For parents that were shocked their kids didn't get accepted...

[Anonymous]

There are always seem to be a few students who only applied to top-20 schools and are shocked when they don’t get in, but it’s unfair to characterize everyone who was surprised this year that way. There truly were some surprises this year. Pitt and Auburn come to mind as examples of schools that got significantly more competitive this year. Kids that would have been accepted two years ago, or even last year, didn’t get in this year. TBH, there are very few schools that are nationally known that are true safeties any more. Doesn’t mean that there isn’t a place for everyone, but the “lottery” feel of applications goes further down the USNWR list than it used to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I understand some families have overly high expectations and would have benefited from more accurate information about current conditions. However you're being downright nasty, OP. Plenty of families have been rejected from their preferred choices (yes, families, it's all right if it's a family thing, and not just the student's thing), and are pretty down.

But perhaps cruelty is the point of your post. In which case... thoughts and prayers.

+1
Maybe some parents don't have the time or resources to be as knowledgeable as they could be. Why is it so necessary to be nasty? Your shocked others aren't living your same life? That's honestly strange to me.

-1 OP directed her question to people on DCUM who were shocked their kids didn’t get admitted. Every poster on here has the time and resources to get pretty knowledgeable because there is a lot of excellent information right here on DCUM. And OP’s question has already prompted some thoughtful comments about this year’s experience that will no doubt be helpful to those with younger kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thought process that you ‘need’ to attend a selective school to be successful is wrong to begin with. Thats where all the stress and anxiety comes from. It’s unbelievable how seemingly educated people here think the name and selectivity of a school determine success and happiness is completely flawed. Every high stats kid thinks that they deserve to go to a selective school otherwise their high school years were a waste. Thats flawed thinking. Thats a source of stress. Just because you have high stats doesn’t mean you get into a selective school. Fix your expectations

100% this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where you unaware of the significant increase in applications since COVID? Did you think TO would have no effect on the applicant pool? Did anyone (e.g., college counselor) discuss yield projection for perceived "safety" schools? Do you consider the math/odds in applying to a school that accepts less than 20% of applicants? Did you discuss any of these issues with your kids before they applied? Or is it something else?

I heard there was expected to be a huge increase in applications but I wasn't sure what that impact would be. We figured that the schools would still look at tests for those students that did submit them. I remember seeing statistics showing that for TO schools in the prior year, the acceptance rate was higher for students that did submit test scores. We guessed that the increase in applications is mainly from students who are reaching at schools that they normally would not have applied to and that the schools will still find a way to admit students according to their normal standards. In short, we figured that TO was largely a form of virtue signaling. Apparently, we were wrong.

My kid's counselor was very reassuring to our kid regarding his chances of being accepted. Looking at the Naviance map for his ED school, his stats are in the heart of a cluster of checkmarks and only one X. Despite this, we applied to 20+ schools because ED/EA rounds completely shattered our preconceived notions. Now the counselor is voicing frustration and the sinking feeling that the students haven't been given adequate guidance this year. One student with a 3.6 GPA and 1350 SAT applied to a "normal" number of schools and did not get into any of them.

We did consider the math/odds but felt confident about our kid's stats, ECs, recommendations, and essay quality. Even if he has bad luck at one, two, three, or four schools, he should not have bad luck at 10 or 20 schools. We are engineers and we understand statistics; both of us are also in administrative roles and write documents targeted toward a variety of audiences so we understand the importance of connecting with the reader. I believe we were rationally optimistic based on the then-best-available information.

I do want to congratulate all the students that got into a school that they are happy with. It's a valuable opportunity and I wish them the very best.

And???

[Anonymous]

People seem to forget that rejection has always been part of the process. Even forty years ago, it was rare for students to get in everywhere they applied. I was in the top ten percent of a nationally ranked public high school, and a National merit semi finalist and still got rejected by Duke, waitlisted by one or two other schools even though admitted to current top school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's hard for some people to fathom the size of some of these applicant pools. And it's also hard to fathom that there are literally thousands of students with amazing programs and top grades in these pools.

We also tend to grasp onto the anecdotes that comfort us after see the numbers. So a college rejects 90% of applicants, but someone's cousin got in with 2 Bs on their transcript, so we tell ourselves our kid has a chance.

There's a difference between someone having unrealistic expectations and those that looked at past admissions trends and had set more realistic expectations, only to have that expectation shattered by what has been a very different year compared to the past.

But the super selective schools were still super selective.

There were a few odd ones, like Auburn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are always seem to be a few students who only applied to top-20 schools and are shocked when they don’t get in, but it’s unfair to characterize everyone who was surprised this year that way. There truly were some surprises this year. Pitt and Auburn come to mind as examples of schools that got significantly more competitive this year. Kids that would have been accepted two years ago, or even last year, didn’t get in this year. TBH, there are very few schools that are nationally known that are true safeties any more. Doesn’t mean that there isn’t a place for everyone, but the “lottery” feel of applications goes further down the USNWR list than it used to.

The shock is spread around up and down the ranks, not just those who applied to top-20, or even just a few of the schools like Pitt and Auburn. I see kids getting rejected from UMD, W&M, VTech, and JMU who have stats that should have made those schools fairly safe in years past.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where you unaware of the significant increase in applications since COVID? Did you think TO would have no effect on the applicant pool? Did anyone (e.g., college counselor) discuss yield projection for perceived "safety" schools? Do you consider the math/odds in applying to a school that accepts less than 20% of applicants? Did you discuss any of these issues with your kids before they applied? Or is it something else?

I heard there was expected to be a huge increase in applications but I wasn't sure what that impact would be. We figured that the schools would still look at tests for those students that did submit them. I remember seeing statistics showing that for TO schools in the prior year, the acceptance rate was higher for students that did submit test scores. We guessed that the increase in applications is mainly from students who are reaching at schools that they normally would not have applied to and that the schools will still find a way to admit students according to their normal standards. In short, we figured that TO was largely a form of virtue signaling. Apparently, we were wrong.

My kid's counselor was very reassuring to our kid regarding his chances of being accepted. Looking at the Naviance map for his ED school, his stats are in the heart of a cluster of checkmarks and only one X. Despite this, we applied to 20+ schools because ED/EA rounds completely shattered our preconceived notions. Now the counselor is voicing frustration and the sinking feeling that the students haven't been given adequate guidance this year. One student with a 3.6 GPA and 1350 SAT applied to a "normal" number of schools and did not get into any of them.

We did consider the math/odds but felt confident about our kid's stats, ECs, recommendations, and essay quality. Even if he has bad luck at one, two, three, or four schools, he should not have bad luck at 10 or 20 schools. We are engineers and we understand statistics; both of us are also in administrative roles and write documents targeted toward a variety of audiences so we understand the importance of connecting with the reader. I believe we were rationally optimistic based on the then-best-available information.

I do want to congratulate all the students that got into a school that they are happy with. It's a valuable opportunity and I wish them the very best.

OP here: thanks for responding--being rationally optimistic makes sense given the context. I must admit that I hope TO goes away before my younger high-achieving kid applies to colleges. I don't see much hope if many schools continue to get 50k+ applications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where you unaware of the significant increase in applications since COVID? Did you think TO would have no effect on the applicant pool? Did anyone (e.g., college counselor) discuss yield projection for perceived "safety" schools? Do you consider the math/odds in applying to a school that accepts less than 20% of applicants? Did you discuss any of these issues with your kids before they applied? Or is it something else?

I heard there was expected to be a huge increase in applications but I wasn't sure what that impact would be. We figured that the schools would still look at tests for those students that did submit them. I remember seeing statistics showing that for TO schools in the prior year, the acceptance rate was higher for students that did submit test scores. We guessed that the increase in applications is mainly from students who are reaching at schools that they normally would not have applied to and that the schools will still find a way to admit students according to their normal standards. In short, we figured that TO was largely a form of virtue signaling. Apparently, we were wrong.

My kid's counselor was very reassuring to our kid regarding his chances of being accepted. Looking at the Naviance map for his ED school, his stats are in the heart of a cluster of checkmarks and only one X. Despite this, we applied to 20+ schools because ED/EA rounds completely shattered our preconceived notions. Now the counselor is voicing frustration and the sinking feeling that the students haven't been given adequate guidance this year. One student with a 3.6 GPA and 1350 SAT applied to a "normal" number of schools and did not get into any of them.

We did consider the math/odds but felt confident about our kid's stats, ECs, recommendations, and essay quality. Even if he has bad luck at one, two, three, or four schools, he should not have bad luck at 10 or 20 schools. We are engineers and we understand statistics; both of us are also in administrative roles and write documents targeted toward a variety of audiences so we understand the importance of connecting with the reader. I believe we were rationally optimistic based on the then-best-available information.

I do want to congratulate all the students that got into a school that they are happy with. It's a valuable opportunity and I wish them the very best.

And???

??? The OP asked as series of questions, which I made a good faith effort to answer from my perspective. Do you have anything to contribute?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where you unaware of the significant increase in applications since COVID? Did you think TO would have no effect on the applicant pool? Did anyone (e.g., college counselor) discuss yield projection for perceived "safety" schools? Do you consider the math/odds in applying to a school that accepts less than 20% of applicants? Did you discuss any of these issues with your kids before they applied? Or is it something else?

So you acknowledge the system is broken and no one should expect it to be logical and therefore they shouldn’t complain? Applicants can and should be angry. It’s ridiculous that there’s no reliable way to predict chances of admission and people are right to be aggravated with a needlessly opaque and Byzantium system that protects and enriches these “non-profits.”

1) The system is not "broken."

2) The process and the results ARE logical, for the current climate - you just don't like that.

3) Why in the world would you think that you are entitled to be able to "predict chances of admission?" And even if you could, if you're looking at top schools with acceptance rates in single digits - can you not understand that that applies to you, too. THAT IS your "chance of admission."

4) Please explain how you come to regard this as a "needlessly opaque and Byzantium system that protects and enriches non-profits." I'm open to hearing a credible explanation of this, but doubt you have one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where you unaware of the significant increase in applications since COVID? Did you think TO would have no effect on the applicant pool? Did anyone (e.g., college counselor) discuss yield projection for perceived "safety" schools? Do you consider the math/odds in applying to a school that accepts less than 20% of applicants? Did you discuss any of these issues with your kids before they applied? Or is it something else?

I heard there was expected to be a huge increase in applications but I wasn't sure what that impact would be. We figured that the schools would still look at tests for those students that did submit them. I remember seeing statistics showing that for TO schools in the prior year, the acceptance rate was higher for students that did submit test scores. We guessed that the increase in applications is mainly from students who are reaching at schools that they normally would not have applied to and that the schools will still find a way to admit students according to their normal standards. In short, we figured that TO was largely a form of virtue signaling. Apparently, we were wrong.

My kid's counselor was very reassuring to our kid regarding his chances of being accepted. Looking at the Naviance map for his ED school, his stats are in the heart of a cluster of checkmarks and only one X. Despite this, we applied to 20+ schools because ED/EA rounds completely shattered our preconceived notions. Now the counselor is voicing frustration and the sinking feeling that the students haven't been given adequate guidance this year. One student with a 3.6 GPA and 1350 SAT applied to a "normal" number of schools and did not get into any of them.

We did consider the math/odds but felt confident about our kid's stats, ECs, recommendations, and essay quality. Even if he has bad luck at one, two, three, or four schools, he should not have bad luck at 10 or 20 schools. We are engineers and we understand statistics; both of us are also in administrative roles and write documents targeted toward a variety of audiences so we understand the importance of connecting with the reader. I believe we were rationally optimistic based on the then-best-available information.

I do want to congratulate all the students that got into a school that they are happy with. It's a valuable opportunity and I wish them the very best.

And???

And is right.

And by the way, if this is a public school you're talking about, all you're doing is proving our point. A 3.6 GPA is inconsistent with a 1350 SAT score.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where you unaware of the significant increase in applications since COVID? Did you think TO would have no effect on the applicant pool? Did anyone (e.g., college counselor) discuss yield projection for perceived "safety" schools? Do you consider the math/odds in applying to a school that accepts less than 20% of applicants? Did you discuss any of these issues with your kids before they applied? Or is it something else?

I heard there was expected to be a huge increase in applications but I wasn't sure what that impact would be. We figured that the schools would still look at tests for those students that did submit them. I remember seeing statistics showing that for TO schools in the prior year, the acceptance rate was higher for students that did submit test scores. We guessed that the increase in applications is mainly from students who are reaching at schools that they normally would not have applied to and that the schools will still find a way to admit students according to their normal standards. In short, we figured that TO was largely a form of virtue signaling. Apparently, we were wrong.

My kid's counselor was very reassuring to our kid regarding his chances of being accepted. Looking at the Naviance map for his ED school, his stats are in the heart of a cluster of checkmarks and only one X. Despite this, we applied to 20+ schools because ED/EA rounds completely shattered our preconceived notions. Now the counselor is voicing frustration and the sinking feeling that the students haven't been given adequate guidance this year. One student with a 3.6 GPA and 1350 SAT applied to a "normal" number of schools and did not get into any of them.

We did consider the math/odds but felt confident about our kid's stats, ECs, recommendations, and essay quality. Even if he has bad luck at one, two, three, or four schools, he should not have bad luck at 10 or 20 schools. We are engineers and we understand statistics; both of us are also in administrative roles and write documents targeted toward a variety of audiences so we understand the importance of connecting with the reader. I believe we were rationally optimistic based on the then-best-available information.

I do want to congratulate all the students that got into a school that they are happy with. It's a valuable opportunity and I wish them the very best.

OP here: thanks for responding--being rationally optimistic makes sense given the context. I must admit that I hope TO goes away before my younger high-achieving kid applies to colleges. I don't see much hope if many schools continue to get 50k+ applications.

I have one more kid that will be going through this in 3 years. I am also hoping for his sake that this year's madness give way to order in the near future. In the meantime, we'll adjust our strategy as new information emerges. Best of luck to your kid as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where you unaware of the significant increase in applications since COVID? Did you think TO would have no effect on the applicant pool? Did anyone (e.g., college counselor) discuss yield projection for perceived "safety" schools? Do you consider the math/odds in applying to a school that accepts less than 20% of applicants? Did you discuss any of these issues with your kids before they applied? Or is it something else?

I heard there was expected to be a huge increase in applications but I wasn't sure what that impact would be. We figured that the schools would still look at tests for those students that did submit them. I remember seeing statistics showing that for TO schools in the prior year, the acceptance rate was higher for students that did submit test scores. We guessed that the increase in applications is mainly from students who are reaching at schools that they normally would not have applied to and that the schools will still find a way to admit students according to their normal standards. In short, we figured that TO was largely a form of virtue signaling. Apparently, we were wrong.

My kid's counselor was very reassuring to our kid regarding his chances of being accepted. Looking at the Naviance map for his ED school, his stats are in the heart of a cluster of checkmarks and only one X. Despite this, we applied to 20+ schools because ED/EA rounds completely shattered our preconceived notions. Now the counselor is voicing frustration and the sinking feeling that the students haven't been given adequate guidance this year. One student with a 3.6 GPA and 1350 SAT applied to a "normal" number of schools and did not get into any of them.

We did consider the math/odds but felt confident about our kid's stats, ECs, recommendations, and essay quality. Even if he has bad luck at one, two, three, or four schools, he should not have bad luck at 10 or 20 schools. We are engineers and we understand statistics; both of us are also in administrative roles and write documents targeted toward a variety of audiences so we understand the importance of connecting with the reader. I believe we were rationally optimistic based on the then-best-available information.

I do want to congratulate all the students that got into a school that they are happy with. It's a valuable opportunity and I wish them the very best.

And???

And is right.

And by the way, if this is a public school you're talking about, all you're doing is proving our point. A 3.6 GPA is inconsistent with a 1350 SAT score.

I am fascinated. How so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where you unaware of the significant increase in applications since COVID? Did you think TO would have no effect on the applicant pool? Did anyone (e.g., college counselor) discuss yield projection for perceived "safety" schools? Do you consider the math/odds in applying to a school that accepts less than 20% of applicants? Did you discuss any of these issues with your kids before they applied? Or is it something else?

So you acknowledge the system is broken and no one should expect it to be logical and therefore they shouldn’t complain? Applicants can and should be angry. It’s ridiculous that there’s no reliable way to predict chances of admission and people are right to be aggravated with a needlessly opaque and Byzantium system that protects and enriches these “non-profits.”

I agree entirely. The system should benefit the students, in that it should be transparent. Whatever selection criteria are used should be crystal clear and objectively measurable. Right now it benefits the colleges, and that's not how education is supposed to work. That's not how education works in other wealthy countries - over there, it's grades and test scores, period. No grade inflation, curriculae don't change much depending on which region of the country you're from, and usually there are mandatory national exams that help compare student profiles. Done. Social engineering is just not allowed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Entitlement despite the fact that there are thousands of kids domestically and internationally with similar academic profiles applying to the same 50 schools.

It's not "entitlement" so stop saying that. THey aren't saying their kids are ENTITLED to get in. They are saying their kids worked hard, got great grades, checked all the boxes. And working hard has, in the past, managed to get those kids into "good" colleges. That is not the norm now. But, many parents' views are colored by what has been the case in the past. You can argue whether the past v. present is the better model. But that feeling is not "entitlement."