VT is Out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In state DC also got waitlisted with straight As throughout high school, highest rigor across all subjects, NMSF and 1570 on SAT. Solid extracurriculars. Interested in VT, not first choice, but then doesn’t have one clear first choice and would be happy to go to a number of schools. The WL is so perplexing. Doesn’t VT want to take academically strong kids, especially in state ones? What is the mission of the school if they don’t want to take kids who will clearly be able to handle a challenging workload? Happy for kids who got in, but not understanding what is the point of a state school yield protecting.

What you just described is a dime a dozen. Your fundamental miscalculation is assuming that the applicant pool isn’t largely comprised of qualified students, just like what you just described. They have more qualified kids than seats. It’s not yielding protection and it’s not that your kid wasn’t qualified. Your kid was boring. Lots of qualified yet boring kids don’t get in.

NP. No need to be rude. Your point was going fine until the insult.

It’s not rude, it’s just the way this works. Toughen up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those with high stats who did not get into VT.

FYI- Binghamton, Buffalo, Stonybrook and Albany SUNY schools (there 4 flagships) are still taking applications and they routinely for OOS in DMV with high GPAs give the instate tuition rate which is $7.070 a year.

At least Stonybrook is not that generous with aid. Their instate is $10k, OOS is $30k and top merit is $15k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In state DC also got waitlisted with straight As throughout high school, highest rigor across all subjects, NMSF and 1570 on SAT. Solid extracurriculars. Interested in VT, not first choice, but then doesn’t have one clear first choice and would be happy to go to a number of schools. The WL is so perplexing. Doesn’t VT want to take academically strong kids, especially in state ones? What is the mission of the school if they don’t want to take kids who will clearly be able to handle a challenging workload? Happy for kids who got in, but not understanding what is the point of a state school yield protecting.

What you just described is a dime a dozen. Your fundamental miscalculation is assuming that the applicant pool isn’t largely comprised of qualified students, just like what you just described. They have more qualified kids than seats. It’s not yielding protection and it’s not that your kid wasn’t qualified. Your kid was boring. Lots of qualified yet boring kids don’t get in.

+1
I was going to tell that PP her kid sounds great - like so many other applicants. Some parents seem to think VT should take ALL the qualified applicants, regardless of how much space they have in each program. That's not how it works. Some of these kids will come off the waitlist, but otherwise, the competition for a finite number of spots is fierce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know how anyone can read this thread and not come to the conclusion that VT yield protects. What's more likely? That, or ALL of these high stats kids getting waitlisted wrote crappy essays? SMH.

But they're not ALL getting waitlisted. Some are. Many are accepted. They're not here complaining about it.

VT has a weird admissions pattern, I admit. But if it were really yield protection, you'd see an actual pattern to it, not just unusual misses.

If they were yield protecting, they'd track demonstrated interest, offer Early Decision, look for LOR. They do none of that. You can't yield predict without it. You can, however, make some weird choices.

Posters are trying to figure out the pattern of accepted. So far: thought to essays; thought and commitment to service; major. Some test optional others submitted; most above 4.0 gpa but rigor of classes differs. Was it higher acceptances of OOS students? 74% of enrolled students are from in-state. OOS applicants face stiff competition.

In state yield at VT is historically strong, so acceptance rates are lower.
OOS yield at VT is historically low, so acceptance rates are higher.

It's one of the (many) interesting quirks of VT admission that OOS acceptance rates are higher than in state.

Another quirk is that they are very transparent - https://udc.vt.edu/irdata/data/students/admission/index#college- which leads to gamesmanship where applicants will flock to a major that has historically higher acceptance rates, causing the rate to dive, causing claims of YiELd PrOTecTIoN!

How is that a quirk. OOS pays more. My kids with a 4.67 WGPA and 13 APs in state got turned down instate for College Park in Maryland and got into VT which she went. At College park kids go in with lower GPAs then her as they pay higher tuition University of Delaware is 61 percent out of state. They pay more.

It is a quirk because other Virginia state schools have lower admit rates for OOS students than in state students. Typically, admit rates for in state are higher. All Virginia schools are required to have ~2/3 in-state students.

It just happens that way because OOS yield is very low and in state yield is high. OOS families seem to be deciding that VT is expensive/not worth it compared to their other options.

Not really. Most of my DC's friends at VT are OOS. There is no shortage of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In state DC also got waitlisted with straight As throughout high school, highest rigor across all subjects, NMSF and 1570 on SAT. Solid extracurriculars. Interested in VT, not first choice, but then doesn’t have one clear first choice and would be happy to go to a number of schools. The WL is so perplexing. Doesn’t VT want to take academically strong kids, especially in state ones? What is the mission of the school if they don’t want to take kids who will clearly be able to handle a challenging workload? Happy for kids who got in, but not understanding what is the point of a state school yield protecting.

What you just described is a dime a dozen. Your fundamental miscalculation is assuming that the applicant pool isn’t largely comprised of qualified students, just like what you just described. They have more qualified kids than seats. It’s not yielding protection and it’s not that your kid wasn’t qualified. Your kid was boring. Lots of qualified yet boring kids don’t get in.

NP. No need to be rude. Your point was going fine until the insult.

Agree. You are the better person for not returning an insult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know how anyone can read this thread and not come to the conclusion that VT yield protects. What's more likely? That, or ALL of these high stats kids getting waitlisted wrote crappy essays? SMH.

But they're not ALL getting waitlisted. Some are. Many are accepted. They're not here complaining about it.

VT has a weird admissions pattern, I admit. But if it were really yield protection, you'd see an actual pattern to it, not just unusual misses.

If they were yield protecting, they'd track demonstrated interest, offer Early Decision, look for LOR. They do none of that. You can't yield predict without it. You can, however, make some weird choices.

Posters are trying to figure out the pattern of accepted. So far: thought to essays; thought and commitment to service; major. Some test optional others submitted; most above 4.0 gpa but rigor of classes differs. Was it higher acceptances of OOS students? 74% of enrolled students are from in-state. OOS applicants face stiff competition.

In state yield at VT is historically strong, so acceptance rates are lower.
OOS yield at VT is historically low, so acceptance rates are higher.

It's one of the (many) interesting quirks of VT admission that OOS acceptance rates are higher than in state.

Another quirk is that they are very transparent - https://udc.vt.edu/irdata/data/students/admission/index#college- which leads to gamesmanship where applicants will flock to a major that has historically higher acceptance rates, causing the rate to dive, causing claims of YiELd PrOTecTIoN!

How is that a quirk. OOS pays more. My kids with a 4.67 WGPA and 13 APs in state got turned down instate for College Park in Maryland and got into VT which she went. At College park kids go in with lower GPAs then her as they pay higher tuition University of Delaware is 61 percent out of state. They pay more.

It is a quirk because other Virginia state schools have lower admit rates for OOS students than in state students. Typically, admit rates for in state are higher. All Virginia schools are required to have ~2/3 in-state students.

It just happens that way because OOS yield is very low and in state yield is high. OOS families seem to be deciding that VT is expensive/not worth it compared to their other options.

Not really. Most of my DC's friends at VT are OOS. There is no shortage of them.

Of course, but most admitted OOS don't accept. Which is why they accept a lot more OOS apps to hit the 1/3 OOS enrollment target.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In state DC also got waitlisted with straight As throughout high school, highest rigor across all subjects, NMSF and 1570 on SAT. Solid extracurriculars. Interested in VT, not first choice, but then doesn’t have one clear first choice and would be happy to go to a number of schools. The WL is so perplexing. Doesn’t VT want to take academically strong kids, especially in state ones? What is the mission of the school if they don’t want to take kids who will clearly be able to handle a challenging workload? Happy for kids who got in, but not understanding what is the point of a state school yield protecting.

What you just described is a dime a dozen. Your fundamental miscalculation is assuming that the applicant pool isn’t largely comprised of qualified students, just like what you just described. They have more qualified kids than seats. It’s not yielding protection and it’s not that your kid wasn’t qualified. Your kid was boring. Lots of qualified yet boring kids don’t get in.

NP. No need to be rude. Your point was going fine until the insult.

Agree. You are the better person for not returning an insult.

Why is the truth insulting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In state DC also got waitlisted with straight As throughout high school, highest rigor across all subjects, NMSF and 1570 on SAT. Solid extracurriculars. Interested in VT, not first choice, but then doesn’t have one clear first choice and would be happy to go to a number of schools. The WL is so perplexing. Doesn’t VT want to take academically strong kids, especially in state ones? What is the mission of the school if they don’t want to take kids who will clearly be able to handle a challenging workload? Happy for kids who got in, but not understanding what is the point of a state school yield protecting.

What you just described is a dime a dozen. Your fundamental miscalculation is assuming that the applicant pool isn’t largely comprised of qualified students, just like what you just described. They have more qualified kids than seats. It’s not yielding protection and it’s not that your kid wasn’t qualified. Your kid was boring. Lots of qualified yet boring kids don’t get in.

NP. No need to be rude. Your point was going fine until the insult.

Agree. You are the better person for not returning an insult.

Why is the truth insulting?

Took offence with the word "boring" but I guess it could mean not having a spike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They thought the short essays were stupid, so I am sure they did not put 100% effort into them.

It’s no surprise that a very smart student would see through the short essay questions for VT. They are performative nonsense.

I felt like every essay my kid wrote, outside their main essay, was unnecessary non-sense. It felt in each case like a hoop jumping exercise to demonstrate you were willing to put for a minimum amount of effort to be considered for admission.

LOL, you do realize that your kid has to demonstrate they are worthy of admission?

[Anonymous]

Apply to under enrolled majors if you want VT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing the host says on YCBK that is very true is “respect the competition”. Sure, your kid is great but there are tons of great kids for a million reasons and they can’t all get a spot.

+1 VT clearly doesn't just want the highest-stats kids. They have a threshold, probably a mix of grades, scores if available, and aspects of the transcript that align with the major, and above that threshold the essays hold huge weight.

DS got in a couple years ago. Not the highest stats but strong in math and related subjects, applied to a major where that mattered (not engineering), used the essays to show deep involvement in service + how the major at VT supported his career goal. He essentially used the "goal" questions as a "why VT" opportunity, which was recommended by an admissions officer in an info session. He explained his career goal, what he'd done to inform his choice of that major and why he wanted the VT program.

Does not compute. System malfunction.

[Anonymous]

My kid got into VT - engineering. Probably below average GPA his school. But very high SAT and essays that highlighted the 5 years on community service.

We think the essays helped a lot as they demonstrated the “that I may serve” spirit.

Good luck to all!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid got into VT - engineering. Probably below average GPA his school. But very high SAT and essays that highlighted the 5 years on community service.

We think the essays helped a lot as they demonstrated the “that I may serve” spirit.

Good luck to all!

The more I think about it, I kind of like that VT gives kids with scores/grades that aren't as high as some of those waitlisted a real chance in admissions. No, they aren't as academically qualified as the very high stats kids (but yet are still qualified) and let's face it, kids will be as disingenuous as they think they need to be and even lie in writing how their values align with those of VT, but admissions shouldn't be based solely on academic qualifications once a certain cutoff is met.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid got into VT - engineering. Probably below average GPA his school. But very high SAT and essays that highlighted the 5 years on community service.

We think the essays helped a lot as they demonstrated the “that I may serve” spirit.

Good luck to all!

The more I think about it, I kind of like that VT gives kids with scores/grades that aren't as high as some of those waitlisted a real chance in admissions. No, they aren't as academically qualified as the very high stats kids (but yet are still qualified) and let's face it, kids will be as disingenuous as they think they need to be and even lie in writing how their values align with those of VT, but admissions shouldn't be based solely on academic qualifications once a certain cutoff is met.

I think, in addition to a commitment to service, they are looking for kids who truly want to attend and make a good fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid waitlisted!! Totally shocked! IB candidate highest rigor 3.98 GPA 4.46 weighted. 790 SAT Math!! College counselor said he’d definitely get in.

Engineering instate…

How is this possible?!?