Admissions officers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school hosted a panel with eight AOs, mostly well-known/brand-name schools plus a couple of in-state. They gave the expected answers to questions like, how do you view test scores, using AI in essays, that kind of thing. My big takeaway: the AOs mostly seemed well-meaning but frankly not all that bright. It was like, oh, THIS is who makes these big decisions about my kid? Frankly one that stood out as most impressive was the in-state rep. Anyway, I'm not sure what my point is, it's not like I really thought AOs were a bunch of Harvard MBAs but it was still eye-opening.

AOs usually are people who fell into the role after college (often lesser known college) by working their way up in admissions after other career paths stalled. They are usually nice, people-oriented people but few have intellectual gravitas or are as impressive as the kids they are judging and sometimes rejecting. Most are middle-class and went to lesser known schools and not A students with slates of impressive ECs themselves. The heads of admission at Georgetown, Emory and a few others are exceptions.

It's useful perspective for our kids to know they're being judged by people with lesser credentials and accolades than they have.

This 100% incorrect. I work in higher ed (professor/chair) and recently attended a presentation on college counseling and college admissions professionals. The majority of AOs started their career path in admissions after graduating from college (many were student tour guides). A significant number of entry level/junior AOs are alumni of the institutions they work for, especially the top 30 schools.

[Anonymous]

I'm kind of nervous because the rep from my daughter's top college was a 20 something male and one super pretty, flirtatious girl in the grade was flirting with him (per my daughter and friends who were also at the meeting).

We are hoping this does not make the difference. How stupid is it that I even know this or care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol so many bitter snobs on this thread.

I was thinking the same

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AOs I've met, granted they have been more senior, have impressive undergrad degrees (often from the school they now represent).
On campus, most of the few junior people we were in contact with had also attended the school.

+1

Honestly, it seems like someone in this thread is trying to preemptively soothe themselves by saying the forthcoming rejections are coming from stupid people.

It’s not rational.

Agree. The AOs I and my kids have met have been both bright and personable. Sounds like entitlement at play. If they can't buy their way in, change the narrative .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AOs I've met, granted they have been more senior, have impressive undergrad degrees (often from the school they now represent).
On campus, most of the few junior people we were in contact with had also attended the school.

+1

Honestly, it seems like someone in this thread is trying to preemptively soothe themselves by saying the forthcoming rejections are coming from stupid people.

It’s not rational.

+1. Lot of anticipatory copium going on here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure having a bunch of Harvard MBAs in the process would improve things.

they would have been smarter, maybe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How would you all feel if your brilliant young adults told you they wanted to pursue a career in admissions?

The admissions officers at the Ivy schools I attended seemed to be liberal arts majors at SLACs and recent alums who were admissions officers by day but using their free staff tuition benefit to pursue advanced studies. The Directors of admissions were alums, but older ones who had often been in higher ed administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve noticed that women are overrepresented as AOs, which raises concerns about the evaluation of male applicants.

Now imagine how POC feel knowing that the vast majority of AOs are white.

Guilt-ridden whites who think they already have enough asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve noticed that women are overrepresented as AOs, which raises concerns about the evaluation of male applicants.

Now imagine how POC feel knowing that the vast majority of AOs are white.

Guilt-ridden whites who think they already have enough asians.

These white AOs are trying their best to get as many URM in the doors as possible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve noticed that women are overrepresented as AOs, which raises concerns about the evaluation of male applicants.

Now imagine how POC feel knowing that the vast majority of AOs are white.

Guilt-ridden whites who think they already have enough asians.

These white AOs are trying their best to get as many URM in the doors as possible

“And fewer white boys! They don’t need to go to an elite school. They’ll do fine if they go to Alabama or something. Join a fraternity or whatever white boys do.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve noticed that women are overrepresented as AOs, which raises concerns about the evaluation of male applicants.

Now imagine how POC feel knowing that the vast majority of AOs are white.

Guilt-ridden whites who think they already have enough asians.

These white AOs are trying their best to get as many URM in the doors as possible

How do you know this? With affirmative action gone, I highly doubt it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school hosted a panel with eight AOs, mostly well-known/brand-name schools plus a couple of in-state. They gave the expected answers to questions like, how do you view test scores, using AI in essays, that kind of thing. My big takeaway: the AOs mostly seemed well-meaning but frankly not all that bright. It was like, oh, THIS is who makes these big decisions about my kid? Frankly one that stood out as most impressive was the in-state rep. Anyway, I'm not sure what my point is, it's not like I really thought AOs were a bunch of Harvard MBAs but it was still eye-opening.

AOs usually are people who fell into the role after college (often lesser known college) by working their way up in admissions after other career paths stalled. They are usually nice, people-oriented people but few have intellectual gravitas or are as impressive as the kids they are judging and sometimes rejecting. Most are middle-class and went to lesser known schools and not A students with slates of impressive ECs themselves. The heads of admission at Georgetown, Emory and a few others are exceptions.

It's useful perspective for our kids to know they're being judged by people with lesser credentials and accolades than they have.

They are still the gatekeepers. So there.

[Anonymous]

Another excuse for why your middling DC didn't get into an Ivy. "DC didn't get in because 1) a black person took the spot and 2) the AOs were too stupid to recognize DC's genius.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve noticed that women are overrepresented as AOs, which raises concerns about the evaluation of male applicants.

Now imagine how POC feel knowing that the vast majority of AOs are white.

Guilt-ridden whites who think they already have enough asians.

These white AOs are trying their best to get as many URM in the doors as possible

As they should. The URMs are qualified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol so many bitter snobs on this thread.

I was thinking the same

Are both of you new here? DCUM is gonna DCUM.