Change at Georgetown

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No need for Georgetown to change. Why should they? The only reason would be to get more applicants so they can lower their acceptance rate and increase their ranking. But guess what? Thankfully, they're not focused on that. They take applications from only those who truly want to attend, so they yes, they get fewer applicants. But the students who attend, do so happily. Jesuit spirit alive and well at Georgetown.

We saw much lower stat legacy continually getting in from our school—much lower scores/gpa, etc. I’m all for legacy if they have stats consistent with the unhooked candidates, but come on.

These comments always get me. Why do people think they know other kids' "stats" so well?

There are these things called Naviance and SCOIR. It provides test scores and gpa.

And it's anonymous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No need for Georgetown to change. Why should they? The only reason would be to get more applicants so they can lower their acceptance rate and increase their ranking. But guess what? Thankfully, they're not focused on that. They take applications from only those who truly want to attend, so they yes, they get fewer applicants. But the students who attend, do so happily. Jesuit spirit alive and well at Georgetown.

+1

as it is, the admission rate is around like 12% and SFS is more like 8%. If they went to the common app, these would both drop significantly

No, higher: 15%. But it is a self-selected group by and large.

Right. The lowest rate is McDonough, then the college, then SFS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No need for Georgetown to change. Why should they? The only reason would be to get more applicants so they can lower their acceptance rate and increase their ranking. But guess what? Thankfully, they're not focused on that. They take applications from only those who truly want to attend, so they yes, they get fewer applicants. But the students who attend, do so happily. Jesuit spirit alive and well at Georgetown.

We saw much lower stat legacy continually getting in from our school—much lower scores/gpa, etc. I’m all for legacy if they have stats consistent with the unhooked candidates, but come on.

These comments always get me. Why do people think they know other kids' "stats" so well?

There are these things called Naviance and SCOIR. It provides test scores and gpa.

And it's anonymous.

It tells you the grades/scores of the kids that were accepted, correct. The kids talk about --mom, dad, sibling, etc. went there or the parents themselves note they are alum. In the same way the kids know who got recruited as an athlete.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No need for Georgetown to change. Why should they? The only reason would be to get more applicants so they can lower their acceptance rate and increase their ranking. But guess what? Thankfully, they're not focused on that. They take applications from only those who truly want to attend, so they yes, they get fewer applicants. But the students who attend, do so happily. Jesuit spirit alive and well at Georgetown.

+1

as it is, the admission rate is around like 12% and SFS is more like 8%. If they went to the common app, these would both drop significantly

No, higher: 15%. But it is a self-selected group by and large.

Right. The lowest rate is McDonough, then the college, then SFS.

Everyone always told us that SFS was the hardest admit, such that it would be better for my kid to apply poly sci or govt or history to the college vs to SFS.

I know the published data shows college harder---but I think SFS you get a lot of highly qualified International students and those that speak multiple languages, so that might affect chances--competition?

[Anonymous]

The "feeder high school" thing, if it's still the case, is one thing they could change, especially with their heavy use of scores for support/reassurance.

[Anonymous]

I respect the Georgetown process a lot. The application requires a commitment to their process and likely prevents many from adding it as a shot-gun approach rather than with intention. They don't over-market/promote. I like that they are not TO and the essays are good prompts to showcase your fit for the school. The EA is non-binding and legacies are encouraged to apply in RD round/not EA. They get great candidates and kids. My high stats legacy kid planned to apply RD to GT this year but was admitted ED elsewhere. GT was in my kids's top 3, but they decided to try for another reach school ed that they also liked. GT is amazing but there are many great schools.

[Anonymous]

My kid just got in REA with a 1500 on one sitting and two subsequent scores that were much much lower. The big worry about them seeing all scores is unfounded. They are only looking at the high score.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Dean of Admission at Georgetown is still Charles Deacon. He has been there for many decades and is in his 80s. I don't think anything changes until he retires, which has not happened yet.

Yeah, he is considered a legend.

[Anonymous]

If they get rid of scores, it’s so they can let in more lackluster spawn of rich donors & legacies.

[Anonymous]

I felt Georgetown’s essays were very appropriate. I felt like all of the requirements put together a picture of him that was complete and very relevant. There were no strange diversity essays (ie UVA).
I felt like Georgetown got a complete picture and could make a good decision at REA time
Got in, no hooks at all, no feeder school. Unless full pay is a hook which some of you might say it is. Then again, plenty of full pay kids get deferred….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Dean of Admission at Georgetown is still Charles Deacon. He has been there for many decades and is in his 80s. I don't think anything changes until he retires, which has not happened yet.

New president likely means it's imminent though. Even though I personally think Georgetown does an excellent job of weeding out unserious applicants.

100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they get rid of scores, it’s so they can let in more lackluster spawn of rich donors & legacies.

This doesn't sound like a move they'd make, as it would go in the opposite direction of other top schools. Maybe they'd get rid of all scores, but still require a score.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No need for Georgetown to change. Why should they? The only reason would be to get more applicants so they can lower their acceptance rate and increase their ranking. But guess what? Thankfully, they're not focused on that. They take applications from only those who truly want to attend, so they yes, they get fewer applicants. But the students who attend, do so happily. Jesuit spirit alive and well at Georgetown.

We saw much lower stat legacy continually getting in from our school—much lower scores/gpa, etc. I’m all for legacy if they have stats consistent with the unhooked candidates, but come on.

My kids were those legacies. They would not have gotten in without it. One is now a junior with a 3.9 GPA in double government and philosophy majors and other meaningful contributions to the school, even with severe ADHD that prevented them from having the stats to get in. The other is not doing quite as well in a biology major, but has managed to persevere and get their GPA up over a 3.0 after some struggles with really hard classes, also with severe ADHD. They have tons of friends, close connections to professors and the Jesuits. Both just making so much out of the school that they feel connected to and give back to. So, what's your problem? Was it fair that severe ADHD kept them from thriving at rigid high school curriculum? Why is it any less fair that they have to deal with that while other, neurotypical kids have to deal with not having legacy? The world takes all kinds and I, for one, am thankful that Georgetown is a place that values relationships and connections and gives kids like mine a chance. Go ahead and flame away.

Happy for you, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they get rid of scores, it’s so they can let in more lackluster spawn of rich donors & legacies.

My lackluster spawn got in with scores in the mid-1400s, as did many non-legacy. The great thing about Georgetown is that they don't see scores as the be all end all. They know that there is a certain level prospective students should meet to show they can do the work. They don't have sliding scale and say, first let's take all the 1600s and go down from there. That's why they have such a vibrant, diverse group of students who are grounded, ambitious, and community-minded (well, except for the MSB--that place is a toxic cesspool, but that's for another thread). It's why Georgetown was sophisticated enough not to go TO in the first place. That only raised the average admitted scores and didn't allow those with sub-1500s to consider, leaving many schools to miss out on great students. Georgetown doesn't think like that and that works very well for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they get rid of scores, it’s so they can let in more lackluster spawn of rich donors & legacies.

This doesn't sound like a move they'd make, as it would go in the opposite direction of other top schools. Maybe they'd get rid of all scores, but still require a score.

You still don't understand. Georgetown doesn't care if they go in the direction of other top schools--at least when it comes to test scores and the Common App. It's a shame that, like the previous NCAA athletes that have imposed consequences for future athletes with their selfish law suit, those suing over legacy admission are also selfish and pursuing a baseless suit.