it 2 years ago and was able glean a logic to it. Wish it weren’t the case, but given that I can’t change it, we played the game. We broke out the admissions criteria into 4 parts, and focused on each of those in turn. That worked a charm for DD. She’s into a top 10 college, no hooks other than good luck and knowing the game.

Thanks. I have a 9th grader and will get this book!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here-again not aiming for T20 or Ivy League schools. My kids are above average but not spectacular. I just want them to be happy and do their best. But reading these threads makes it seem like even state schools are super competitive. And if kids can't get into UVA/WM/VT, then won't the next schools on the list (VCU, JMU, etc) become very competitive as well? I don't want to buy into the rat race (like checking off some list from a book that seems completely unrealistic for most kids) but I want my kids to be left in the dust.

Yes, that is exactly what has been happening and will continue to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a formula. People say it’s random, and that’s true on the margins. But there is a way to play it if you know the formula. The absolute best thing you can do for your 8-10the grader now is to buy Who Gets In and Why. I read it 2 years ago and was able glean a logic to it. Wish it weren’t the case, but given that I can’t change it, we played the game. We broke out the admissions criteria into 4 parts, and focused on each of those in turn. That worked a charm for DD. She’s into a top 10 college, no hooks other than good luck and knowing the game.

Thanks. I have a 9th grader and will get this book!

If the book really is as advertised here, then buying it for your kid risks mental health issues. Be sure to balance it out, at least, with Where You Go is not Who You'll Be, Harvard Schmarvard and/or the Less High School Stress website. Strategizing is fine to a certain extent, but not if it's leading to anxiety over 'needing' to gain admission to specific colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read who gets in and why too, and while very insightful, I’m not sure it gives a magic formula.

What I took away from WGIAW it was:

Be very smart and get an A and 5 on BC Calc junior year (especially if female as this illustrates high quant IQ.)
Take the other hardest courses at your school and get As
Apply ED and EA
Be full pay
Be recruited for a sport
Most importantly, admission officers are human and make many seemingly random decisions

Anyway, this “recipe” is not possible for most kids. For my kids, we are going to do a lot of rolling and EA schools and be happy with those schools. We are not getting attached to any one perfect school. I am encouraging my kid to apply to schools they fit their areas of interest but have admission rates above 50%. Maybe they will try for one harder to get into school for ED but that will be balanced with others that are more likely.

PP. I don’t think the book gives a formula. I kind of gleaned one from the book and from anecdotes of friends and neighbors. It worked for us. Not saying it would work for others. But maybe it’s helpful for some who like to think in a “what helps” way. Lots of things don’t help. Some things do. Play those cards right and you improve your odds. That’s all I meant.

PP Can you tell us what you gleaned from it? What matters and what does not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read who gets in and why too, and while very insightful, I’m not sure it gives a magic formula.

What I took away from WGIAW it was:

Be very smart and get an A and 5 on BC Calc junior year (especially if female as this illustrates high quant IQ.)
Take the other hardest courses at your school and get As
Apply ED and EA
Be full pay
Be recruited for a sport
Most importantly, admission officers are human and make many seemingly random decisions

Anyway, this “recipe” is not possible for most kids. For my kids, we are going to do a lot of rolling and EA schools and be happy with those schools. We are not getting attached to any one perfect school. I am encouraging my kid to apply to schools they fit their areas of interest but have admission rates above 50%. Maybe they will try for one harder to get into school for ED but that will be balanced with others that are more likely.

PP. I don’t think the book gives a formula. I kind of gleaned one from the book and from anecdotes of friends and neighbors. It worked for us. Not saying it would work for others. But maybe it’s helpful for some who like to think in a “what helps” way. Lots of things don’t help. Some things do. Play those cards right and you improve your odds. That’s all I meant.

PP Can you tell us what you gleaned from it? What matters and what does not?

PP here. Yes! It’s grades, rigor, SAT/ACT, ECs, and applications. I also want to make clear that it isn’t at all about getting into a Top 20 college. It’s about aiming for what you think is best for your DC. You get the formula, maximize the variables in it, and that improves your odds for colleges that you’re targeting. It’s so simple people will think it’s stupid. But we just took each variable in turn during junior year and used our limited time and money on what mattered most, each of those variables. Like we said, we can’t control everything, but for the next 2 montres, we’re focusing on maximizing SAT score. Check. Next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read who gets in and why too, and while very insightful, I’m not sure it gives a magic formula.

What I took away from WGIAW it was:

Be very smart and get an A and 5 on BC Calc junior year (especially if female as this illustrates high quant IQ.)
Take the other hardest courses at your school and get As
Apply ED and EA
Be full pay
Be recruited for a sport
Most importantly, admission officers are human and make many seemingly random decisions

Anyway, this “recipe” is not possible for most kids. For my kids, we are going to do a lot of rolling and EA schools and be happy with those schools. We are not getting attached to any one perfect school. I am encouraging my kid to apply to schools they fit their areas of interest but have admission rates above 50%. Maybe they will try for one harder to get into school for ED but that will be balanced with others that are more likely.

PP. I don’t think the book gives a formula. I kind of gleaned one from the book and from anecdotes of friends and neighbors. It worked for us. Not saying it would work for others. But maybe it’s helpful for some who like to think in a “what helps” way. Lots of things don’t help. Some things do. Play those cards right and you improve your odds. That’s all I meant.

PP Can you tell us what you gleaned from it? What matters and what does not?

PP here. Yes! It’s grades, rigor, SAT/ACT, ECs, and applications. I also want to make clear that it isn’t at all about getting into a Top 20 college. It’s about aiming for what you think is best for your DC. You get the formula, maximize the variables in it, and that improves your odds for colleges that you’re targeting. It’s so simple people will think it’s stupid. But we just took each variable in turn during junior year and used our limited time and money on what mattered most, each of those variables. Like we said, we can’t control everything, but for the next 2 montres, we’re focusing on maximizing SAT score. Check. Next.

What I got out of the book was partly how many totally qualified students they see, and how they have to prune hard to get to a reasonably sized class. It helped me see that my kid's experience of being put on many waitlists was actually a sign of being qualified but just not having some (likely unchangeable) attributes desired by the school for that particular class.

Also how important it is to tell a coherent story about the student. Want to major in subject X but have showed no interest in it before (through classes, extracurriculars, etc.)? Not a great look. Say you couldn't do extracurriculars because of family obligations but then don't give enough detail about the time commitment? You haven't proven your case and it's hard to tell if you're an involved older sibling or just a slacker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The current situation is that colleges have become less predictable in whom they accept, in part due to test-optional admissions. It's not so much that college admission is more selective across the board, although it has certainly become so at the top universities and colleges, but that students are forced to widen their search and apply to more schools to ensure admission at one of them. And tuition increases every year, faster than salaries can keep up.

And that's a very bad thing. It puts the burden on the student and their family to navigate an extremely complex, non-transparent, process. Colleges and universities profit from the murkier admissions criteria ("holistic" and "equitable" my foot) to cherry-pick the class that suits them that year, to sculpt their brand and image. Profit, in the form of reputation and money, is the end goal, at the expense of individual students.

No other wealthy nation does this to its young people.

No, but their way is worse. Only the top 10% on one test will get into college in some Asian countries. That's it. If you didn't feel well on test day or were tired or stressed, oh well. I'd much prefer our way where there are schools for every student. My kid is having a pretty low-stress high school experience because we are realistic. He will end up at a SLAC surrounded by students who didn't kill themselves trying to get into top 20 schools. The rankings I care about are which schools retain the highest number of students, 4 year graduation rate and happiest students.

Completely agree. In the UK, you’ve got one shot. The GCSE’s. And if you don’t, at the age of 16, place in A levels Math, you are out of the running for numerous university degrees/career paths…. You can’t do engineering, computer science, biology, medicine, chemistry, physics, accounting and business (at their top unis….)… Your path is determined at the age of 16! Their system is way worse than ours. At least our kids/adults have entry paths into ANY career from multiple approaches… Community college, 4 year college, re-entering as an adult learner, switching careers, a second bachelors. Educate yourself PP before you make such false claims.