Insider Perspectives from a Highly Selective Admissions Office

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any advice on which liberal arts schools are on the rise, but not yet fully "discovered". DC is starting the college search process, focused on liberal arts schools, but looking for the next hot school (i.e., where your average bright, accomplished, but unhooked kid might have a fighting chance of gaining admission).

Thank you.

Trinity University, Rhodes, Colorado College

Colorado is impossible to get to these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yawn. White privileged folks prevail as usual w/ alumni connections and donations.

Of course, if you happen to be white and have parents who never graduated from high school and Dad makes less than $15 per hour with a SAHM, no special interest group cares about you and you are totally screwed....

Totally wrong -- you're a highly coveted "first-gen" student who will get a free ride if you have the credentials to get into HYPS. Doesn't mean it'll be easy -- if you fall in this category, you aren't likely to have had the educational opportunities and developed some of the academic skills that UMC kids have, and you may experience a real cultural schock, struggle financially (or cause your family to), and may not have the support you need at home. But college admissions officers do care about you and you are not totally screwed.

True - it is the kids of these white "First Geners" who are now UMC who are screwed!

Well (I'm the PP you're agreeing with and a quasi-first gen myself), not exactly screwed. My UMC kid has directly benefited from the upward mobility that Harvard educations gave her parents. Harvard was a life-changing experience for me, but it'd be more of the same for DC -- she was born into that transformed life. Doesn't it make more sense to give access to the kids for whom Harvard will make the most difference vs. kids who start out with so many advantages that they're going to do well whether they go to Harvard or not? I get why legacy preferences exist (($$$)), but I wish they didn't.

Your assumption is that legacies and other UMC students don't bring anything to the table that a "First Gener" doesn't have. If the push for "diversity" is going to be sustainable over the long term as something that truly benefits students and adds to the educational experience, it must be in the service of producing a group of students with a truly wide range of experiences. I think a class entirely made up of "First Geners" would be as bad as a class only made up of legacies. I suspect that a great deal of the "upper mobility" that Harvard gave you wasn't just the intellectual experience, but the social/economic education, as well. I went to a school that was not as academically respected as Harvard, but which was a popular recruiting stop for employers, as the school was known for producing graduates with a certain "polish" and an ability to feel comfortable in any situation. I was from a very middle class family, and I learned to fit in with the children of billionaires as well as students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Denying admission to either the billionaire's kids or the students from disadvantaged backgrounds would have been a significant detriment to my "education."

One of the statements from OP that concerned me was the point about wanting interviews from recent graduates who have a better feel regarding who will "fit in" at the school. This sounds a lot like "we want people from all socioeconomic and racial backgrounds...as long as they think exactly like us."

[Anonymous]

why do schools superscore?

[Anonymous]

Looks better for the school's stats if they can claim higher SAT scores for the entering class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:why do schools superscore?

It already feels like a high-stakes test without it. Are you advocating for even more pressure?

I think Berkeley only looks at the best sitting, if you want your child to only be judged on one four-hour sitting.

[Anonymous]

No offense but I feel like I know all this...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yawn. White privileged folks prevail as usual w/ alumni connections and donations.

Of course, if you happen to be white and have parents who never graduated from high school and Dad makes less than $15 per hour with a SAHM, no special interest group cares about you and you are totally screwed....

Totally wrong -- you're a highly coveted "first-gen" student who will get a free ride if you have the credentials to get into HYPS. Doesn't mean it'll be easy -- if you fall in this category, you aren't likely to have had the educational opportunities and developed some of the academic skills that UMC kids have, and you may experience a real cultural schock, struggle financially (or cause your family to), and may not have the support you need at home. But college admissions officers do care about you and you are not totally screwed.

True - it is the kids of these white "First Geners" who are now UMC who are screwed!

Well (I'm the PP you're agreeing with and a quasi-first gen myself), not exactly screwed. My UMC kid has directly benefited from the upward mobility that Harvard educations gave her parents. Harvard was a life-changing experience for me, but it'd be more of the same for DC -- she was born into that transformed life. Doesn't it make more sense to give access to the kids for whom Harvard will make the most difference vs. kids who start out with so many advantages that they're going to do well whether they go to Harvard or not? I get why legacy preferences exist (($$$)), but I wish they didn't.

Your assumption is that legacies and other UMC students don't bring anything to the table that a "First Gener" doesn't have. If the push for "diversity" is going to be sustainable over the long term as something that truly benefits students and adds to the educational experience, it must be in the service of producing a group of students with a truly wide range of experiences. I think a class entirely made up of "First Geners" would be as bad as a class only made up of legacies. I suspect that a great deal of the "upper mobility" that Harvard gave you wasn't just the intellectual experience, but the social/economic education, as well. I went to a school that was not as academically respected as Harvard, but which was a popular recruiting stop for employers, as the school was known for producing graduates with a certain "polish" and an ability to feel comfortable in any situation. I was from a very middle class family, and I learned to fit in with the children of billionaires as well as students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Denying admission to either the billionaire's kids or the students from disadvantaged backgrounds would have been a significant detriment to my "education."

One of the statements from OP that concerned me was the point about wanting interviews from recent graduates who have a better feel regarding who will "fit in" at the school. This sounds a lot like "we want people from all socioeconomic and racial backgrounds...as long as they think exactly like us."

My child saw this with an interview at one of Ivys this year when he was very pointedly asked about his political views generally and whether he participated in the women's march. There definitely was a litmus test vibe to the interview.

[Anonymous]

That sounds like an AWOL interviewer. Probably not a good admissions office rep. Was the interviewer young?

[Anonymous]

I would like to thank the OP for such an informative posts and all the "inside" info provided. Very very used full

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No offense but I feel like I know all this...

What's all this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP - Can you discuss the rationale for accepting Asian (or any other race) International students over students of the same race who live in the U.S. (many who have emigrated)? Given the large cohort of the foreign-born and their children in the U.S., why does the school not feel that it can achieve diversity from within the U.S.? Why would the valuable resource of an elite American education not be better used for those who have committed to this country? (I know you didn't create the policy, but perhaps have heard the conversations).

And, BTW - those SAT scores for alums that you want to denigrate were probably harder to achieve "back in the day" before the SAT re-sets and the mainstreaming of the prep industry.

Because international students pay much higher tuition... That's why so many schools spend a lot in advertisement in some foreign countries trying to get foreign students...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - Can you discuss the rationale for accepting Asian (or any other race) International students over students of the same race who live in the U.S. (many who have emigrated)? Given the large cohort of the foreign-born and their children in the U.S., why does the school not feel that it can achieve diversity from within the U.S.? Why would the valuable resource of an elite American education not be better used for those who have committed to this country? (I know you didn't create the policy, but perhaps have heard the conversations).

And, BTW - those SAT scores for alums that you want to denigrate were probably harder to achieve "back in the day" before the SAT re-sets and the mainstreaming of the prep industry.

Because international students pay much higher tuition... That's why so many schools spend a lot in advertisement in some foreign countries trying to get foreign students...

Not exactly true. Tuition is generally the same at private schools but FA rules may be dramatically different for international students (it's up to each school). Basically it's a way of getting more full pay students without lowering academic standards (international rather than national pool of .5%ers) and with the added benefits of claiming greater diversity and a global network.

[Anonymous]

This is the most useful thread in a long time...

[Anonymous]

Why do you ask the parent's occupation? How is that taken into account?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do you ask the parent's occupation? How is that taken into account?

Last year we went to visit a coach at Harvard and the first thing he asked me was if I was wealthy.
He said that Harvard is always looking for future donors