What's academic top 1%?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple. Meets ALL of the following criteria

Within the first five ranks in a class size of over 500
Scores of over 1550 SAT or 35 ACT in a single attempt. No super scoring.
Scores 5 in most of the 8 or more AP tests taken
Scores of over 750 in every one of Subject tests if taken

Very likely around 5,000-10,000 max such students in the whole country. So not many You could easily accommodate every one of them in the top ten schools. But then the diversity goals of the schools would be violated, so they are rejected routinely in favor of less academically accomplished students through all kinds of twisted rationalizations.

As someone who used to be an academic star in high school back when tutoring wasn't so prevalent, when I read your list, my mind mentally automatically adds up the hours/$$ of tutoring/prep and the parental involvement for most of the kids on your list to achieve those "accomplishments."
Yes, some will have done it naturally. They are the real thing. Others were hoisted there, going past others who may not have had that support. It's a game now and I don't take the things you list at face value anymore.

This 1000%

Most are not that way thru no assistance. Back when most of us attended HS, tutoring was not a thing, unless you were really struggling and then it was the struggling kid sitting at the HS after hours with the NHS students providing tutoring for free. Nobody with A's and B's got "tutoring"---you worked with your friends and figured out how to do the homework. (or in my case, I did the math and science homework on the phone with 1 or 2 friends and they disseminated it to the rest of the class as I didn't have the time or interest to explain it to everyone multiple times). We took the SAT once. You either took the SAT or ACT based on where you lived---rarely did you take both (I took both cause I lived in a state where SAT was the one and I wanted to apply to colleges in the midwest where they wanted ACTs). You got your score and you submitted it. Taking the PSAT in 11th grade (and 11th grade only) was "the preparation" for the SAT.
We took AP courses (only had 2 offered) and then took the test, with minimal preparation. The really smart ones got 4 or 5s---the rest got 2 or 3s.

But even back then, elite schools still had many kids who had 1300s and good gpa but not 4.0. What was similar across most students was the motivation and drive to succeed, except it was more natural and not driven by the parents and rat race of getting into college. I attended a T10 school, it was filled with smart, motivated kids. But it was genuine motivation and drive. THat's not what I see now at those schools or with most of the kids who get in---most are in the cog of doing everything in hopes of getting into the right college, not because they want to learn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple. Meets ALL of the following criteria

Within the first five ranks in a class size of over 500
Scores of over 1550 SAT or 35 ACT in a single attempt. No super scoring.
Scores 5 in most of the 8 or more AP tests taken
Scores of over 750 in every one of Subject tests if taken

Very likely around 5,000-10,000 max such students in the whole country. So not many You could easily accommodate every one of them in the top ten schools. But then the diversity goals of the schools would be violated, so they are rejected routinely in favor of less academically accomplished students through all kinds of twisted rationalizations.

So, you just eliminate any kid who attended a high school under 2K students, or who did IB, or Dual enrollment, etc. . . ?

Also, not sure how it's twisted to say that academics aren't the only kind of accomplishment that's important. It's twisted to say that they are. None of the elite schools claims to be accepting kids just based on academics.

And that's what bothers these snowflake parents who feel entitled for their kid to get an elite education because they focused their kid on 15+ APs, getting a 1580 and a 4.0UW with carefully choreographed volunteering and ECs. They spent 4+ years fitting their kid into this "academic box" and forgot to let their kid do this naturally. Now if they only get into #34 they feel demoralized and complain "it's not fair". They want it to be all about "academics", not about the right interesting group of people to learn together, because they can use their privilege to ensure the "academics" are "top notch"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple. Meets ALL of the following criteria

Within the first five ranks in a class size of over 500
Scores of over 1550 SAT or 35 ACT in a single attempt. No super scoring.
Scores 5 in most of the 8 or more AP tests taken
Scores of over 750 in every one of Subject tests if taken

Very likely around 5,000-10,000 max such students in the whole country. So not many You could easily accommodate every one of them in the top ten schools. But then the diversity goals of the schools would be violated, so they are rejected routinely in favor of less academically accomplished students through all kinds of twisted rationalizations.

So, you just eliminate any kid who attended a high school under 2K students, or who did IB, or Dual enrollment, etc. . . ?

Also, not sure how it's twisted to say that academics aren't the only kind of accomplishment that's important. It's twisted to say that they are. None of the elite schools claims to be accepting kids just based on academics.

And that's what bothers these snowflake parents who feel entitled for their kid to get an elite education because they focused their kid on 15+ APs, getting a 1580 and a 4.0UW with carefully choreographed volunteering and ECs. They spent 4+ years fitting their kid into this "academic box" and forgot to let their kid do this naturally. Now if they only get into #34 they feel demoralized and complain "it's not fair". They want it to be all about "academics", not about the right interesting group of people to learn together, because they can use their privilege to ensure the "academics" are "top notch"

Their kids are doing well, and will continue to do well, in life. Unfortunately many parents crave the bragging rights of saying their kids is at "Top Brand University"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple. Meets ALL of the following criteria

Within the first five ranks in a class size of over 500
Scores of over 1550 SAT or 35 ACT in a single attempt. No super scoring.
Scores 5 in most of the 8 or more AP tests taken
Scores of over 750 in every one of Subject tests if taken

Very likely around 5,000-10,000 max such students in the whole country. So not many You could easily accommodate every one of them in the top ten schools. But then the diversity goals of the schools would be violated, so they are rejected routinely in favor of less academically accomplished students through all kinds of twisted rationalizations.

As someone who used to be an academic star in high school back when tutoring wasn't so prevalent, when I read your list, my mind mentally automatically adds up the hours/$$ of tutoring/prep and the parental involvement for most of the kids on your list to achieve those "accomplishments."
Yes, some will have done it naturally. They are the real thing. Others were hoisted there, going past others who may not have had that support. It's a game now and I don't take the things you list at face value anymore.

PP, as my one and done 1600 SAT HYPSM HS boyfriend would say, "if you don't know how much you don't know, then you're really not that bright."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come on guys just do basic math. 3.6 million students graduate each year and 1% of that is 36,000 correct? And that’s nearly double what the ivy league can take each year.

When you consider that top schools take from well beyond the top 1% to fulfill their needs do you realize it’s a simple math problem and rearranging the deck chairs will not suddenly result in no one feeling that they were cheated.

The nirvana you think you seek is only possible if applicants realize that there are more than 20 great colleges in the country and that if they are a top performer, they are likely to get into one.

Do the math, most of them should be able to get in t20 schools though.

I personally think T60 is pretty much great.

But they can’t take just the top 1% academically and fill their classes. They can’t get the musicians artists writers, and yes, athletes if they just take the top one percent which would be overly weighted with students with strong math skills because you can’t score that high without being a polymath.

And for the record, I believe that a large percentage of those kids do make up the top 20. If you look at the stats each school publishes you will see that is the case.

You said do the math so I did the math. I agree mostly, but the colleges should be more transparent.
For example, If they need musicians playing certain instruments thisyear, say so.
So if I play another instrument, I can save my money and time and effort, apply somewhere else.

If you are a music major, you will easily know how many of your instrument school X needs. Talk to the music dept and you will find out the typical size, how many undergrad and how many grads for say French Horn fills the studio. They will tell you how many seniors are currently graduating and you do the math. If you are not a Music major, very few (if any ) elite schools fill their slots with "we need 1 more oboe player".

Colleges are transparent. They tell you what is "very important", "important", "considered" and "not considerded". they tell you the gpa by quartile and sat/act quartiles. They also tell you their acceptance rate, and typically you can get data on ED vs RD rates. So you can compile all that information, do what you want with it and determine if it's worth it for your kid to apply. Take Tulane, where they take something like 60% from ED---really want to go there, you better consider applying ED.
Majority of colleges will tell you they are holistic admissions. That means that they value all kids as more than just a SAT and GPA number. Nothing is really hidden. It just doesn't happen to be a "if you get X+ on your SATs and 3.Y+ UW gpa and Q AP courses, etc then we are your school and come on in you will be accepted. " that does not happen for any school with under a 50-60% acceptance rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple. Meets ALL of the following criteria

Within the first five ranks in a class size of over 500
Scores of over 1550 SAT or 35 ACT in a single attempt. No super scoring.
Scores 5 in most of the 8 or more AP tests taken
Scores of over 750 in every one of Subject tests if taken

Very likely around 5,000-10,000 max such students in the whole country. So not many You could easily accommodate every one of them in the top ten schools. But then the diversity goals of the schools would be violated, so they are rejected routinely in favor of less academically accomplished students through all kinds of twisted rationalizations.

There are not any subject tests anymore and haven't been for several years.

HS Class of 2022 were able to submit any subject tests they had already completed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come on guys just do basic math. 3.6 million students graduate each year and 1% of that is 36,000 correct? And that’s nearly double what the ivy league can take each year.

When you consider that top schools take from well beyond the top 1% to fulfill their needs do you realize it’s a simple math problem and rearranging the deck chairs will not suddenly result in no one feeling that they were cheated.

The nirvana you think you seek is only possible if applicants realize that there are more than 20 great colleges in the country and that if they are a top performer, they are likely to get into one.

No one said anything about ivies. Great schools but they are not MIT.

If you want MIT, you honestly should push for that passion in a sport. MIT is happy to be flexible with admissions and the coaches weed most "unqualified" people out early during the recruitment phase. Unfortunately, this won't work at CalTech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple. Meets ALL of the following criteria

Within the first five ranks in a class size of over 500
Scores of over 1550 SAT or 35 ACT in a single attempt. No super scoring.
Scores 5 in most of the 8 or more AP tests taken
Scores of over 750 in every one of Subject tests if taken

Very likely around 5,000-10,000 max such students in the whole country. So not many You could easily accommodate every one of them in the top ten schools. But then the diversity goals of the schools would be violated, so they are rejected routinely in favor of less academically accomplished students through all kinds of twisted rationalizations.

As someone who used to be an academic star in high school back when tutoring wasn't so prevalent, when I read your list, my mind mentally automatically adds up the hours/$$ of tutoring/prep and the parental involvement for most of the kids on your list to achieve those "accomplishments."
Yes, some will have done it naturally. They are the real thing. Others were hoisted there, going past others who may not have had that support. It's a game now and I don't take the things you list at face value anymore.

Indeed, how many hours and $$ in private coaches have kids/parents spent for recruited athletes ?

Hey spend your money where you want.
Just don't think that Junior is being cheated because he is a genius and the others who are let in aren't.

Indeed, but parents who spend money on activities and sports to make their kids stand out in college admissions are just as guilty as parents spending money on tutors in terms of trying gaming the system.

Obviously---both are coming from a point of huge privilege and using that to craft their kid into the ideal college candidate. When that fails (ie they don't get into a T25), then the parent is pissed. Sometimes the kid is pissed as well---who wouldn't be if they feel their last 8-10+ years has been spent on a well crafted path towards "elite university" and they "fail" to accomplish that.

Much better to encourage your kid to do what they love, do it to the best of their abilities and delve deep into it. Don't spend money on it unless you can easily afford it and your kid actually wants to do it (your kid, not YOU).

I'm guilty of using tutors---did 8 hours for SAT prep when my kid asked. But then we stopped when it was apparent 1500 was the max score (it's where they landed after 4 hours of tutoring after the initial practice test and all future scores were within 10 points--got a 160 point bump and we were happy). Sure we could have paid for more hours and likely gotten to 1550+, but my kid would have been miserable and I don't believe in spending 40+ hours for the SAT. We got the initial benefits and said done and I recognize our privilege to be able to do this. My kid probably could have gotten to 1440 on their own maybe 1500, but it was much easier to get the one on one help. So we did. Privilege at it's finest. However, as long as it's available of course we will use it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple. Meets ALL of the following criteria

Within the first five ranks in a class size of over 500
Scores of over 1550 SAT or 35 ACT in a single attempt. No super scoring.
Scores 5 in most of the 8 or more AP tests taken
Scores of over 750 in every one of Subject tests if taken

Very likely around 5,000-10,000 max such students in the whole country. So not many You could easily accommodate every one of them in the top ten schools. But then the diversity goals of the schools would be violated, so they are rejected routinely in favor of less academically accomplished students through all kinds of twisted rationalizations.

So, you just eliminate any kid who attended a high school under 2K students, or who did IB, or Dual enrollment, etc. . . ?

Also, not sure how it's twisted to say that academics aren't the only kind of accomplishment that's important. It's twisted to say that they are. None of the elite schools claims to be accepting kids just based on academics.

And that's what bothers these snowflake parents who feel entitled for their kid to get an elite education because they focused their kid on 15+ APs, getting a 1580 and a 4.0UW with carefully choreographed volunteering and ECs. They spent 4+ years fitting their kid into this "academic box" and forgot to let their kid do this naturally. Now if they only get into #34 they feel demoralized and complain "it's not fair". They want it to be all about "academics", not about the right interesting group of people to learn together, because they can use their privilege to ensure the "academics" are "top notch"

Their kids are doing well, and will continue to do well, in life. Unfortunately many parents crave the bragging rights of saying their kids is at "Top Brand University"

Agreed! My kid is at a "just missed being an elite" school. Met 8 of their friends during move out this week--took them to dinner so 3 hours of listening in on life. A really smart bunch of kids. 3 who are still laughing at the fact Cornell offered them "guaranteed transfer 2nd year" (like why would they even consider transferring at this point), 2 who turned down NEU with merit, most were WL at several T25 schools as well. Listening to them genuinely discuss life and academics and what books they want to read this summer when they will finally have more time (always the sign of a smart person imo). Their plans for their academic future were fun to hear about. These kids are motivated, doing research already, several will be TAs next year for a variety of classes, several are freshman orientation leaders for next fall, etc. These kids will all be just fine. They are happy and thriving despite "not being at a T25". Smart kids will excel wherever they land.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple. Meets ALL of the following criteria

Within the first five ranks in a class size of over 500
Scores of over 1550 SAT or 35 ACT in a single attempt. No super scoring.
Scores 5 in most of the 8 or more AP tests taken
Scores of over 750 in every one of Subject tests if taken

Very likely around 5,000-10,000 max such students in the whole country. So not many You could easily accommodate every one of them in the top ten schools. But then the diversity goals of the schools would be violated, so they are rejected routinely in favor of less academically accomplished students through all kinds of twisted rationalizations.

As someone who used to be an academic star in high school back when tutoring wasn't so prevalent, when I read your list, my mind mentally automatically adds up the hours/$$ of tutoring/prep and the parental involvement for most of the kids on your list to achieve those "accomplishments."
Yes, some will have done it naturally. They are the real thing. Others were hoisted there, going past others who may not have had that support. It's a game now and I don't take the things you list at face value anymore.

This 1000%

Most are not that way thru no assistance. Back when most of us attended HS, tutoring was not a thing, unless you were really struggling and then it was the struggling kid sitting at the HS after hours with the NHS students providing tutoring for free. Nobody with A's and B's got "tutoring"---you worked with your friends and figured out how to do the homework. (or in my case, I did the math and science homework on the phone with 1 or 2 friends and they disseminated it to the rest of the class as I didn't have the time or interest to explain it to everyone multiple times). We took the SAT once. You either took the SAT or ACT based on where you lived---rarely did you take both (I took both cause I lived in a state where SAT was the one and I wanted to apply to colleges in the midwest where they wanted ACTs). You got your score and you submitted it. Taking the PSAT in 11th grade (and 11th grade only) was "the preparation" for the SAT.
We took AP courses (only had 2 offered) and then took the test, with minimal preparation. The really smart ones got 4 or 5s---the rest got 2 or 3s.

But even back then, elite schools still had many kids who had 1300s and good gpa but not 4.0. What was similar across most students was the motivation and drive to succeed, except it was more natural and not driven by the parents and rat race of getting into college. I attended a T10 school, it was filled with smart, motivated kids. But it was genuine motivation and drive. THat's not what I see now at those schools or with most of the kids who get in---most are in the cog of doing everything in hopes of getting into the right college, not because they want to learn

I don't see this. I have been familiar with the same public district for decades because I went and my kids went. It has gotten a little smaller but it is still the same half dozen students at the very top of the class that go off to the most elite colleges. They all have something extra to add to the application
...a sports star, a music prodigy, a science prize, etc....but everyone of them was at the very top of the class and wanted to learn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Simple. Meets ALL of the following criteria

Within the first five ranks in a class size of over 500
Scores of over 1550 SAT or 35 ACT in a single attempt. No super scoring.
Scores 5 in most of the 8 or more AP tests taken
Scores of over 750 in every one of Subject tests if taken

Very likely around 5,000-10,000 max such students in the whole country. So not many You could easily accommodate every one of them in the top ten schools. But then the diversity goals of the schools would be violated, so they are rejected routinely in favor of less academically accomplished students through all kinds of twisted rationalizations.

With Superscoring, they could give a rat's *ss about one-sitting anymore, much less scores...except for Georgetown and a very few others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple. Meets ALL of the following criteria

Within the first five ranks in a class size of over 500
Scores of over 1550 SAT or 35 ACT in a single attempt. No super scoring.
Scores 5 in most of the 8 or more AP tests taken
Scores of over 750 in every one of Subject tests if taken

Very likely around 5,000-10,000 max such students in the whole country. So not many You could easily accommodate every one of them in the top ten schools. But then the diversity goals of the schools would be violated, so they are rejected routinely in favor of less academically accomplished students through all kinds of twisted rationalizations.

As someone who used to be an academic star in high school back when tutoring wasn't so prevalent, when I read your list, my mind mentally automatically adds up the hours/$$ of tutoring/prep and the parental involvement for most of the kids on your list to achieve those "accomplishments."
Yes, some will have done it naturally. They are the real thing. Others were hoisted there, going past others who may not have had that support. It's a game now and I don't take the things you list at face value anymore.

This 1000%

Most are not that way thru no assistance. Back when most of us attended HS, tutoring was not a thing, unless you were really struggling and then it was the struggling kid sitting at the HS after hours with the NHS students providing tutoring for free. Nobody with A's and B's got "tutoring"---you worked with your friends and figured out how to do the homework. (or in my case, I did the math and science homework on the phone with 1 or 2 friends and they disseminated it to the rest of the class as I didn't have the time or interest to explain it to everyone multiple times). We took the SAT once. You either took the SAT or ACT based on where you lived---rarely did you take both (I took both cause I lived in a state where SAT was the one and I wanted to apply to colleges in the midwest where they wanted ACTs). You got your score and you submitted it. Taking the PSAT in 11th grade (and 11th grade only) was "the preparation" for the SAT.
We took AP courses (only had 2 offered) and then took the test, with minimal preparation. The really smart ones got 4 or 5s---the rest got 2 or 3s.

But even back then, elite schools still had many kids who had 1300s and good gpa but not 4.0. What was similar across most students was the motivation and drive to succeed, except it was more natural and not driven by the parents and rat race of getting into college. I attended a T10 school, it was filled with smart, motivated kids. But it was genuine motivation and drive. THat's not what I see now at those schools or with most of the kids who get in---most are in the cog of doing everything in hopes of getting into the right college, not because they want to learn

I don't see this. I have been familiar with the same public district for decades because I went and my kids went. It has gotten a little smaller but it is still the same half dozen students at the very top of the class that go off to the most elite colleges. They all have something extra to add to the application
...a sports star, a music prodigy, a science prize, etc....but everyone of them was at the very top of the class and wanted to learn.

I agree that most that actually get into the T25/elites have something extra to add and most importantly Want to learn---they have the drive and motivation. But I see plenty attempting to emulate this thru tutoring and lots of extra help (essay writers, etc) who then complain when they don't get in to a T25. I think the reason they don't is largely that they are not quite "material for the elite school"....they don't get that it has to come from within, the drive has to be there and can not just be going thru the motions to make mommy and daddy happy so they can brag about where I'm attending school. Those that make it to elite schools are very smart, motivated and have that drive. And some like that do not get into the elite, but typically get into several in the 25-60 range (if they planned appropriately)

[Anonymous]

The amount of prep for tests and applications in general now is more than a bit crazy. I graduated with degrees from a top 5 college and T14 law school in the 2000s and didn't see anything at this scale. I guess I wasn't in a major city though. People did some things for the purposes of making themselves look like a leader and retook tests if they scored well below their practice tests but things have gotten out of hand IMO. It must be hard for colleges to look at applications when half of what they see today isn't really an indication of the applicant and their passions.

I've had separate chats with a Big 3 grad and TJ grad both at top 10 colleges and they were describing the test prep and ECs their friends had done in hs. Unfortunately, a lot of it was admittedly just for college admissions. Thankfully, some societal good came from the ECs but it was pretty clearly inauthentic hearing them describe it. Maybe since some of those friends didn't place as well, the colleges are better at weeding posers out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come on guys just do basic math. 3.6 million students graduate each year and 1% of that is 36,000 correct? And that’s nearly double what the ivy league can take each year.

When you consider that top schools take from well beyond the top 1% to fulfill their needs do you realize it’s a simple math problem and rearranging the deck chairs will not suddenly result in no one feeling that they were cheated.

The nirvana you think you seek is only possible if applicants realize that there are more than 20 great colleges in the country and that if they are a top performer, they are likely to get into one.

No one said anything about ivies. Great schools but they are not MIT.

You mean the MIT that recruits athletes and super scores? That MIT?

Or the test optional Cal Tech?

.

Sorry but there are ivy students that would not last one semester at MIT. Anyway...the point is, there are a lot more spots at top notch universities beyond the ivy league.

So in your narrow little worldview there’s only one barometer for intelligence. Ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The amount of prep for tests and applications in general now is more than a bit crazy. I graduated with degrees from a top 5 college and T14 law school in the 2000s and didn't see anything at this scale. I guess I wasn't in a major city though. People did some things for the purposes of making themselves look like a leader and retook tests if they scored well below their practice tests but things have gotten out of hand IMO. It must be hard for colleges to look at applications when half of what they see today isn't really an indication of the applicant and their passions.

I've had separate chats with a Big 3 grad and TJ grad both at top 10 colleges and they were describing the test prep and ECs their friends had done in hs. Unfortunately, a lot of it was admittedly just for college admissions. Thankfully, some societal good came from the ECs but it was pretty clearly inauthentic hearing them describe it. Maybe since some of those friends didn't place as well, the colleges are better at weeding posers out.

What did they expect when they invented so called 'holistic' when there was need to discriminate Jews.

Harvard invented Likeability/Courage/Kindness score when Asians are excelling in leadership, ECs, and doing great in interviews.