Holistic admissions is BS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People tend to forget that luck also plays a factor.

Do parents still set up 501c3s for their kids to fluff their odds?

[Anonymous]

Yeah I agree. Colleges should not be able to choose who they want! Especially the private ones!

[Anonymous]

This thread is silly. If you’re so smart that your kid is also smart, you should recognize that a lot of kids will get rejected when 50k apply for 3k seats, or whatever the numbers are. Why would you ever imagine that your less-than-perfect kid would excel at this game when even the perfect fail?

As for the opacity at top schools, it will never change, and for good reason. Top schools are looking for smarts AND something else that together has a high probability of creating distinguished alumni. Why define the something else? Schools want alumni succeeding in all areas of life and the world changes too quickly to put disruption and creativity in a bottle.

OP, it sounds like your kid is a conventionally smart kid who wanted a break. There’s nothing wrong with that, but that’s not who Harvard admits. A solid state school would be a perfect fit for your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is silly. If you’re so smart that your kid is also smart, you should recognize that a lot of kids will get rejected when 50k apply for 3k seats, or whatever the numbers are. Why would you ever imagine that your less-than-perfect kid would excel at this game when even the perfect fail?

As for the opacity at top schools, it will never change, and for good reason. Top schools are looking for smarts AND something else that together has a high probability of creating distinguished alumni. Why define the something else? Schools want alumni succeeding in all areas of life and the world changes too quickly to put disruption and creativity in a bottle.

OP, it sounds like your kid is a conventionally smart kid who wanted a break. There’s nothing wrong with that, but that’s not who Harvard admits. A solid state school would be a perfect fit for your kid.

Agree with your points. All I am saying is that top colleges can be more transparent with required GPA. Less stress on parents and kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is silly. If you’re so smart that your kid is also smart, you should recognize that a lot of kids will get rejected when 50k apply for 3k seats, or whatever the numbers are. Why would you ever imagine that your less-than-perfect kid would excel at this game when even the perfect fail?

As for the opacity at top schools, it will never change, and for good reason. Top schools are looking for smarts AND something else that together has a high probability of creating distinguished alumni. Why define the something else? Schools want alumni succeeding in all areas of life and the world changes too quickly to put disruption and creativity in a bottle.

OP, it sounds like your kid is a conventionally smart kid who wanted a break. There’s nothing wrong with that, but that’s not who Harvard admits. A solid state school would be a perfect fit for your kid.

Agree with your points. All I am saying is that top colleges can be more transparent with required GPA. Less stress on parents and kids

What if there isn't one?

And what about the GPA data in the CDS is insufficient?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People tend to forget that luck also plays a factor.

This is actually huge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First comes grades and then holistic admissions

Read a newspaper or look through the internet. Race is increasingly all that matters.

Lessened White privilege alert

[Anonymous]

My kid got into two T20 schools a couple years ago with a low GPA (3.1) from a top private. He also had perfect SAT scores. I think the admissions committee recognized that he was a smart, but immature kid, To me, that it a sign of holistic admissions. Looking at the whole kid -- not one metric.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is silly. If you’re so smart that your kid is also smart, you should recognize that a lot of kids will get rejected when 50k apply for 3k seats, or whatever the numbers are. Why would you ever imagine that your less-than-perfect kid would excel at this game when even the perfect fail?

As for the opacity at top schools, it will never change, and for good reason. Top schools are looking for smarts AND something else that together has a high probability of creating distinguished alumni. Why define the something else? Schools want alumni succeeding in all areas of life and the world changes too quickly to put disruption and creativity in a bottle.

OP, it sounds like your kid is a conventionally smart kid who wanted a break. There’s nothing wrong with that, but that’s not who Harvard admits. A solid state school would be a perfect fit for your kid.

Schools are looking for the next AOC and Stacy Abrahms, not super-smart garden variety future doctors and lawyers who will never be recognized outside their immediate circles. Unfortunately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First comes grades and then holistic admissions

Read a newspaper or look through the internet. Race is increasingly all that matters.

And yet, according to the Jeffrey Selingo book "Black Students, for example, account for about 6 percent of freshmen at elite schools, a proportion that has been virtually unchanged since 1980." Selingo, Who Gets In and Why, p11.

The citation lists the data from this article: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/24/us/affirmative-action.html

But don't let facts risk melting a delicate snowflake.

Read a book and look at data. Maybe stay off those websites that feed your confirmation bias.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First comes grades and then holistic admissions

Read a newspaper or look through the internet. Race is increasingly all that matters.

And yet, according to the Jeffrey Selingo book "Black Students, for example, account for about 6 percent of freshmen at elite schools, a proportion that has been virtually unchanged since 1980." Selingo, Who Gets In and Why, p11.

The citation lists the data from this article: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/24/us/affirmative-action.html

But don't let facts risk melting a delicate snowflake.

Read a book and look at data. Maybe stay off those websites that feed your confirmation bias.

Yes and probably a lower proportion of those students are descended from enslaved people in the US than in the 80s--so many black students now are the kids of Nigerian, Ghanaian, and Caribbean doctors and engineers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First comes grades and then holistic admissions

Read a newspaper or look through the internet. Race is increasingly all that matters.

And yet, according to the Jeffrey Selingo book "Black Students, for example, account for about 6 percent of freshmen at elite schools, a proportion that has been virtually unchanged since 1980." Selingo, Who Gets In and Why, p11.

The citation lists the data from this article: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/24/us/affirmative-action.html

But don't let facts risk melting a delicate snowflake.

Read a book and look at data. Maybe stay off those websites that feed your confirmation bias.

Yes and probably a lower proportion of those students are descended from enslaved people in the US than in the 80s--so many black students now are the kids of Nigerian, Ghanaian, and Caribbean doctors and engineers.

Let's notice a difference between this post and the one it is responding to:

The first one lists two sources, one with deep data.

The second one lists no sources and no data, and is clearly a claim pulled right from near a back pocket.

Which one would you trust?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well yes, you have to be able to do the work. So grades are most important.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People tend to forget that luck also plays a factor.

Do parents still set up 501c3s for their kids to fluff their odds?

In a recent podcast, Dartmouth admissions officers mentioned how impressive some Apps are, like ones that talk about their work on their nonprofits to improve their communities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is silly. If you’re so smart that your kid is also smart, you should recognize that a lot of kids will get rejected when 50k apply for 3k seats, or whatever the numbers are. Why would you ever imagine that your less-than-perfect kid would excel at this game when even the perfect fail?

As for the opacity at top schools, it will never change, and for good reason. Top schools are looking for smarts AND something else that together has a high probability of creating distinguished alumni. Why define the something else? Schools want alumni succeeding in all areas of life and the world changes too quickly to put disruption and creativity in a bottle.

OP, it sounds like your kid is a conventionally smart kid who wanted a break. There’s nothing wrong with that, but that’s not who Harvard admits. A solid state school would be a perfect fit for your kid.

You're not paying close attention. Bolded is, at best, 1/2 the calculus these days. The other 1/2 (or more) involves DEI considerations.