My kid isn't getting in

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for not blaming the URM boogeyman like most of the grievance-,filled DCUM posters do when their DC doesn't get admitted to his/ her college of choice.


God damn it. Some of you act like admissions standards aren't quantifiably lower for URMs and first gens. The data is readily available: they are. And each of those acceptances means one fewer acceptance for students -- many of them sons and daughters of people who post here -- not in favored demographic groups but with much higher stats. It's bull crap. And just to preempt the response I'm sure is coming, yes, legacies have gotten the same favorable treatment for many years. That's bull crap too.


A poor brown kid did not steal your kid’s spot. Try harder next time.


Exactly. The entitlement burns.


Look, I have no dog in this fight. But neither of the 2 immediate PPs are contributing anything constructive to the discussion raised. It's not "entitlement" to think that you work hard and excel = you get into a top school. That is how it has been -and some think it should be- forever. Why should those kids go to "lesser" schools when they've worked hard to get the top grades?

Answer the PPs question -and I'd like to know the answer- are the admit standards lower or not for certain demographics and groups?
Anonymous
Agree with you 100%. I am also a mom of a high stat URM and those stars are not going to get most kids accepted at a top school. The Ivy reaction videos on YouTube have confirmed for me that the URM getting in are amazing with high stats and ECs and usually have some other hook like you mentioned like being an athlete.

Some of these posters want to feel better about their child’s rejection by putting others down. I find the behavior gross.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for not blaming the URM boogeyman like most of the grievance-,filled DCUM posters do when their DC doesn't get admitted to his/ her college of choice.


God damn it. Some of you act like admissions standards aren't quantifiably lower for URMs and first gens. The data is readily available: they are. And each of those acceptances means one fewer acceptance for students -- many of them sons and daughters of people who post here -- not in favored demographic groups but with much higher stats. It's bull crap. And just to preempt the response I'm sure is coming, yes, legacies have gotten the same favorable treatment for many years. That's bull crap too.


A poor brown kid did not steal your kid’s spot. Try harder next time.


Exactly. The entitlement burns.


Look, I have no dog in this fight. But neither of the 2 immediate PPs are contributing anything constructive to the discussion raised. It's not "entitlement" to think that you work hard and excel = you get into a top school. That is how it has been -and some think it should be- forever. Why should those kids go to "lesser" schools when they've worked hard to get the top grades?

Answer the PPs question -and I'd like to know the answer- are the admit standards lower or not for certain demographics and groups?


Well if this is happening on the level that you and others are making it out to be, than that "lesser" school is going to be filled with top-notch students. So there's that.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for not blaming the URM boogeyman like most of the grievance-,filled DCUM posters do when their DC doesn't get admitted to his/ her college of choice.


God damn it. Some of you act like admissions standards aren't quantifiably lower for URMs and first gens. The data is readily available: they are. And each of those acceptances means one fewer acceptance for students -- many of them sons and daughters of people who post here -- not in favored demographic groups but with much higher stats. It's bull crap. And just to preempt the response I'm sure is coming, yes, legacies have gotten the same favorable treatment for many years. That's bull crap too.


A poor brown kid did not steal your kid’s spot. Try harder next time.


Exactly. The entitlement burns.


Look, I have no dog in this fight. But neither of the 2 immediate PPs are contributing anything constructive to the discussion raised. It's not "entitlement" to think that you work hard and excel = you get into a top school. That is how it has been -and some think it should be- forever. Why should those kids go to "lesser" schools when they've worked hard to get the top grades?

Answer the PPs question -and I'd like to know the answer- are the admit standards lower or not for certain demographics and groups?


Well if this is happening on the level that you and others are making it out to be, than that "lesser" school is going to be filled with top-notch students. So there's that.


Exactly. This website is full of data that show this:

https://lesshighschoolstress.com/page/3/

The page I linked to shows the median SAT scores of students at various schools, including 'safety schools' BU, Boston College and Tulane all in the 98th percentile. Why does anyone not consider these colleges 'top notch'?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for not blaming the URM boogeyman like most of the grievance-,filled DCUM posters do when their DC doesn't get admitted to his/ her college of choice.


God damn it. Some of you act like admissions standards aren't quantifiably lower for URMs and first gens. The data is readily available: they are. And each of those acceptances means one fewer acceptance for students -- many of them sons and daughters of people who post here -- not in favored demographic groups but with much higher stats. It's bull crap. And just to preempt the response I'm sure is coming, yes, legacies have gotten the same favorable treatment for many years. That's bull crap too.


A poor brown kid did not steal your kid’s spot. Try harder next time.


Exactly. The entitlement burns.


Look, I have no dog in this fight. But neither of the 2 immediate PPs are contributing anything constructive to the discussion raised. It's not "entitlement" to think that you work hard and excel = you get into a top school. That is how it has been -and some think it should be- forever. Why should those kids go to "lesser" schools when they've worked hard to get the top grades?

Answer the PPs question -and I'd like to know the answer- are the admit standards lower or not for certain demographics and groups?


Well if this is happening on the level that you and others are making it out to be, than that "lesser" school is going to be filled with top-notch students. So there's that.


Because there are more of these kids than there are slots at the schools you want. Even if no one with lower stats than them were accepted.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for not blaming the URM boogeyman like most of the grievance-,filled DCUM posters do when their DC doesn't get admitted to his/ her college of choice.


God damn it. Some of you act like admissions standards aren't quantifiably lower for URMs and first gens. The data is readily available: they are. And each of those acceptances means one fewer acceptance for students -- many of them sons and daughters of people who post here -- not in favored demographic groups but with much higher stats. It's bull crap. And just to preempt the response I'm sure is coming, yes, legacies have gotten the same favorable treatment for many years. That's bull crap too.


A poor brown kid did not steal your kid’s spot. Try harder next time.


Exactly. The entitlement burns.


Look, I have no dog in this fight. But neither of the 2 immediate PPs are contributing anything constructive to the discussion raised. It's not "entitlement" to think that you work hard and excel = you get into a top school. That is how it has been -and some think it should be- forever. Why should those kids go to "lesser" schools when they've worked hard to get the top grades?

Answer the PPs question -and I'd like to know the answer- are the admit standards lower or not for certain demographics and groups?


I looked up Thurgood Marshall because I remembered reading that he wanted to go to University of Maryland but was not able to attend. From Wikipedia “ Marshall wanted to study in his hometown law school, the University of Maryland School of Law, but did not apply because of the school's policy of segregation… Marshall graduated from Howard Law in 1933 ranked first in his class with an LL.B. magna cum laude”. Per your argument that since the beginning of time people could expect if they worked hard they would get into the top school begs the question what people are you referring to? Do you really not have a dog, or dog whistle as it may be, in this fight?






Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for not blaming the URM boogeyman like most of the grievance-,filled DCUM posters do when their DC doesn't get admitted to his/ her college of choice.


God damn it. Some of you act like admissions standards aren't quantifiably lower for URMs and first gens. The data is readily available: they are. And each of those acceptances means one fewer acceptance for students -- many of them sons and daughters of people who post here -- not in favored demographic groups but with much higher stats. It's bull crap. And just to preempt the response I'm sure is coming, yes, legacies have gotten the same favorable treatment for many years. That's bull crap too.


A poor brown kid did not steal your kid’s spot. Try harder next time.


Exactly. The entitlement burns.


Look, I have no dog in this fight. But neither of the 2 immediate PPs are contributing anything constructive to the discussion raised. It's not "entitlement" to think that you work hard and excel = you get into a top school. That is how it has been -and some think it should be- forever. Why should those kids go to "lesser" schools when they've worked hard to get the top grades?

Answer the PPs question -and I'd like to know the answer- are the admit standards lower or not for certain demographics and groups?


I looked up Thurgood Marshall because I remembered reading that he wanted to go to University of Maryland but was not able to attend. From Wikipedia “ Marshall wanted to study in his hometown law school, the University of Maryland School of Law, but did not apply because of the school's policy of segregation… Marshall graduated from Howard Law in 1933 ranked first in his class with an LL.B. magna cum laude”. Per your argument that since the beginning of time people could expect if they worked hard they would get into the top school begs the question what people are you referring to? Do you really not have a dog, or dog whistle as it may be, in this fight?

Ummm . . . this doesn't say he didn 't get in. It says he didn't apply. There are so many real examples - you just didn't pick one. Weak.





Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:DC high stats from magnet, SAT 1600, GPA 4.0 UW, 4.78 W, 7 AP's with all 5's and one 4, school club leader, founder of a national non profit rejected from Princeton and top public schools, accepted into UMD honors.
What is wrong with this profile? Got deferred from a couple other top public schools. So far UMD is the only one in hand.


My guess: DC is Asian.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for not blaming the URM boogeyman like most of the grievance-,filled DCUM posters do when their DC doesn't get admitted to his/ her college of choice.


God damn it. Some of you act like admissions standards aren't quantifiably lower for URMs and first gens. The data is readily available: they are. And each of those acceptances means one fewer acceptance for students -- many of them sons and daughters of people who post here -- not in favored demographic groups but with much higher stats. It's bull crap. And just to preempt the response I'm sure is coming, yes, legacies have gotten the same favorable treatment for many years. That's bull crap too.


A poor brown kid did not steal your kid’s spot. Try harder next time.


Exactly. The entitlement burns.


Look, I have no dog in this fight. But neither of the 2 immediate PPs are contributing anything constructive to the discussion raised. It's not "entitlement" to think that you work hard and excel = you get into a top school. That is how it has been -and some think it should be- forever. Why should those kids go to "lesser" schools when they've worked hard to get the top grades?

Answer the PPs question -and I'd like to know the answer- are the admit standards lower or not for certain demographics and groups?


I looked up Thurgood Marshall because I remembered reading that he wanted to go to University of Maryland but was not able to attend. From Wikipedia “ Marshall wanted to study in his hometown law school, the University of Maryland School of Law, but did not apply because of the school's policy of segregation… Marshall graduated from Howard Law in 1933 ranked first in his class with an LL.B. magna cum laude”. Per your argument that since the beginning of time people could expect if they worked hard they would get into the top school begs the question what people are you referring to? Do you really not have a dog, or dog whistle as it may be, in this fight?

Ummm . . . this doesn't say he didn 't get in. It says he didn't apply. There are so many real examples - you just didn't pick one. Weak.


I think you might be joking… but on the off chance you are not, Justice Marshall was prohibited from applying to UMD because they didn’t accept black people at that time. He didn’t get in because he was not allowed to apply. If that isn’t an example of someone being kept from attending a school for which he is qualified, I don’t know what is. And, this thread should be blocked if anyone dares to say Thurgood Marshall wasn’t smart or a deserving. He was a lion of his generation.



Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for not blaming the URM boogeyman like most of the grievance-,filled DCUM posters do when their DC doesn't get admitted to his/ her college of choice.


God damn it. Some of you act like admissions standards aren't quantifiably lower for URMs and first gens. The data is readily available: they are. And each of those acceptances means one fewer acceptance for students -- many of them sons and daughters of people who post here -- not in favored demographic groups but with much higher stats. It's bull crap. And just to preempt the response I'm sure is coming, yes, legacies have gotten the same favorable treatment for many years. That's bull crap too.


A poor brown kid did not steal your kid’s spot. Try harder next time.


Exactly. The entitlement burns.


Look, I have no dog in this fight. But neither of the 2 immediate PPs are contributing anything constructive to the discussion raised. It's not "entitlement" to think that you work hard and excel = you get into a top school. That is how it has been -and some think it should be- forever. Why should those kids go to "lesser" schools when they've worked hard to get the top grades?

Answer the PPs question -and I'd like to know the answer- are the admit standards lower or not for certain demographics and groups?


I looked up Thurgood Marshall because I remembered reading that he wanted to go to University of Maryland but was not able to attend. From Wikipedia “ Marshall wanted to study in his hometown law school, the University of Maryland School of Law, but did not apply because of the school's policy of segregation… Marshall graduated from Howard Law in 1933 ranked first in his class with an LL.B. magna cum laude”. Per your argument that since the beginning of time people could expect if they worked hard they would get into the top school begs the question what people are you referring to? Do you really not have a dog, or dog whistle as it may be, in this fight?

Ummm . . . this doesn't say he didn 't get in. It says he didn't apply. There are so many real examples - you just didn't pick one. Weak.


I think you might be joking… but on the off chance you are not, Justice Marshall was prohibited from applying to UMD because they didn’t accept black people at that time. He didn’t get in because he was not allowed to apply. If that isn’t an example of someone being kept from attending a school for which he is qualified, I don’t know what is. And, this thread should be blocked if anyone dares to say Thurgood Marshall wasn’t smart or a deserving. He was a lion of his generation.





false. https://umdarchives.wordpress.com/2014/02/25/trailblazers-integration-at-the-university-of-maryland-part-1/
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for not blaming the URM boogeyman like most of the grievance-,filled DCUM posters do when their DC doesn't get admitted to his/ her college of choice.


God damn it. Some of you act like admissions standards aren't quantifiably lower for URMs and first gens. The data is readily available: they are. And each of those acceptances means one fewer acceptance for students -- many of them sons and daughters of people who post here -- not in favored demographic groups but with much higher stats. It's bull crap. And just to preempt the response I'm sure is coming, yes, legacies have gotten the same favorable treatment for many years. That's bull crap too.


A poor brown kid did not steal your kid’s spot. Try harder next time.


Exactly. The entitlement burns.


Look, I have no dog in this fight. But neither of the 2 immediate PPs are contributing anything constructive to the discussion raised. It's not "entitlement" to think that you work hard and excel = you get into a top school. That is how it has been -and some think it should be- forever. Why should those kids go to "lesser" schools when they've worked hard to get the top grades?

Answer the PPs question -and I'd like to know the answer- are the admit standards lower or not for certain demographics and groups?


I looked up Thurgood Marshall because I remembered reading that he wanted to go to University of Maryland but was not able to attend. From Wikipedia “ Marshall wanted to study in his hometown law school, the University of Maryland School of Law, but did not apply because of the school's policy of segregation… Marshall graduated from Howard Law in 1933 ranked first in his class with an LL.B. magna cum laude”. Per your argument that since the beginning of time people could expect if they worked hard they would get into the top school begs the question what people are you referring to? Do you really not have a dog, or dog whistle as it may be, in this fight?

Ummm . . . this doesn't say he didn 't get in. It says he didn't apply. There are so many real examples - you just didn't pick one. Weak.


I think you might be joking… but on the off chance you are not, Justice Marshall was prohibited from applying to UMD because they didn’t accept black people at that time. He didn’t get in because he was not allowed to apply. If that isn’t an example of someone being kept from attending a school for which he is qualified, I don’t know what is. And, this thread should be blocked if anyone dares to say Thurgood Marshall wasn’t smart or a deserving. He was a lion of his generation.





false. https://umdarchives.wordpress.com/2014/02/25/trailblazers-integration-at-the-university-of-maryland-part-1/


From your link:

“ The integration of the law school was short-lived. Two more black students, John L. Dozier and William A. Hawkins, were admitted in 1889. Complaints from white students and a conservative administration led to Dozier’s and Hawkins’ expulsion in 1890, and by 1891, an official policy of discrimination was in place. This policy would last for more than 40 years.”

“The battle for integration of the law school was taken up again in 1935, under the leadership of famed civil rights attorney Charles Hamilton Houston and future Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, working on behalf of the NAACP.”

Marshall graduated law school in 1933.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP, thanks for not blaming the URM boogeyman like most of the grievance-,filled DCUM posters do when their DC doesn't get admitted to his/ her college of choice.


God damn it. Some of you act like admissions standards aren't quantifiably lower for URMs and first gens. The data is readily available: they are. And each of those acceptances means one fewer acceptance for students -- many of them sons and daughters of people who post here -- not in favored demographic groups but with much higher stats. It's bull crap. And just to preempt the response I'm sure is coming, yes, legacies have gotten the same favorable treatment for many years. That's bull crap too.


A poor brown kid did not steal your kid’s spot. Try harder next time.


Exactly. The entitlement burns.


Look, I have no dog in this fight. But neither of the 2 immediate PPs are contributing anything constructive to the discussion raised. It's not "entitlement" to think that you work hard and excel = you get into a top school. That is how it has been -and some think it should be- forever. Why should those kids go to "lesser" schools when they've worked hard to get the top grades?

Answer the PPs question -and I'd like to know the answer- are the admit standards lower or not for certain demographics and groups?


Admission standards aren't lower for certain groups. They just aren't.

In some cases, test scores may be lower, but test scores aren't great predictors of performance, even if you assume that the tests are perfectly nonbiased. That's why many schools are making test scores optional or not using them at all. Test scores have been shown to underpredict performance for some groups. Groups that have less access to test prep are going to underperfom on the test. Groups that have less access to advanced classes that teach to the test are going to underperfom on those tests. Groups that are constantly told that they "don't do well on standardized tests" tend to underperform on those tests.

There are more qualified kids than slots at the top schools. Even if you only accepted white kids, there would still be 10 qualified white kids for every spot. URM and immigrants are not keeping your kids out of the top 20 schools. It's just math.

A hard working, bright kid will do just fine if they attend a "lesser" school. The anxiety about admission to a top 20 school is just baseless anxiety.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:DC high stats from magnet, SAT 1600, GPA 4.0 UW, 4.78 W, 7 AP's with all 5's and one 4, school club leader, founder of a national non profit rejected from Princeton and top public schools, accepted into UMD honors.
What is wrong with this profile? Got deferred from a couple other top public schools. So far UMD is the only one in hand.


My guess: DC is Asian.


Are Asians not admitted?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Not being full pay is huge. I wish Naviance separated kids into full pay or not.


This exactly.
DS is so upset that he could not get into USC while 2 classmates with lower GPA, much lower SAT got in with full pay.
Anonymous
Last year my high stats DD from Big 3 full pay didn’t not get into USC. It’s really hard to tell why kids get in.
post reply Forum Index » College and University Discussion
Message Quick Reply
Go to: