Some apps just land well

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, some do, they just have an “it” quality. I tend to think it’s apps that are so authentic and genuine and consistent in voice across the application you can’t help but feel like you know them. Kind of like the person that can make anyone feel like they are the only thing that matters when you speak to them.

This 1000%

Majority at the T20 schools have some part of the "it" quality. They are naturally curious about learning, their application is genuine, they are natural leaders and actually did the things in their app themselves. Those are the kids who get admitted to most places.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We learned after first kid (2023) that you want/need your complete application to tell a whole story not just disjointed pieces that don’t connect. It needs to be authentic to the student - please please please let them write their own essays - and have points that echo across the essay(s), activities, and academic interests. Second kid’s package was much tighter and they overperformed this cycle.

All of this.
Tight integrated memorable story without repetition-where each part of the application reveals something new but interrelated to the kid’s applicant persona/ narrative/ tagline.

It’s ok to okay to omit things in the EC list if it doesn’t complement the rest of the story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We learned after first kid (2023) that you want/need your complete application to tell a whole story not just disjointed pieces that don’t connect. It needs to be authentic to the student - please please please let them write their own essays - and have points that echo across the essay(s), activities, and academic interests. Second kid’s package was much tighter and they overperformed this cycle.

All of this.
Tight integrated memorable story without repetition-where each part of the application reveals something new but interrelated to the kid’s applicant persona/ narrative/ tagline.

It’s ok to okay to omit things in the EC list if it doesn’t complement the rest of the story.

Agreed.

These poor kids ... they've been sold on so many passing trends. Could it be that their genuine selves, just a little edited, are the way to go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My nephew didnt have the high stats thrown around here. He had a 1440 SAT, 3.7 GPA. Interesting/different EC and amazing essays. He is a hell of a writer. I have not yet met a person who has read his common app essay who didnt cry. Showing smarts with vulnerability just pushed his application to the top. He is finishing up his first year at Princeton.

It’s that vulnerability that makes you cry or catch your throat. I have read one of those common app essays this cycle. That applicant is getting in everywhere.

I am sure your kids are great so no issue there. But do we really want schools filled with people with sob stories? Then people wonder why these campuses have so many students with mental health issues.

Right, I thought sob stories were "out."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My nephew didnt have the high stats thrown around here. He had a 1440 SAT, 3.7 GPA. Interesting/different EC and amazing essays. He is a hell of a writer. I have not yet met a person who has read his common app essay who didnt cry. Showing smarts with vulnerability just pushed his application to the top. He is finishing up his first year at Princeton.

My kids are much lower-stats than that. But they're good writers. No sob stories, but their essays were emotional and real. I'm proud of what they submitted, because it was all them!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We learned after first kid (2023) that you want/need your complete application to tell a whole story not just disjointed pieces that don’t connect. It needs to be authentic to the student - please please please let them write their own essays - and have points that echo across the essay(s), activities, and academic interests. Second kid’s package was much tighter and they overperformed this cycle.

All of this.
Tight integrated memorable story without repetition-where each part of the application reveals something new but interrelated to the kid’s applicant persona/ narrative/ tagline.

It’s ok to okay to omit things in the EC list if it doesn’t complement the rest of the story.

Agreed.

These poor kids ... they've been sold on so many passing trends. Could it be that their genuine selves, just a little edited, are the way to go?

My kid has a medical condition that isn't visible and requires significant effort to mitigate. Too stats, but condition has somewhat impacted EC strength to date.

Resilience that this kid exhibits behind the scenes is extraordinary but we always see advice not to talk about medical or LDs in apps. Are the only vulnerability stories that are acceptable cultural/family/financial struggles?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We learned after first kid (2023) that you want/need your complete application to tell a whole story not just disjointed pieces that don’t connect. It needs to be authentic to the student - please please please let them write their own essays - and have points that echo across the essay(s), activities, and academic interests. Second kid’s package was much tighter and they overperformed this cycle.

All of this.
Tight integrated memorable story without repetition-where each part of the application reveals something new but interrelated to the kid’s applicant persona/ narrative/ tagline.

It’s ok to okay to omit things in the EC list if it doesn’t complement the rest of the story.

Agreed.

These poor kids ... they've been sold on so many passing trends. Could it be that their genuine selves, just a little edited, are the way to go?

My kid has a medical condition that isn't visible and requires significant effort to mitigate. Too stats, but condition has somewhat impacted EC strength to date.

Resilience that this kid exhibits behind the scenes is extraordinary but we always see advice not to talk about medical or LDs in apps. Are the only vulnerability stories that are acceptable cultural/family/financial struggles?

We relied on the college counselor to mention DD's bizarre medical issues that created some challenges for her. (Concussion and then a subsequent seizure a few months later), POTS diagnosis the following year, etc.). She may have used one of those in a supplemental that was focused on overcoming something or resilience, but it was not included in her main essay.

[Anonymous]

The system has become geared to favor big personalities, braggarts, and showoffs. It works against smart, genuine, hardworking but quiet leaders who do the actual work that needs to be done (instead of the made up work that is fun and glamorous and showy).

The smart and well rounded kids in my kids class (2025) have the worst results. The athletes, legacies, and most cultivated (with the pushiest parents) are doing the best. It is disheartening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My nephew didnt have the high stats thrown around here. He had a 1440 SAT, 3.7 GPA. Interesting/different EC and amazing essays. He is a hell of a writer. I have not yet met a person who has read his common app essay who didnt cry. Showing smarts with vulnerability just pushed his application to the top. He is finishing up his first year at Princeton.

How did your nephew like Princeton?

He is having the time of his life. Has a great group of friends, his grades this first year are better than what his SAT would’ve indicated.

[Anonymous]

Is it possible that these are the kids with the truly off-the-charts recommendations?

After all, the same recommendations go to all the schools. My sense is that there are a few kids every year who are top of the class AND have genuinely strong and real relationships with the teachers and counselor who write their recommendations. So they’re a completely different level of effusive, specific, and authentic that most high-stats kids have.

Basically, in a world where everything else can be curated, fished, or faked, there’s still one piece of the application that has the potential to be truly genuine and therefore illuminating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that these are the kids with the truly off-the-charts recommendations?

After all, the same recommendations go to all the schools. My sense is that there are a few kids every year who are top of the class AND have genuinely strong and real relationships with the teachers and counselor who write their recommendations. So they’re on a completely different level of effusive, specific, and authentic that most high-stats kids have.

Basically, in a world where everything else can be curated, fished, or faked, there’s still one piece of the application that has the potential to be truly genuine and therefore illuminating.

Fudged. Not fished. 😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We had an interesting one.
DS applied to 3 Ivies RD last year and no school on ED, only EA.
He was accepted to 1 of the Ivies, 2 SLACs and LSE.

Come Jan 15, I get a call from one of our great friends from college (same Ivy) whom we had lost contact 5 years ago. He tells us his wife is in admissions at this same Ivy and she came across our kid’s name. We reconnected, etc and come Ivy day, he gets his acceptance.

How does this story even belong on this thread. So your DC got in because you knew the AO, there was nothing special about their app.

1st, by definition, it literally “landed well”per OP’s subject line.
2nd, you don’t know my kid’s stats do you? Did I say he got in because of the AO? Kid was a 1560 SAT with 12 APs at 5 and a 3.9 UW GPA. Amazing essays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that these are the kids with the truly off-the-charts recommendations?

After all, the same recommendations go to all the schools. My sense is that there are a few kids every year who are top of the class AND have genuinely strong and real relationships with the teachers and counselor who write their recommendations. So they’re a completely different level of effusive, specific, and authentic that most high-stats kids have.

Basically, in a world where everything else can be curated, fished, or faked, there’s still one piece of the application that has the potential to be truly genuine and therefore illuminating.

I think so. It would make sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The system has become geared to favor big personalities, braggarts, and showoffs. It works against smart, genuine, hardworking but quiet leaders who do the actual work that needs to be done (instead of the made up work that is fun and glamorous and showy).

The smart and well rounded kids in my kids class (2025) have the worst results. The athletes, legacies, and most cultivated (with the pushiest parents) are doing the best. It is disheartening.

What I saw in 2023 too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous[b wrote:]Is it possible that these are the kids with the truly off-the-charts recommendations? [/b]

After all, the same recommendations go to all the schools. My sense is that there are a few kids every year who are top of the class AND have genuinely strong and real relationships with the teachers and counselor who write their recommendations. So they’re a completely different level of effusive, specific, and authentic that most high-stats kids have.

Basically, in a world where everything else can be curated, fished, or faked, there’s still one piece of the application that has the potential to be truly genuine and therefore illuminating.

No, we actually saw the rec from one teacher (who sent it to my kid) and it was a "best of my 25 year career" one and this kid is getting deferred and waitlisted left and right. It was a beautifully crafted letter that actually made me cry.
I imagine this kind of thing gets written a lot.