How did your super high stats kid fare (1550 plus and 4.5 plus with max rigor)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1550 is not considered high.

Are you the same idiot who says a HHI of $800k+ is not rich but MC?

You need a reality check. 1550 is 1% - that's a fact, not your perception.

Also keep in mind that some of these results were during test optional.
It really is just a crap shoot though unless have a hook

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:this thread is hella depressing. what's the point of racking up all these stats?

or are we all just obsessing over the wrong list of schools?

like there's no hope for me fr.

Pick a different major. Computer science, engineering, business will generally all lead to these outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:3.94, 1580 (first try), took highest rigor advanced classes, good internship and non profit involvement, lots of school related leadership roles and submitted research. No national awards or APs.

Rejected. Upenn ED1 , uva

Accepted to targets: nyu, pitt, umd, case western and usc

Attending NYU, business

Are you in-state Virginia?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this thread is hella depressing. what's the point of racking up all these stats?

or are we all just obsessing over the wrong list of schools?

like there's no hope for me fr.

The point is if you don't rack em up, you don't have a shot at all.

At a certain point, it's just a lottery for everyone.

Totally agree with this. High Stats are absolutely required for real consideration for unhooked kids (and even for hooked but they have much higher odds) but from that point its a crapshoot. Plus some of the target schools yield protect and waitlist higher stats students. Unfortunately that all means applying to more schools which feeds the cycle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A kid like that can land anywhere. My kid also had similar stats with max rigor and exceeded high school offerings in 2 subjects. Like another PP, he took 3 courses beyond BC calculus.

I encouraged him to be realistic and told him that it is hard to predict admissions. High stats kids we know ended up at HYP, UVA, UMD, and Michigan. We tried not to push our kid to apply T10 if he didn’t really want it.

He applied and was accepted ED1 in engineering in a T40 school he loved and felt right to him.

I believe cream rises to the top. Your bright kid will be fine wherever he/she lands.

+1
All the angst here is because most of these "high stats" students aren't naturally bright - they're curated and pushed by their parents. They're basically just average competent children of strivers. The kids who are destined to succeed probably don't have parents on here posting all their insecurity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think that is one of the reasons colleges want strong extracurriculars, the primary reason being they want engaged students adding to campus life. Perfect grades and top SAT scores while spending 30+ hours a week doing other activities shows they can handle the rigor.
I don't think colleges really want students who will struggle academically, at least not many of them.

LOL. How does a student spend 30+ hours per week on EC's in addition to actual school?

I have a kid like that, he's my energizer bunny type kid. He has long days, and busy weekends.

I also had a kid who spent about 28-30 hours a week on ECs: 20 for performing arts and 8-10 on clubs, volunteering work. Took every hard class possible and loved the challenge, a wall of 5’s on the app, had done all the hard ones by the end of junior year. They were just more efficient and naturally intellectually quick so they spent very little time on homework compared to other students near the top of the class. They are at an ivy. Many of their peers are of the same mold, but it is definitely under half. They remain near the top in a competitive and difficult major. No one was their level in their high school. They needed a T10/ivy for fit to finally study among a large group of similar minds and not always be the smartest and fastest thinker in the room.

Your kid did not need an ivy to not be the smartest thinker in the room. There are several universities (even far outside T20) where your kid would not have been the smartest in the room by a long shot. University of Alabama for example has a very large cohort of insanely smart ivy/ivy+ accepted/level kids, due to huge scholarship $ and very specialized top level programs.

Not every family can afford an ivy, no matter what type of academic rockstar their kid is -- that is to say, there are large concentrations of kids like this at many universities, not just ivies.

LOL

DP

You laugh, but I was one of those kids. I went to state flagship because they gave me full ride. I was NMF and I went fully funded through my PhD, now making top 1% salary and have 1% NW. I'm not unique at state no name schools. My parents actively discouraged me from even looking at ivy because we couldn't afford it and they have bias against "those" schools. I don't have a bias against them like my parents do, but I know they are totally unnecessary for success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A kid like that can land anywhere. My kid also had similar stats with max rigor and exceeded high school offerings in 2 subjects. Like another PP, he took 3 courses beyond BC calculus.

I encouraged him to be realistic and told him that it is hard to predict admissions. High stats kids we know ended up at HYP, UVA, UMD, and Michigan. We tried not to push our kid to apply T10 if he didn’t really want it.

He applied and was accepted ED1 in engineering in a T40 school he loved and felt right to him.

I believe cream rises to the top. Your bright kid will be fine wherever he/she lands.

+1
All the angst here is because most of these "high stats" students aren't naturally bright - they're curated and pushed by their parents. They're basically just average competent children of strivers. The kids who are destined to succeed probably don't have parents on here posting all their insecurity.

This! I remember when my kids played soccer in elementary school and the constant talking by parents about how their kid was the next phenom and needed to “play up” because they were so gifted. Three years later, these kids got cut from the freshmen HS soccer team and never played a sport again. Then the parents tripled down on the kids academics and never stopped talking about it. In six years it will be the same thing - the kids average-ness will come through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this thread is hella depressing. what's the point of racking up all these stats?

or are we all just obsessing over the wrong list of schools?

like there's no hope for me fr.

Pick a different major. Computer science, engineering, business will generally all lead to these outcomes.

That is not useful if one of those topics is what your kid really wants to study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think that is one of the reasons colleges want strong extracurriculars, the primary reason being they want engaged students adding to campus life. Perfect grades and top SAT scores while spending 30+ hours a week doing other activities shows they can handle the rigor.
I don't think colleges really want students who will struggle academically, at least not many of them.

LOL. How does a student spend 30+ hours per week on EC's in addition to actual school?

I have a kid like that, he's my energizer bunny type kid. He has long days, and busy weekends.

I also had a kid who spent about 28-30 hours a week on ECs: 20 for performing arts and 8-10 on clubs, volunteering work. Took every hard class possible and loved the challenge, a wall of 5’s on the app, had done all the hard ones by the end of junior year. They were just more efficient and naturally intellectually quick so they spent very little time on homework compared to other students near the top of the class. They are at an ivy. Many of their peers are of the same mold, but it is definitely under half. They remain near the top in a competitive and difficult major. No one was their level in their high school. They needed a T10/ivy for fit to finally study among a large group of similar minds and not always be the smartest and fastest thinker in the room.

Your kid did not need an ivy to not be the smartest thinker in the room. There are several universities (even far outside T20) where your kid would not have been the smartest in the room by a long shot. University of Alabama for example has a very large cohort of insanely smart ivy/ivy+ accepted/level kids, due to huge scholarship $ and very specialized top level programs.

Not every family can afford an ivy, no matter what type of academic rockstar their kid is -- that is to say, there are large concentrations of kids like this at many universities, not just ivies.

LOL

Just keep thinking that way (Laughing) and waste your $$$$. Outside of IB or PE firms, 95%+ of the people you work with will have attended the most affordable private with merit or state U to get their degree. They are smart and their drive and determination is what gets you places in life, not the Uni you attend. Your kid will be surrounded by plenty of smart people

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this thread is hella depressing. what's the point of racking up all these stats?

or are we all just obsessing over the wrong list of schools?

like there's no hope for me fr.

Pick a different major. Computer science, engineering, business will generally all lead to these outcomes.

That is not useful if one of those topics is what your kid really wants to study.

True. But it is reality. In recent years, engineering and CS are at a completely different level when it comes to competitiveness. You can be the best student in the world, and Maryland or Illinois still aren’t safeties.

I think CS will lighten up going forward, but business is filling the gap. Something like NYU Stern is an incredibly difficult admit today. And meanwhile engineering is still where the bright kids go. So that remains as competitive as ever.

It’s a lot different than when parents were going to college and could comfortably float into a good career with a a history or English degree. Gen Z is scared, driven, and very practical. So all the most useful degrees - engineering, pre-med,, business, CS- have become incredibly competitive. Because that’s where the talent is migrating.

But this is an excellent time for art history and poetry majors applying to selective colleges.

[Anonymous]

Kid had 1580 SAT/36 ACT.
Salutatorian. Private HS in Texas. Basically maxed out GPA with 10 APs at 5.

Great ECs.

Denied at H,P,S
Accepted Vandy, Duke and Oxford.

[Anonymous]

Harvard, Harvard, Duke, Princeton, Oxford, Cambridge, Pomona, and strangely UT Austin

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about this for a reality check:

4.0 UW, 4.86 W
1560 SAT, 13 AP 8 5s, 5 4s (non-STEM), AP Calc BC 10th grade, through MVC and Linear algebra
4 year varsity athlete
national CS awards
part time job

Rejected: Carnegie Mellon, Northwestern, Brown
WL: Cornell, Northeastern, Case Western
Accepted: UMD, RIT, RPI

CS major
MCPS Magnet
At UMD on scholarship

Did he draw swastika in the margins of his essays or something? WTF?
4.86 barely seems possible unless you took a bunch of high school courses before high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:this thread is hella depressing. what's the point of racking up all these stats?

or are we all just obsessing over the wrong list of schools?

like there's no hope for me fr.

Because of grade inflation, you need high stats or you're cooked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The smartest thing colleges could do, financially speaking, is admit whip-smart, hard-working CS and engineering majors. These are the kids who have the best odds of striking it rich and having something to give back to the college 20 or 40 years down the road. They are also more likely to contribute to society with patents, innovation, technological advance, improved productivity, etc. Colleges are short-sighted to not woo them.

Top legal and finance kids typically earn far more than engineering/cs kids. But, your strategy would push the average earnings number up a lot.

The top finance kids ARE the top CS kids and legal requires an extra degree where stem majors still make more than non-stem majors, frequently by a lot.