VT this Friday?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please list stats — curious about the couple pps with sons and thought tech was a match and kids rejected.
I’ll be in this spot in a year.

Deferred with 4.0UW/4.5W/1570 and 13 APs or post-APs.

That is nuts. Where else did they apply?

Princeton, Harvard, Hopkins, Duke, UVA, bunch of others. VT was lowest ranked school. Already in at several higher ranked schools. If you are high stats and want VT, better go ED and show tons of interest.

In state? Engineering? Yield protection? But, UGH!

Yes, in state engineering. Feels like yield protection but no way to tell for sure.

Seems like no other explanation. But also don’t understand why VT would bother to engage in such a practice.

What I have heard is that VT engages in yield protection for enrollment management--a few years back they started using an algorithm (many big state Us use) that predicts who will enroll--this shuts out some high stats kids to the waitlist. If they really want to attend, they will be snapped up--and are often even offered merit aid. VT typically reaches out to these kids the day or so after decision day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son got in!

The admission letter states "With more than 47,000 applications for 7,085 seats in our first-year class.." Does this mean the admission rate is only 15.07%

No--because only about 1/3 of kids who are accepted will likely enroll, so they accept 3x as many students typically. So more like a 45% acceptance rate is my guess. Which is a lot lower than VT used to be.

I think that was established 20 pages ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many high stats kids do want VT because of the in state cost savings. It’s not okay to yield protect in state kids.

Then apply ED and stop complaining.

Agree. Apply ED instate to either UVA or VT whichever is your first choice and stop complaining and saying oh that was my first choice after decisions come out.

That is a dumb argument. High stats kids have to burn their one ED shot or get shut out of their state university because the school will yield protect against over qualified kids potentially rejecting them? [i] Many states like UT Austin also guarantee admission to in state high stats kids.

I don’t think Tech is doing this. My daughter with a 4.6, 1530 got in and she applied EA.

Of course Tech is engaging in yield protection. It has been for the last four years. Go back here on DCUM and read the ED, EA, and RD threads and look at the stats of kids deferred or waitlisted. They are astounding. Do the same at College Confidential and Reddit. Just because your kid got in doesn’t mean similarly situated kids did not

DP. You seem to believe all qualified kids should be accepted, but that’s not reality. Name a school that is able to do that - none. They pick the students they want, as at any university. What’s astounding is that some of you parents can’t seem to accept this.

This is the reality. There are more well qualified students than they can accommodate and they don't admit just on some formula of GPA+Rigor+Testing. I assume they are making very fine distinctions between students based on responses to the essays, since that's the only other thing they really look at (other than demographics) + mathematical models of who is likely to yield.

It sucks to be the highly qualified student who is shut out but that is what can happen with "holistic admissions." My only real gripe about it is I don't think VT is completely honest about their yield management since their CDS says they don't consider interest, but obviously they do. Any school that offers ED considers interest since that is the ultimate expression of interest. And it seems obvious from past years in how they deny some super high stats kids that they reject students they think won't come. If you aren't applying ED, I'd encourage my student to express a lot of interest and be specific in the question about goals to tie that to how VT specifically will help you achieve that goal. That's what DS did 2 years ago when he was admitted, although who knows what ultimately tips it one way or the other.

And I guess many of us don't think this should be happening.

It’s happening at 99% of schools. This is nothing new.
DP

I didn't say it was new or that it wasn't happening. So your point?
But it IS happening more and it's up for a legitimate debate as to whether it should be.

That debate has been had and the answer has already been established: Yes, it should be. All of you who think scoring high on SATs and having high GPAs should be an automatic admission don't have a clue. My guess is kids that fit into this category didn't spend any time on the supplementals or demonstrate a history of service (maybe since they were locked in their rooms studying so much), which are the two biggest thing VT clearly says it cares about. These are really the only two places where one can differentiate one's self against the tens of thousands of qualified applicants (assuming you aren't an athlete).

According to VT's Common Data Set, volunteer/service work is merely "considered," along with a number of other things.

See, if you attended an information session on campus or actually spoken to an admissions officer for your child‘s school (or, preferably, if your child initiated that conversation), you would have heard these points emphasized. Your mistake, evidently, was relying on forms and formula. I think I might be understanding why your child wasn’t admitted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many high stats kids do want VT because of the in state cost savings. It’s not okay to yield protect in state kids.

Then apply ED and stop complaining.

Agree. Apply ED instate to either UVA or VT whichever is your first choice and stop complaining and saying oh that was my first choice after decisions come out.

That is a dumb argument. High stats kids have to burn their one ED shot or get shut out of their state university because the school will yield protect against over qualified kids potentially rejecting them? [i] Many states like UT Austin also guarantee admission to in state high stats kids.

I don’t think Tech is doing this. My daughter with a 4.6, 1530 got in and she applied EA.

Of course Tech is engaging in yield protection. It has been for the last four years. Go back here on DCUM and read the ED, EA, and RD threads and look at the stats of kids deferred or waitlisted. They are astounding. Do the same at College Confidential and Reddit. Just because your kid got in doesn’t mean similarly situated kids did not

DP. You seem to believe all qualified kids should be accepted, but that’s not reality. Name a school that is able to do that - none. They pick the students they want, as at any university. What’s astounding is that some of you parents can’t seem to accept this.

This is the reality. There are more well qualified students than they can accommodate and they don't admit just on some formula of GPA+Rigor+Testing. I assume they are making very fine distinctions between students based on responses to the essays, since that's the only other thing they really look at (other than demographics) + mathematical models of who is likely to yield.

It sucks to be the highly qualified student who is shut out but that is what can happen with "holistic admissions." My only real gripe about it is I don't think VT is completely honest about their yield management since their CDS says they don't consider interest, but obviously they do. Any school that offers ED considers interest since that is the ultimate expression of interest. And it seems obvious from past years in how they deny some super high stats kids that they reject students they think won't come. If you aren't applying ED, I'd encourage my student to express a lot of interest and be specific in the question about goals to tie that to how VT specifically will help you achieve that goal. That's what DS did 2 years ago when he was admitted, although who knows what ultimately tips it one way or the other.

And I guess many of us don't think this should be happening.

It’s happening at 99% of schools. This is nothing new.
DP

I didn't say it was new or that it wasn't happening. So your point?
But it IS happening more and it's up for a legitimate debate as to whether it should be.

That debate has been had and the answer has already been established: Yes, it should be. All of you who think scoring high on SATs and having high GPAs should be an automatic admission don't have a clue. My guess is kids that fit into this category didn't spend any time on the supplementals or demonstrate a history of service (maybe since they were locked in their rooms studying so much), which are the two biggest thing VT clearly says it cares about. These are really the only two places where one can differentiate one's self against the tens of thousands of qualified applicants (assuming you aren't an athlete).

According to VT's Common Data Set, volunteer/service work is merely "considered," along with a number of other things.

See, if you attended an information session on campus or actually spoken to an admissions officer for your child‘s school (or, preferably, if your child initiated that conversation), you would have heard these points emphasized. Your mistake, evidently, was relying on forms and formula. I think I might be understanding why your child wasn’t admitted.

+1 and at the info session we attended with DS (now a sophomore there), the admissions person specifically encouraged students to use the goal question to talk about how VT would be part of meeting the goal. DS used it to talk about his career goal and specific aspects of the major he wanted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many high stats kids do want VT because of the in state cost savings. It’s not okay to yield protect in state kids.

Then apply ED and stop complaining.

Agree. Apply ED instate to either UVA or VT whichever is your first choice and stop complaining and saying oh that was my first choice after decisions come out.

That is a dumb argument. High stats kids have to burn their one ED shot or get shut out of their state university because the school will yield protect against over qualified kids potentially rejecting them? [i] Many states like UT Austin also guarantee admission to in state high stats kids.

I don’t think Tech is doing this. My daughter with a 4.6, 1530 got in and she applied EA.

Of course Tech is engaging in yield protection. It has been for the last four years. Go back here on DCUM and read the ED, EA, and RD threads and look at the stats of kids deferred or waitlisted. They are astounding. Do the same at College Confidential and Reddit. Just because your kid got in doesn’t mean similarly situated kids did not

DP. You seem to believe all qualified kids should be accepted, but that’s not reality. Name a school that is able to do that - none. They pick the students they want, as at any university. What’s astounding is that some of you parents can’t seem to accept this.

This is the reality. There are more well qualified students than they can accommodate and they don't admit just on some formula of GPA+Rigor+Testing. I assume they are making very fine distinctions between students based on responses to the essays, since that's the only other thing they really look at (other than demographics) + mathematical models of who is likely to yield.

It sucks to be the highly qualified student who is shut out but that is what can happen with "holistic admissions." My only real gripe about it is I don't think VT is completely honest about their yield management since their CDS says they don't consider interest, but obviously they do. Any school that offers ED considers interest since that is the ultimate expression of interest. And it seems obvious from past years in how they deny some super high stats kids that they reject students they think won't come. If you aren't applying ED, I'd encourage my student to express a lot of interest and be specific in the question about goals to tie that to how VT specifically will help you achieve that goal. That's what DS did 2 years ago when he was admitted, although who knows what ultimately tips it one way or the other.

And I guess many of us don't think this should be happening.

It’s happening at 99% of schools. This is nothing new.
DP

I didn't say it was new or that it wasn't happening. So your point?
But it IS happening more and it's up for a legitimate debate as to whether it should be.

That debate has been had and the answer has already been established: Yes, it should be. All of you who think scoring high on SATs and having high GPAs should be an automatic admission don't have a clue. My guess is kids that fit into this category didn't spend any time on the supplementals or demonstrate a history of service (maybe since they were locked in their rooms studying so much), which are the two biggest thing VT clearly says it cares about. These are really the only two places where one can differentiate one's self against the tens of thousands of qualified applicants (assuming you aren't an athlete).

According to VT's Common Data Set, volunteer/service work is merely "considered," along with a number of other things.

But their own essays are "very important" and they ask about things like service and leadership. These essays are the ONLY place you can make your case for why you belong at, and want to go to VT. I assume most of the high-stats kids who got denied did so because they weren't as effective as they needed to be there.

+1
VT’s motto is “ut prosim” - that I may serve. Service is huge at VT. They want highly qualified applicants who are ALSO committed in some way to volunteering. And not just one-off gigs, but a true commitment to some cause over the course of high school. I have no doubt that some of those not accepted have no idea what this even means.

Because they are one-track drones who have been hyper focused on academic achievement and expect to be rewarded for that. Which, frankly, is antithetical to the VT paradigm. It has nothing to do with yield protection. The entitled attitude in these parents’ disbelief also indicates they still don’t get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(I’ve posted earlier in this thread. Not sure why I’m so engaged by this.)
Losing in-state high achievers who truly want VT seems wrong. Accepting more first gen state residents seems right. Yield from acceptances to VT is relatively low. How do they get this right if they are clearly not first choice for so many of the people “shocked” not to get in?

Agree with previous poster: there’s no advantage in driving away in-state high achievers who do want to attend.

What process solves this?

ED solves this. High stats kids who *really* want to go to VT should apply ED. Those complaining about rejections did not.

Virginia is the only state where public schools have ED. Sounds like the VT position is high stats in state kids should not apply to UVA or other schools if they want to get into VT. But they are more okay for slightly lower stats in state kids to apply to multiple schools. Okay seems hard to justify that as a fair transparent way to serve the state. It also seems a little defeatist.

Virginia isn’t even close to being the only stare where public universities have ED.

Which others? Most have EA.

University of Vermont has ED

2023 is the first year they have ED.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many high stats kids do want VT because of the in state cost savings. It’s not okay to yield protect in state kids.

Then apply ED and stop complaining.

Agree. Apply ED instate to either UVA or VT whichever is your first choice and stop complaining and saying oh that was my first choice after decisions come out.

That is a dumb argument. High stats kids have to burn their one ED shot or get shut out of their state university because the school will yield protect against over qualified kids potentially rejecting them? [i] Many states like UT Austin also guarantee admission to in state high stats kids.

I don’t think Tech is doing this. My daughter with a 4.6, 1530 got in and she applied EA.

Of course Tech is engaging in yield protection. It has been for the last four years. Go back here on DCUM and read the ED, EA, and RD threads and look at the stats of kids deferred or waitlisted. They are astounding. Do the same at College Confidential and Reddit. Just because your kid got in doesn’t mean similarly situated kids did not

DP. You seem to believe all qualified kids should be accepted, but that’s not reality. Name a school that is able to do that - none. They pick the students they want, as at any university. What’s astounding is that some of you parents can’t seem to accept this.

This is the reality. There are more well qualified students than they can accommodate and they don't admit just on some formula of GPA+Rigor+Testing. I assume they are making very fine distinctions between students based on responses to the essays, since that's the only other thing they really look at (other than demographics) + mathematical models of who is likely to yield.

It sucks to be the highly qualified student who is shut out but that is what can happen with "holistic admissions." My only real gripe about it is I don't think VT is completely honest about their yield management since their CDS says they don't consider interest, but obviously they do. Any school that offers ED considers interest since that is the ultimate expression of interest. And it seems obvious from past years in how they deny some super high stats kids that they reject students they think won't come. If you aren't applying ED, I'd encourage my student to express a lot of interest and be specific in the question about goals to tie that to how VT specifically will help you achieve that goal. That's what DS did 2 years ago when he was admitted, although who knows what ultimately tips it one way or the other.

And I guess many of us don't think this should be happening.

It’s happening at 99% of schools. This is nothing new.
DP

I didn't say it was new or that it wasn't happening. So your point?
But it IS happening more and it's up for a legitimate debate as to whether it should be.

That debate has been had and the answer has already been established: Yes, it should be. All of you who think scoring high on SATs and having high GPAs should be an automatic admission don't have a clue. My guess is kids that fit into this category didn't spend any time on the supplementals or demonstrate a history of service (maybe since they were locked in their rooms studying so much), which are the two biggest thing VT clearly says it cares about. These are really the only two places where one can differentiate one's self against the tens of thousands of qualified applicants (assuming you aren't an athlete).

According to VT's Common Data Set, volunteer/service work is merely "considered," along with a number of other things.

But their own essays are "very important" and they ask about things like service and leadership. These essays are the ONLY place you can make your case for why you belong at, and want to go to VT. I assume most of the high-stats kids who got denied did so because they weren't as effective as they needed to be there.

+1
VT’s motto is “ut prosim” - that I may serve. Service is huge at VT. They want highly qualified applicants who are ALSO committed in some way to volunteering. And not just one-off gigs, but a true commitment to some cause over the course of high school. I have no doubt that some of those not accepted have no idea what this even means.

Because they are one-track drones who have been hyper focused on academic achievement and expect to be rewarded for that. Which, frankly, is antithetical to the VT paradigm. It has nothing to do with yield protection. The entitled attitude in these parents’ disbelief also indicates they still don’t get it.

Agreed. The entitlement really is astonishing.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please list stats — curious about the couple pps with sons and thought tech was a match and kids rejected.
I’ll be in this spot in a year.

Deferred with 4.0UW/4.5W/1570 and 13 APs or post-APs.

That is nuts. Where else did they apply?

Princeton, Harvard, Hopkins, Duke, UVA, bunch of others. VT was lowest ranked school. Already in at several higher ranked schools. If you are high stats and want VT, better go ED and show tons of interest.

In state? Engineering? Yield protection? But, UGH!

Yes, in state engineering. Feels like yield protection but no way to tell for sure.

Seems like no other explanation. But also don’t understand why VT would bother to engage in such a practice.

What I have heard is that VT engages in yield protection for enrollment management--a few years back they started using an algorithm (many big state Us use) that predicts who will enroll--this shuts out some high stats kids to the waitlist. If they really want to attend, they will be snapped up--and are often even offered merit aid. VT typically reaches out to these kids the day or so after decision day.

Or, the kids who really want to attend apply ED.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please list stats — curious about the couple pps with sons and thought tech was a match and kids rejected.
I’ll be in this spot in a year.

Deferred with 4.0UW/4.5W/1570 and 13 APs or post-APs.

That is nuts. Where else did they apply?

Princeton, Harvard, Hopkins, Duke, UVA, bunch of others. VT was lowest ranked school. Already in at several higher ranked schools. If you are high stats and want VT, better go ED and show tons of interest.

In state? Engineering? Yield protection? But, UGH!

Yes, in state engineering. Feels like yield protection but no way to tell for sure.

Seems like no other explanation. But also don’t understand why VT would bother to engage in such a practice.

What I have heard is that VT engages in yield protection for enrollment management--a few years back they started using an algorithm (many big state Us use) that predicts who will enroll--this shuts out some high stats kids to the waitlist. If they really want to attend, they will be snapped up--and are often even offered merit aid. VT typically reaches out to these kids the day or so after decision day.

Or, the kids who really want to attend apply ED.
DP

I'm sorry but that's BS regardless of how many people on here say that with seemingly little empathy for people's situation. You can have a strong desire to go somewhere or even have a school as you favorite but still have several legitimate reasons for not going ED, especially when you have to make that call early in fall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many high stats kids do want VT because of the in state cost savings. It’s not okay to yield protect in state kids.

Then apply ED and stop complaining.

Agree. Apply ED instate to either UVA or VT whichever is your first choice and stop complaining and saying oh that was my first choice after decisions come out.

That is a dumb argument. High stats kids have to burn their one ED shot or get shut out of their state university because the school will yield protect against over qualified kids potentially rejecting them? [i] Many states like UT Austin also guarantee admission to in state high stats kids.

I don’t think Tech is doing this. My daughter with a 4.6, 1530 got in and she applied EA.

Of course Tech is engaging in yield protection. It has been for the last four years. Go back here on DCUM and read the ED, EA, and RD threads and look at the stats of kids deferred or waitlisted. They are astounding. Do the same at College Confidential and Reddit. Just because your kid got in doesn’t mean similarly situated kids did not

DP. You seem to believe all qualified kids should be accepted, but that’s not reality. Name a school that is able to do that - none. They pick the students they want, as at any university. What’s astounding is that some of you parents can’t seem to accept this.

This is the reality. There are more well qualified students than they can accommodate and they don't admit just on some formula of GPA+Rigor+Testing. I assume they are making very fine distinctions between students based on responses to the essays, since that's the only other thing they really look at (other than demographics) + mathematical models of who is likely to yield.

It sucks to be the highly qualified student who is shut out but that is what can happen with "holistic admissions." My only real gripe about it is I don't think VT is completely honest about their yield management since their CDS says they don't consider interest, but obviously they do. Any school that offers ED considers interest since that is the ultimate expression of interest. And it seems obvious from past years in how they deny some super high stats kids that they reject students they think won't come. If you aren't applying ED, I'd encourage my student to express a lot of interest and be specific in the question about goals to tie that to how VT specifically will help you achieve that goal. That's what DS did 2 years ago when he was admitted, although who knows what ultimately tips it one way or the other.

And I guess many of us don't think this should be happening.

It’s happening at 99% of schools. This is nothing new.
DP

I didn't say it was new or that it wasn't happening. So your point?
But it IS happening more and it's up for a legitimate debate as to whether it should be.

That debate has been had and the answer has already been established: Yes, it should be. All of you who think scoring high on SATs and having high GPAs should be an automatic admission don't have a clue. My guess is kids that fit into this category didn't spend any time on the supplementals or demonstrate a history of service (maybe since they were locked in their rooms studying so much), which are the two biggest thing VT clearly says it cares about. These are really the only two places where one can differentiate one's self against the tens of thousands of qualified applicants (assuming you aren't an athlete).

According to VT's Common Data Set, volunteer/service work is merely "considered," along with a number of other things.

See, if you attended an information session on campus or actually spoken to an admissions officer for your child‘s school (or, preferably, if your child initiated that conversation), you would have heard these points emphasized. Your mistake, evidently, was relying on forms and formula. I think I might be understanding why your child wasn’t admitted.

So you're saying that VT provided false information for the Common Data Set - that they've liars? That's pretty harsh. And not that it matters, but my DC withdrew their application to VT after being accepted ED at a much higher ranked school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many high stats kids do want VT because of the in state cost savings. It’s not okay to yield protect in state kids.

Then apply ED and stop complaining.

Agree. Apply ED instate to either UVA or VT whichever is your first choice and stop complaining and saying oh that was my first choice after decisions come out.

That is a dumb argument. High stats kids have to burn their one ED shot or get shut out of their state university because the school will yield protect against over qualified kids potentially rejecting them? [i] Many states like UT Austin also guarantee admission to in state high stats kids.

I don’t think Tech is doing this. My daughter with a 4.6, 1530 got in and she applied EA.

Of course Tech is engaging in yield protection. It has been for the last four years. Go back here on DCUM and read the ED, EA, and RD threads and look at the stats of kids deferred or waitlisted. They are astounding. Do the same at College Confidential and Reddit. Just because your kid got in doesn’t mean similarly situated kids did not

DP. You seem to believe all qualified kids should be accepted, but that’s not reality. Name a school that is able to do that - none. They pick the students they want, as at any university. What’s astounding is that some of you parents can’t seem to accept this.

This is the reality. There are more well qualified students than they can accommodate and they don't admit just on some formula of GPA+Rigor+Testing. I assume they are making very fine distinctions between students based on responses to the essays, since that's the only other thing they really look at (other than demographics) + mathematical models of who is likely to yield.

It sucks to be the highly qualified student who is shut out but that is what can happen with "holistic admissions." My only real gripe about it is I don't think VT is completely honest about their yield management since their CDS says they don't consider interest, but obviously they do. Any school that offers ED considers interest since that is the ultimate expression of interest. And it seems obvious from past years in how they deny some super high stats kids that they reject students they think won't come. If you aren't applying ED, I'd encourage my student to express a lot of interest and be specific in the question about goals to tie that to how VT specifically will help you achieve that goal. That's what DS did 2 years ago when he was admitted, although who knows what ultimately tips it one way or the other.

And I guess many of us don't think this should be happening.

It’s happening at 99% of schools. This is nothing new.
DP

I didn't say it was new or that it wasn't happening. So your point?
But it IS happening more and it's up for a legitimate debate as to whether it should be.

That debate has been had and the answer has already been established: Yes, it should be. All of you who think scoring high on SATs and having high GPAs should be an automatic admission don't have a clue. My guess is kids that fit into this category didn't spend any time on the supplementals or demonstrate a history of service (maybe since they were locked in their rooms studying so much), which are the two biggest thing VT clearly says it cares about. These are really the only two places where one can differentiate one's self against the tens of thousands of qualified applicants (assuming you aren't an athlete).

According to VT's Common Data Set, volunteer/service work is merely "considered," along with a number of other things.

See, if you attended an information session on campus or actually spoken to an admissions officer for your child‘s school (or, preferably, if your child initiated that conversation), you would have heard these points emphasized. Your mistake, evidently, was relying on forms and formula. I think I might be understanding why your child wasn’t admitted.

So you're saying that VT provided false information for the Common Data Set - that they've liars? That's pretty harsh. And not that it matters, but my DC withdrew their application to VT after being accepted ED at a much higher ranked school.

I am saying anyone who attended information sessions or, I don’t know, interacted, would have been told what’s what and that information was more reliable.

And I am also saying you’re a lying liar who lies about your kid being accepted at some other school because you are on this thread like white on rice — you are too weirdly emotionally invested for that to be true. You sound like little Sammy who has a girlfriend in Canada.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many high stats kids do want VT because of the in state cost savings. It’s not okay to yield protect in state kids.

Then apply ED and stop complaining.

Agree. Apply ED instate to either UVA or VT whichever is your first choice and stop complaining and saying oh that was my first choice after decisions come out.

That is a dumb argument. High stats kids have to burn their one ED shot or get shut out of their state university because the school will yield protect against over qualified kids potentially rejecting them? [i] Many states like UT Austin also guarantee admission to in state high stats kids.

I don’t think Tech is doing this. My daughter with a 4.6, 1530 got in and she applied EA.

Of course Tech is engaging in yield protection. It has been for the last four years. Go back here on DCUM and read the ED, EA, and RD threads and look at the stats of kids deferred or waitlisted. They are astounding. Do the same at College Confidential and Reddit. Just because your kid got in doesn’t mean similarly situated kids did not

DP. You seem to believe all qualified kids should be accepted, but that’s not reality. Name a school that is able to do that - none. They pick the students they want, as at any university. What’s astounding is that some of you parents can’t seem to accept this.

This is the reality. There are more well qualified students than they can accommodate and they don't admit just on some formula of GPA+Rigor+Testing. I assume they are making very fine distinctions between students based on responses to the essays, since that's the only other thing they really look at (other than demographics) + mathematical models of who is likely to yield.

It sucks to be the highly qualified student who is shut out but that is what can happen with "holistic admissions." My only real gripe about it is I don't think VT is completely honest about their yield management since their CDS says they don't consider interest, but obviously they do. Any school that offers ED considers interest since that is the ultimate expression of interest. And it seems obvious from past years in how they deny some super high stats kids that they reject students they think won't come. If you aren't applying ED, I'd encourage my student to express a lot of interest and be specific in the question about goals to tie that to how VT specifically will help you achieve that goal. That's what DS did 2 years ago when he was admitted, although who knows what ultimately tips it one way or the other.

And I guess many of us don't think this should be happening.

It’s happening at 99% of schools. This is nothing new.
DP

I didn't say it was new or that it wasn't happening. So your point?
But it IS happening more and it's up for a legitimate debate as to whether it should be.

That debate has been had and the answer has already been established: Yes, it should be. All of you who think scoring high on SATs and having high GPAs should be an automatic admission don't have a clue. My guess is kids that fit into this category didn't spend any time on the supplementals or demonstrate a history of service (maybe since they were locked in their rooms studying so much), which are the two biggest thing VT clearly says it cares about. These are really the only two places where one can differentiate one's self against the tens of thousands of qualified applicants (assuming you aren't an athlete).

According to VT's Common Data Set, volunteer/service work is merely "considered," along with a number of other things.

See, if you attended an information session on campus or actually spoken to an admissions officer for your child‘s school (or, preferably, if your child initiated that conversation), you would have heard these points emphasized. Your mistake, evidently, was relying on forms and formula. I think I might be understanding why your child wasn’t admitted.

So you're saying that VT provided false information for the Common Data Set - that they've liars? That's pretty harsh. And not that it matters, but my DC withdrew their application to VT after being accepted ED at a much higher ranked school.

I am saying anyone who attended information sessions or, I don’t know, interacted, would have been told what’s what and that information was more reliable.

And I am also saying you’re a lying liar who lies about your kid being accepted at some other school because you are on this thread like white on rice — you are too weirdly emotionally invested for that to be true. You sound like little Sammy who has a girlfriend in Canada.

You're a weird one. I posted only once before on this thread and haven't lied about anything. I have nothing against VT - my kid liked it well enough and applied there EA, but they applied ED and were accepted elsewhere. And I never said VT doesn't value service. I'm sure it does. I simply pointed out that in its CDS, VT did not list volunteer work as either "very important" or "important", but just "considered.". Apparently you and some others think that is not correct, and that VT has provided applicants in-person with information that contradicts what VT submitted for the CDS. Well, if they did, they should stop supplying false information for the CDS. That is all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please list stats — curious about the couple pps with sons and thought tech was a match and kids rejected.
I’ll be in this spot in a year.

Deferred with 4.0UW/4.5W/1570 and 13 APs or post-APs.

That is nuts. Where else did they apply?

Princeton, Harvard, Hopkins, Duke, UVA, bunch of others. VT was lowest ranked school. Already in at several higher ranked schools. If you are high stats and want VT, better go ED and show tons of interest.

In state? Engineering? Yield protection? But, UGH!

Yes, in state engineering. Feels like yield protection but no way to tell for sure.

Seems like no other explanation. But also don’t understand why VT would bother to engage in such a practice.

What I have heard is that VT engages in yield protection for enrollment management--a few years back they started using an algorithm (many big state Us use) that predicts who will enroll--this shuts out some high stats kids to the waitlist. If they really want to attend, they will be snapped up--and are often even offered merit aid. VT typically reaches out to these kids the day or so after decision day.

Or, the kids who really want to attend apply ED.
DP

I'm sorry but that's BS regardless of how many people on here say that with seemingly little empathy for people's situation. You can have a strong desire to go somewhere or even have a school as you favorite but still have several legitimate reasons for not going ED, especially when you have to make that call early in fall.

Not sure what to tell you. It's a fact that if you have a first-choice school, ED-ing is your best hope of admittance (provided good stats, etc.). It's not a sure-fire solution, but it certainly helps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many high stats kids do want VT because of the in state cost savings. It’s not okay to yield protect in state kids.

Then apply ED and stop complaining.

Agree. Apply ED instate to either UVA or VT whichever is your first choice and stop complaining and saying oh that was my first choice after decisions come out.

That is a dumb argument. High stats kids have to burn their one ED shot or get shut out of their state university because the school will yield protect against over qualified kids potentially rejecting them? [i] Many states like UT Austin also guarantee admission to in state high stats kids.

I don’t think Tech is doing this. My daughter with a 4.6, 1530 got in and she applied EA.

Of course Tech is engaging in yield protection. It has been for the last four years. Go back here on DCUM and read the ED, EA, and RD threads and look at the stats of kids deferred or waitlisted. They are astounding. Do the same at College Confidential and Reddit. Just because your kid got in doesn’t mean similarly situated kids did not

DP. You seem to believe all qualified kids should be accepted, but that’s not reality. Name a school that is able to do that - none. They pick the students they want, as at any university. What’s astounding is that some of you parents can’t seem to accept this.

This is the reality. There are more well qualified students than they can accommodate and they don't admit just on some formula of GPA+Rigor+Testing. I assume they are making very fine distinctions between students based on responses to the essays, since that's the only other thing they really look at (other than demographics) + mathematical models of who is likely to yield.

It sucks to be the highly qualified student who is shut out but that is what can happen with "holistic admissions." My only real gripe about it is I don't think VT is completely honest about their yield management since their CDS says they don't consider interest, but obviously they do. Any school that offers ED considers interest since that is the ultimate expression of interest. And it seems obvious from past years in how they deny some super high stats kids that they reject students they think won't come. If you aren't applying ED, I'd encourage my student to express a lot of interest and be specific in the question about goals to tie that to how VT specifically will help you achieve that goal. That's what DS did 2 years ago when he was admitted, although who knows what ultimately tips it one way or the other.

And I guess many of us don't think this should be happening.

It’s happening at 99% of schools. This is nothing new.
DP

I didn't say it was new or that it wasn't happening. So your point?
But it IS happening more and it's up for a legitimate debate as to whether it should be.

That debate has been had and the answer has already been established: Yes, it should be. All of you who think scoring high on SATs and having high GPAs should be an automatic admission don't have a clue. My guess is kids that fit into this category didn't spend any time on the supplementals or demonstrate a history of service (maybe since they were locked in their rooms studying so much), which are the two biggest thing VT clearly says it cares about. These are really the only two places where one can differentiate one's self against the tens of thousands of qualified applicants (assuming you aren't an athlete).

According to VT's Common Data Set, volunteer/service work is merely "considered," along with a number of other things.

See, if you attended an information session on campus or actually spoken to an admissions officer for your child‘s school (or, preferably, if your child initiated that conversation), you would have heard these points emphasized. Your mistake, evidently, was relying on forms and formula. I think I might be understanding why your child wasn’t admitted.

So you're saying that VT provided false information for the Common Data Set - that they've liars? That's pretty harsh. And not that it matters, but my DC withdrew their application to VT after being accepted ED at a much higher ranked school.

DP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many high stats kids do want VT because of the in state cost savings. It’s not okay to yield protect in state kids.

Then apply ED and stop complaining.

Agree. Apply ED instate to either UVA or VT whichever is your first choice and stop complaining and saying oh that was my first choice after decisions come out.

That is a dumb argument. High stats kids have to burn their one ED shot or get shut out of their state university because the school will yield protect against over qualified kids potentially rejecting them? [i] Many states like UT Austin also guarantee admission to in state high stats kids.

I don’t think Tech is doing this. My daughter with a 4.6, 1530 got in and she applied EA.

Of course Tech is engaging in yield protection. It has been for the last four years. Go back here on DCUM and read the ED, EA, and RD threads and look at the stats of kids deferred or waitlisted. They are astounding. Do the same at College Confidential and Reddit. Just because your kid got in doesn’t mean similarly situated kids did not

DP. You seem to believe all qualified kids should be accepted, but that’s not reality. Name a school that is able to do that - none. They pick the students they want, as at any university. What’s astounding is that some of you parents can’t seem to accept this.

This is the reality. There are more well qualified students than they can accommodate and they don't admit just on some formula of GPA+Rigor+Testing. I assume they are making very fine distinctions between students based on responses to the essays, since that's the only other thing they really look at (other than demographics) + mathematical models of who is likely to yield.

It sucks to be the highly qualified student who is shut out but that is what can happen with "holistic admissions." My only real gripe about it is I don't think VT is completely honest about their yield management since their CDS says they don't consider interest, but obviously they do. Any school that offers ED considers interest since that is the ultimate expression of interest. And it seems obvious from past years in how they deny some super high stats kids that they reject students they think won't come. If you aren't applying ED, I'd encourage my student to express a lot of interest and be specific in the question about goals to tie that to how VT specifically will help you achieve that goal. That's what DS did 2 years ago when he was admitted, although who knows what ultimately tips it one way or the other.

And I guess many of us don't think this should be happening.

It’s happening at 99% of schools. This is nothing new.
DP

I didn't say it was new or that it wasn't happening. So your point?
But it IS happening more and it's up for a legitimate debate as to whether it should be.

That debate has been had and the answer has already been established: Yes, it should be. All of you who think scoring high on SATs and having high GPAs should be an automatic admission don't have a clue. My guess is kids that fit into this category didn't spend any time on the supplementals or demonstrate a history of service (maybe since they were locked in their rooms studying so much), which are the two biggest thing VT clearly says it cares about. These are really the only two places where one can differentiate one's self against the tens of thousands of qualified applicants (assuming you aren't an athlete).

According to VT's Common Data Set, volunteer/service work is merely "considered," along with a number of other things.

See, if you attended an information session on campus or actually spoken to an admissions officer for your child‘s school (or, preferably, if your child initiated that conversation), you would have heard these points emphasized. Your mistake, evidently, was relying on forms and formula. I think I might be understanding why your child wasn’t admitted.

So you're saying that VT provided false information for the Common Data Set - that they've liars? That's pretty harsh. And not that it matters, but my DC withdrew their application to VT after being accepted ED at a much higher ranked school.

I am saying anyone who attended information sessions or, I don’t know, interacted, would have been told what’s what and that information was more reliable.

And I am also saying you’re a lying liar who lies about your kid being accepted at some other school because you are on this thread like white on rice — you are too weirdly emotionally invested for that to be true. You sound like little Sammy who has a girlfriend in Canada.

+100
The sour grapes just continue, endlessly it seems. I wonder if the PP is this bitter about rejections from other schools?