Advice for help advising driven teen and “elite” college admission

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does your DD want? Seems more like this is your dream. I would focus on what she wants once she starts visiting colleges.

+100

"Getting into an Ivy" is never a good goal to have. Goals like "becoming a doctor," "becoming a software engineer," "being a writer," or "working to solve climate change/COVID/HIV" are all good goals to have. But aiming for the Ivies with no idea of what you want post-grad is a recipe for disaster -- and frankly, a recipe I see too many kids in this area fall into.

There are just many on DCUM obsessed with getting their child into an Ivy without any thought whatsoever as to the best fit for their child. They would probably sell their mother to get their child into any Ivy if they could. Its kind of pathetic given that there are so many great colleges that are better than the Ivies depending on the child and what he or she wants to study.

Really? I don't see that here. If anything, I see way too much praise for mediocre LACs that have "a way better undergrad experience than a place like Harvard!"

Uh, it's pretty hard to miss

See the comment above you:

"They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated."

Hahaha. As if a Grinnell degree opens the same doors as one from HYPS.

For graduate school admissions at the Ivies? Grinnell definitely opens the same doors. Possibly more.

If you do well at HYPS undergrad, you don't even have to go to grad school. The kids I know at the top of their class from HYPS are not even going to grad school for the most part. They're walking straight into six figure jobs in consulting, investment banking, private equity, and product management. I don't see that happening at Grinnell (although it's possible a school like Williams or Amherst might be more conducive to that).

Plus, I'll have to admit that it's a little odd when SLAC boosters promote their high admissions rates into PhD programs. PhDs almost always have a negative ROI (even the ones in STEM), and many PhD students are extremely depressed as they realize that all their hard work was mainly for no financial reward.

The PhDs are much, much happier than the miserable souls working in IB or PE. Dear God that’s an unhappy bunch of drug users.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have Ivy professors in my family. They tell me they don’t want their kids going to an Ivy for undergrad and are pushing the SLACs. They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated. Just a data point but I think it is interesting.

I can totally see this. I'm an Ivy grad and I'm encouraging my DC to look at SLACs. She has found several SLACs that she loves and I'm so impressed with what I see. I think she'll get a better education at a SLAC than an Ivy.

I agree, but I still think that an Ivy is better for most students than a SLACs (save for maybe Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley). College is not so much for the education that you get as much as it is for the connections you make and the internships/job opportunities you get after -- and that's much better at, say, Princeton than at Grinnell or Vassar.

Sure, you think that. But a lot of people who know the Ivies better than you — Ivy professors — disagree with you. You’ve bought the marketing entirely but don’t understand the reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have Ivy professors in my family. They tell me they don’t want their kids going to an Ivy for undergrad and are pushing the SLACs. They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated. Just a data point but I think it is interesting.

I can totally see this. I'm an Ivy grad and I'm encouraging my DC to look at SLACs. She has found several SLACs that she loves and I'm so impressed with what I see. I think she'll get a better education at a SLAC than an Ivy.

I agree, but I still think that an Ivy is better for most students than a SLACs (save for maybe Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley). College is not so much for the education that you get as much as it is for the connections you make and the internships/job opportunities you get after -- and that's much better at, say, Princeton than at Grinnell or Vassar.

Sure, you think that. But a lot of people who know the Ivies better than you — Ivy professors — disagree with you. You’ve bought the marketing entirely but don’t understand the reality.

No, I understand the reality fairly well. A Princeton degree will open up doors in corporate America that a Grinnell degree will not. Full stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does your DD want? Seems more like this is your dream. I would focus on what she wants once she starts visiting colleges.

+100

"Getting into an Ivy" is never a good goal to have. Goals like "becoming a doctor," "becoming a software engineer," "being a writer," or "working to solve climate change/COVID/HIV" are all good goals to have. But aiming for the Ivies with no idea of what you want post-grad is a recipe for disaster -- and frankly, a recipe I see too many kids in this area fall into.

There are just many on DCUM obsessed with getting their child into an Ivy without any thought whatsoever as to the best fit for their child. They would probably sell their mother to get their child into any Ivy if they could. Its kind of pathetic given that there are so many great colleges that are better than the Ivies depending on the child and what he or she wants to study.

Really? I don't see that here. If anything, I see way too much praise for mediocre LACs that have "a way better undergrad experience than a place like Harvard!"

Uh, it's pretty hard to miss

See the comment above you:

"They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated."

Hahaha. As if a Grinnell degree opens the same doors as one from HYPS.

For graduate school admissions at the Ivies? Grinnell definitely opens the same doors. Possibly more.

If you do well at HYPS undergrad, you don't even have to go to grad school. The kids I know at the top of their class from HYPS are not even going to grad school for the most part. They're walking straight into six figure jobs in consulting, investment banking, private equity, and product management. I don't see that happening at Grinnell (although it's possible a school like Williams or Amherst might be more conducive to that).

Plus, I'll have to admit that it's a little odd when SLAC boosters promote their high admissions rates into PhD programs. PhDs almost always have a negative ROI (even the ones in STEM), and many PhD students are extremely depressed as they realize that all their hard work was mainly for no financial reward.

The PhDs are much, much happier than the miserable souls working in IB or PE. Dear God that’s an unhappy bunch of drug users.

Both groups are miserable, but at least the IB/PE folks are being paid to be unhappy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have Ivy professors in my family. They tell me they don’t want their kids going to an Ivy for undergrad and are pushing the SLACs. They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated. Just a data point but I think it is interesting.

I can totally see this. I'm an Ivy grad and I'm encouraging my DC to look at SLACs. She has found several SLACs that she loves and I'm so impressed with what I see. I think she'll get a better education at a SLAC than an Ivy.

I agree, but I still think that an Ivy is better for most students than a SLACs (save for maybe Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley). College is not so much for the education that you get as much as it is for the connections you make and the internships/job opportunities you get after -- and that's much better at, say, Princeton than at Grinnell or Vassar.

Sure, you think that. But a lot of people who know the Ivies better than you — Ivy professors — disagree with you. You’ve bought the marketing entirely but don’t understand the reality.

Ivy profs are just jealous that their students will go on to make more money than they ever will. See William Deresiewicz.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have Ivy professors in my family. They tell me they don’t want their kids going to an Ivy for undergrad and are pushing the SLACs. They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated. Just a data point but I think it is interesting.

I can totally see this. I'm an Ivy grad and I'm encouraging my DC to look at SLACs. She has found several SLACs that she loves and I'm so impressed with what I see. I think she'll get a better education at a SLAC than an Ivy.

I agree, but I still think that an Ivy is better for most students than a SLACs (save for maybe Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley). College is not so much for the education that you get as much as it is for the connections you make and the internships/job opportunities you get after -- and that's much better at, say, Princeton than at Grinnell or Vassar.

Sure, you think that. But a lot of people who know the Ivies better than you — Ivy professors — disagree with you. You’ve bought the marketing entirely but don’t understand the reality.

Ivy profs are just jealous that their students will go on to make more money than they ever will. See William Deresiewicz.

Lol no. Trust, Ivy professors, particularly tenured ones, do not envy their PE and IB students. They pity them. Ivy professors have something far more valuable than their cocaine-snorting Wall Street students: time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have Ivy professors in my family. They tell me they don’t want their kids going to an Ivy for undergrad and are pushing the SLACs. They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated. Just a data point but I think it is interesting.

I can totally see this. I'm an Ivy grad and I'm encouraging my DC to look at SLACs. She has found several SLACs that she loves and I'm so impressed with what I see. I think she'll get a better education at a SLAC than an Ivy.

I agree, but I still think that an Ivy is better for most students than a SLACs (save for maybe Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley). College is not so much for the education that you get as much as it is for the connections you make and the internships/job opportunities you get after -- and that's much better at, say, Princeton than at Grinnell or Vassar.

Sure, you think that. But a lot of people who know the Ivies better than you — Ivy professors — disagree with you. You’ve bought the marketing entirely but don’t understand the reality.

Ivy profs are just jealous that their students will go on to make more money than they ever will. See William Deresiewicz.

Lol no. Trust, Ivy professors, particularly tenured ones, do not envy their PE and IB students. They pity them. Ivy professors have something far more valuable than their cocaine-snorting Wall Street students: time.

TF? All the academics I know are low on time. Even the tenured ones. Just look at the grad student strikes at Columbia/the UCs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have Ivy professors in my family. They tell me they don’t want their kids going to an Ivy for undergrad and are pushing the SLACs. They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated. Just a data point but I think it is interesting.

I can totally see this. I'm an Ivy grad and I'm encouraging my DC to look at SLACs. She has found several SLACs that she loves and I'm so impressed with what I see. I think she'll get a better education at a SLAC than an Ivy.

I agree, but I still think that an Ivy is better for most students than a SLACs (save for maybe Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley). College is not so much for the education that you get as much as it is for the connections you make and the internships/job opportunities you get after -- and that's much better at, say, Princeton than at Grinnell or Vassar.

Sure, you think that. But a lot of people who know the Ivies better than you — Ivy professors — disagree with you. You’ve bought the marketing entirely but don’t understand the reality.

Ivy profs are just jealous that their students will go on to make more money than they ever will. See William Deresiewicz.

Lol no. Trust, Ivy professors, particularly tenured ones, do not envy their PE and IB students. They pity them. Ivy professors have something far more valuable than their cocaine-snorting Wall Street students: time.

TF? All the academics I know are low on time. Even the tenured ones. Just look at the grad student strikes at Columbia/the UCs.

Grad students aren’t tenured professors. And you very clearly do not understand the life of an Ivy professor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have Ivy professors in my family. They tell me they don’t want their kids going to an Ivy for undergrad and are pushing the SLACs. They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated. Just a data point but I think it is interesting.

I can totally see this. I'm an Ivy grad and I'm encouraging my DC to look at SLACs. She has found several SLACs that she loves and I'm so impressed with what I see. I think she'll get a better education at a SLAC than an Ivy.

I agree, but I still think that an Ivy is better for most students than a SLACs (save for maybe Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley). College is not so much for the education that you get as much as it is for the connections you make and the internships/job opportunities you get after -- and that's much better at, say, Princeton than at Grinnell or Vassar.

Sure, you think that. But a lot of people who know the Ivies better than you — Ivy professors — disagree with you. You’ve bought the marketing entirely but don’t understand the reality.

No, I understand the reality fairly well. A Princeton degree will open up doors in corporate America that a Grinnell degree will not. Full stop.

Sure, you could make a strong case for a student attending Williams or Amherst over pretty much any school in the country. I'd probably go to Williams over everything but HYP and maybe Dartmouth.

[Anonymous]

Unless your daughter is a URM or first gen college student getting A’s and having good PSAT scores is not going to get her into an Ivy. If she’s not a great athlete she needs to distinguish herself in at least one the following: Art, music, debate, model UN, speech, writing (state or national contests) etc.

There are so many kids with good grades who focus all their time and attention on grades. That’s not about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have Ivy professors in my family. They tell me they don’t want their kids going to an Ivy for undergrad and are pushing the SLACs. They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated. Just a data point but I think it is interesting.

I can totally see this. I'm an Ivy grad and I'm encouraging my DC to look at SLACs. She has found several SLACs that she loves and I'm so impressed with what I see. I think she'll get a better education at a SLAC than an Ivy.

I agree, but I still think that an Ivy is better for most students than a SLACs (save for maybe Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley). College is not so much for the education that you get as much as it is for the connections you make and the internships/job opportunities you get after -- and that's much better at, say, Princeton than at Grinnell or Vassar.

Sure, you think that. But a lot of people who know the Ivies better than you — Ivy professors — disagree with you. You’ve bought the marketing entirely but don’t understand the reality.

No, I understand the reality fairly well. A Princeton degree will open up doors in corporate America that a Grinnell degree will not. Full stop.

Sure, you could make a strong case for a student attending Williams or Amherst over pretty much any school in the country. I'd probably go to Williams over everything but HYP and maybe Dartmouth.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have Ivy professors in my family. They tell me they don’t want their kids going to an Ivy for undergrad and are pushing the SLACs. They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated. Just a data point but I think it is interesting.

I can totally see this. I'm an Ivy grad and I'm encouraging my DC to look at SLACs. She has found several SLACs that she loves and I'm so impressed with what I see. I think she'll get a better education at a SLAC than an Ivy.

I agree, but I still think that an Ivy is better for most students than a SLACs (save for maybe Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley). College is not so much for the education that you get as much as it is for the connections you make and the internships/job opportunities you get after -- and that's much better at, say, Princeton than at Grinnell or Vassar.

Sure, you think that. But a lot of people who know the Ivies better than you — Ivy professors — disagree with you. You’ve bought the marketing entirely but don’t understand the reality.

No, I understand the reality fairly well. A Princeton degree will open up doors in corporate America that a Grinnell degree will not. Full stop.

Sure, you could make a strong case for a student attending Williams or Amherst over pretty much any school in the country. I'd probably go to Williams over everything but HYP and maybe Dartmouth.

This should read: Sure, but you could make a strong case for a student attending Williams or Amherst over pretty much any school in the country. I'd probably go to Williams over everything but HYP and maybe Dartmouth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unless your daughter is a URM or first gen college student getting A’s and having good PSAT scores is not going to get her into an Ivy. If she’s not a great athlete she needs to distinguish herself in at least one the following: Art, music, debate, model UN, speech, writing (state or national contests) etc.

There are so many kids with good grades who focus all their time and attention on grades. That’s not about.

Sorry for the typo - I meant not enough for most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does your DD want? Seems more like this is your dream. I would focus on what she wants once she starts visiting colleges.

+100

"Getting into an Ivy" is never a good goal to have. Goals like "becoming a doctor," "becoming a software engineer," "being a writer," or "working to solve climate change/COVID/HIV" are all good goals to have. But aiming for the Ivies with no idea of what you want post-grad is a recipe for disaster -- and frankly, a recipe I see too many kids in this area fall into.

There are just many on DCUM obsessed with getting their child into an Ivy without any thought whatsoever as to the best fit for their child. They would probably sell their mother to get their child into any Ivy if they could. Its kind of pathetic given that there are so many great colleges that are better than the Ivies depending on the child and what he or she wants to study.

Really? I don't see that here. If anything, I see way too much praise for mediocre LACs that have "a way better undergrad experience than a place like Harvard!"

Uh, it's pretty hard to miss

See the comment above you:

"They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated."

Hahaha. As if a Grinnell degree opens the same doors as one from HYPS.

For graduate school admissions at the Ivies? Grinnell definitely opens the same doors. Possibly more.

If you do well at HYPS undergrad, you don't even have to go to grad school. The kids I know at the top of their class from HYPS are not even going to grad school for the most part. They're walking straight into six figure jobs in consulting, investment banking, private equity, and product management. I don't see that happening at Grinnell (although it's possible a school like Williams or Amherst might be more conducive to that).

Plus, I'll have to admit that it's a little odd when SLAC boosters promote their high admissions rates into PhD programs. PhDs almost always have a negative ROI (even the ones in STEM), and many PhD students are extremely depressed as they realize that all their hard work was mainly for no financial reward.

The PhDs are much, much happier than the miserable souls working in IB or PE. Dear God that’s an unhappy bunch of drug users.

Both groups are miserable, but at least the IB/PE folks are being paid to be unhappy.

This x million. And so many doors are open to you through PE/IB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have Ivy professors in my family. They tell me they don’t want their kids going to an Ivy for undergrad and are pushing the SLACs. They also told me that for graduate admissions, they really like kids from SLACs because they know they were well-educated. Just a data point but I think it is interesting.

I can totally see this. I'm an Ivy grad and I'm encouraging my DC to look at SLACs. She has found several SLACs that she loves and I'm so impressed with what I see. I think she'll get a better education at a SLAC than an Ivy.

I agree, but I still think that an Ivy is better for most students than a SLACs (save for maybe Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley). College is not so much for the education that you get as much as it is for the connections you make and the internships/job opportunities you get after -- and that's much better at, say, Princeton than at Grinnell or Vassar.

Sure, you think that. But a lot of people who know the Ivies better than you — Ivy professors — disagree with you. You’ve bought the marketing entirely but don’t understand the reality.

No, I understand the reality fairly well. A Princeton degree will open up doors in corporate America that a Grinnell degree will not. Full stop.

Most people in HR or admissions will disagree with this. Full Stop.