Making up things in common app activities and awards

[Anonymous]

transcripts and recommendations are all largely the same for kids applying to Dartmouth (etc).

did you read Who Gets In and Why? It's the fact that the student was the elephant whisperer that got her in. The fact that that was a one day even during an expensive one-week touristy thing was unmentioned and not picked up on by the adcomm

and yes, that is what moved the needle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:transcripts and recommendations are all largely the same for kids applying to Dartmouth (etc).

did you read Who Gets In and Why? It's the fact that the student was the elephant whisperer that got her in. The fact that that was a one day even during an expensive one-week touristy thing was unmentioned and not picked up on by the adcomm

and yes, that is what moved the needle.

Yep. Ppl are missing it…

There are a lot of folks that are lying about their activities. Especially the things that are not verifiable. And it adds to their cohesive story.

Maybe it just is what it is.

[Anonymous]

I know, OP! It's infuriating, because as long as admissions are "holistic", there will be cheating and fraud.

It's much harder to cheat on a standardized test than it is to casually invent a bunch of extra-curriculars.

University admissions need to be entirely academic and standardized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I know, OP! It's infuriating, because as long as admissions are "holistic", there will be cheating and fraud.

It's much harder to cheat on a standardized test than it is to casually invent a bunch of extra-curriculars.

University admissions need to be entirely academic and standardized.

The rich/privileged love 'holistic'. Their messaging is that it helps the poors but in reality it allows them to game it to their benefit. Who do you think the college cartel will listen to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:transcripts and recommendations are all largely the same for kids applying to Dartmouth (etc).

did you read Who Gets In and Why? It's the fact that the student was the elephant whisperer that got her in. The fact that that was a one day even during an expensive one-week touristy thing was unmentioned and not picked up on by the adcomm

and yes, that is what moved the needle.

Well the applicant could be lying about being an elephant whisperer. There is zero way to verify any of these stories people write about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I know, OP! It's infuriating, because as long as admissions are "holistic", there will be cheating and fraud.

It's much harder to cheat on a standardized test than it is to casually invent a bunch of extra-curriculars.

University admissions need to be entirely academic and standardized.

Until we come up with a national standardized curriculum, it will never happen. Also, one nationalized entrance exam that is not developed by a "non-profit" such as the college board would also be in the right direction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised at so many people dismissing this is minor. Or somehow suggesting that the system created this. This is a case of someone trying to claim a status that isn't theirs. My kid didn't get an office in her club/team. She presented herself as best she good, listing as Sr. + her function on the team. There is no need to invent because you lost a popularity vote. And, making up awards in lieu of earning them just betrays a Trumplike or Santosy justification for whatever it takes to get ahead. Grr.

Let's see.. We have a taxpayer subsidized higher-ed system that holds the keys to the kingdom (in terms of jobs and wealth creation) that has unjust filters that blatantly benefit the rich/privileged. There's absolutely nothing wrong in circumventing those filters doing whatever it takes. Nothing 'Trumplike or Santosy' about it.

[Anonymous]

the passion project movement is rooted in this "trust and never verified" system.

you can laugh but the kids who found a "passion" in spring of junior year to cook with grandma (look for our podcast!) while connecting your love for baking with your interest in chemistry were super super successful with top colleges

the fact that you cooked with grandma 4x, did 4 podcasts that were 7 minutes each, than you dropped it all and actually plan on transferring into CS asap all go unmentioned. our high school counselors let people tell their own stories, even when they side eye it all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised at so many people dismissing this is minor. Or somehow suggesting that the system created this. This is a case of someone trying to claim a status that isn't theirs. My kid didn't get an office in her club/team. She presented herself as best she good, listing as Sr. + her function on the team. There is no need to invent because you lost a popularity vote. And, making up awards in lieu of earning them just betrays a Trumplike or Santosy justification for whatever it takes to get ahead. Grr.

Let's see.. We have a taxpayer subsidized higher-ed system that holds the keys to the kingdom (in terms of jobs and wealth creation) that has unjust filters that blatantly benefit the rich/privileged. There's absolutely nothing wrong in circumventing those filters doing whatever it takes. Nothing 'Trumplike or Santosy' about it.

See. These are the kinds of people advising their kids to make crap up. I see it all the time. I don’t have much faith colleges can see through it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I know, OP! It's infuriating, because as long as admissions are "holistic", there will be cheating and fraud.

It's much harder to cheat on a standardized test than it is to casually invent a bunch of extra-curriculars.

University admissions need to be entirely academic and standardized.

The rich/privileged love 'holistic'. Their messaging is that it helps the poors but in reality it allows them to game it to their benefit. Who do you think the college cartel will listen to?

Utterly false. Who started "holistic" review? The universities did. They don't care squat about what "the rich/privileged" love. The universities love it because they can rely less on GPA and exam stats and more on kumbaya, leading to social engineering of each entering class. Read the Chronicle of Higher Education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:the passion project movement is rooted in this "trust and never verified" system.

you can laugh but the kids who found a "passion" in spring of junior year to cook with grandma (look for our podcast!) while connecting your love for baking with your interest in chemistry were super super successful with top colleges

the fact that you cooked with grandma 4x, did 4 podcasts that were 7 minutes each, than you dropped it all and actually plan on transferring into CS asap all go unmentioned. our high school counselors let people tell their own stories, even when they side eye it all

This is standard operating procedure for elite school admissions, once again by the rich/privileged. The 'scheme' starts at the beginning of high school and of course the kid is very involved in this. I know a kid that showed 'evidence' of their love for English and got into Stanford. Switched to CS right away. Another was 'into politics and social change' and went the whole nine yards in terms of working for a congressional campaign (daddy's friend), etc. but switched to a science (pre-med intentions) major at their prestigious T3 school. They spent a ton on their college admissions counselor starting with the summer after MS.
Obviously these machinations won't be possible without a really smart kid who actually listens to the parents but for every one such kid, there are hundreds who are at least as good or better that won't get those opportunities yet their parents' taxes subsidize these criminal institutions!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I know, OP! It's infuriating, because as long as admissions are "holistic", there will be cheating and fraud.

It's much harder to cheat on a standardized test than it is to casually invent a bunch of extra-curriculars.

University admissions need to be entirely academic and standardized.

The rich/privileged love 'holistic'. Their messaging is that it helps the poors but in reality it allows them to game it to their benefit. Who do you think the college cartel will listen to?

Utterly false. Who started "holistic" review? The universities did. They don't care squat about what "the rich/privileged" love. The universities love it because they can rely less on GPA and exam stats and more on kumbaya, leading to social engineering of each entering class. Read the Chronicle of Higher Education.

Who do you think runs/controls those institutions?

[Anonymous]

I think it's a good time to teach your kids to put themselves in the best light they can honestly. The admissions advantages are low, and the risks associated with dishonesty at this point are likely low too (unless your kid is claiming they won the Regeneron award or equivalent). It might serve as a later protection against higher stakes temptations to be dishonest (e.g., plagiarism) that can get you kicked out of school or other serious consequences, financial fraud that can get you serious fines/jail time.
All those who blame the system and encourage dishonesty in response likely don't value honesty as a core value--there's always a way to claim there's a tilted system -- tax laws, hiring practices, dating sites--that made you do it. If you value honesty and hope your kids do too---this is a meaningful time to encourage them to put it into action--the stakes are low but not non-existent. They will also encounter people who get away with --and get ahead from--being dishonest, but this just reinforces the stakes of being honest. You can't guarantee they will continue on this path, but you at least know they know you want them to.

[Anonymous]

I Santos'd the hell out of my apps in the early 2000s. Earned me tickets to Vandy, GTech, and Emory. You play to win the game.

[Anonymous]

Cheating started way before TO and holistic admissions. What on earth do you think these college “advisors” parents are shelling out over 25k to are doing? Making sure Sally’s not splitting infinitives? Come on!