Guesstimated % of unhooked kids- ivies- without parental pushing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure, but I think this is the kid that ivies want. They want Barrack Obama at 16-years-old, not a lot of SAT tutoring or curating, with an organically developed passion for community activism. Only they would've wanted him with a 4.0. Not sure what his actual GPA was at the time but pretty sure it wasn't a 4.0.

Obama went to THE most elite private high in Hawaii. They don’t give out As easily, I am pretty sure he didn’t have 4.0. Most likely no one at his school had 4.0.

I don’t think he was a community activist back in high school. He was raised by his white grandparents.

And college admissions were much much easier at his time. Just different times.

He also didn’t get into an Ivy. I do think if he’d had the 4.0 and the community activism, he would’ve been exactly what Princeton was looking for. Today’s ivies want kids that will become adults who bring them glory. They try to poke through the curation to the authenticity, because future leaders probably do have inner drives that go beyond resume building. If they had a crystal ball that told them the marijuana smoking 3.7 kid from Hawaii would one day be president, they would use that ball every time.

These colleges are not aligned with parents, who want kids to be safe, secure, comfortable and in the right networks and social circles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I knew one - kinda - because depending on how you define first generation, he was possibly first generation (both grandparent sets had degrees, but parents didn’t). He was just a super smart, self-motivated kid with good stats and probably a phenomenal interviewer.

I’m the Midwestern 90s self-starter and I will say that at every point in my life where getting something required an application, essay or interview, I’ve had a ton of success. Some people are bland in person but find way to shine when boxed in by the context of an application. I’m definitely one of those people. I do best in bureaucratic, defined settings and the one startup job I had was disastrous for me.

[Anonymous]

I don’t quite get OPs point. It seems they’re asking whether any white or Asian kids with negligent parents get into ivy schools. The answer is unlikely. Most parents are signing up their kids for activities, clubs, sports etc and driving them everywhere. So I guess that’s “curating” by OPs standards. The kids with useless parents are going to have a tough time, but those that break through are going to be really extraordinary.

They still won’t get into Harvard, Yale, Princeton or Dartmouth though, which are all about the hooks. But there are other schools that are more focused on talent regardless of background.

[Anonymous]

Simply signing your kid up for what they want to do and ensuring they are doing good in school is not curating them.

Curating them is about you suggesting / telling them to do certain things with the view specifically of college admissions. Not simply “you need volunteer hours let me help you find some spots locally” but instead “let’s invent a nonprofit for you”

[Anonymous]

My totally unhooked public school kid is just one kid, but she completely created her own path and ended up at HYP. If anything I tried to pull her back from so many of her activities because I worried she was stretching herself too thin, and actively discouraged the early app to the super reach school because I thought was a wasted opportunity at more likely spot. Not DMV but an UMC area of New England so not Arkansas either. So there’s one anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Simply signing your kid up for what they want to do and ensuring they are doing good in school is not curating them.

Curating them is about you suggesting / telling them to do certain things with the view specifically of college admissions. Not simply “you need volunteer hours let me help you find some spots locally” but instead “let’s invent a nonprofit for you”

One of my kids is involved in a popular tiger mom sport. It is painfully obvious which kids are there because the parents think it will help with college. When I tell people my kid does this sport the immediate response I often get is “that will be great for college.” That is not why my child is doing it and it will not have any material impact on their admissions prospects.

Seeing these people who incorrectly think they are gaming the system is sad. And I am not saying this to be rude or Trumpy but a huge percentage of them are immigrants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What percent of students do you think get into Ivy leagues who are both:

- completely unhooked and by that I mean, including Rural, first GEN, low income, minority, athletes, feeder schools, come from states that produce few applicants, etc.

AND

- have zero pushing from parents (to join/start/continue activities, college admissions counselors, essay help, etc) OR anything that results in a curated college app.

I don't know what percent, but DC did get in.

Cared about one thing and only one thing. No volunteering. No other activities. Everthing is related to that one thing and only one thing. Wrote the essay about that, supplemental are about that, recommendation letters are about that, activities are about that.

I did not thing DC even had a chance with that profile, but two of HYPSM bit. I don't think anyone can figure these things out. From what I know the above would be automatic shut out.

[Anonymous]

The ten bullet point activity list is crazy. There is no way kids can accomplish those activities without curating. For us and many UMC parents, it is very realistic to have no need to push kids academically, they are just naturally talented to excel in school and tests. But those activities are not aligned with kids' age. Whacked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The ten bullet point activity list is crazy. There is no way kids can accomplish those activities without curating. For us and many UMC parents, it is very realistic to have no need to push kids academically, they are just naturally talented to excel in school and tests. But those activities are not aligned with kids' age. Whacked.

Can someone link the ten bullet point activity list people are talking about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LOL

Zero!

I saw that crazy 10-bulletpoint activity list yesterday, no way a kid is willing to go through that without "pushing". No. No matter what you say.

Wrong
I did my youngest sister did

When you want it you do it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure, but I think this is the kid that ivies want. They want Barrack Obama at 16-years-old, not a lot of SAT tutoring or curating, with an organically developed passion for community activism. Only they would've wanted him with a 4.0. Not sure what his actual GPA was at the time but pretty sure it wasn't a 4.0.

Obama went to THE most elite private high in Hawaii. They don’t give out As easily, I am pretty sure he didn’t have 4.0. Most likely no one at his school had 4.0.

I don’t think he was a community activist back in high school. He was raised by his white grandparents.

And college admissions were much much easier at his time. Just different times.

He also didn’t get into an Ivy. I do think if he’d had the 4.0 and the community activism, he would’ve been exactly what Princeton was looking for. Today’s ivies want kids that will become adults who bring them glory. They try to poke through the curation to the authenticity, because future leaders probably do have inner drives that go beyond resume building. If they had a crystal ball that told them the marijuana smoking 3.7 kid from Hawaii would one day be president, they would use that ball every time.

These colleges are not aligned with parents, who want kids to be safe, secure, comfortable and in the right networks and social circles.

Obama went to Occidental then transfer to Columbia so I consider he being in an ivy (but not Trump).
3.7 or not, those elite high school is highly selective at first place, to get in and to survive for four years. I have no doubt about his aptitude.
Harris is another example, a great future leader who didn't get in ivies.
Anyway, I don't think Ivies are particularly good at screening for future leaders. People are reading too much into it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percent of students do you think get into Ivy leagues who are both:

- completely unhooked and by that I mean, including Rural, first GEN, low income, minority, athletes, feeder schools, come from states that produce few applicants, etc.

AND

- have zero pushing from parents (to join/start/continue activities, college admissions counselors, essay help, etc) OR anything that results in a curated college app.

I don't know what percent, but DC did get in.

Cared about one thing and only one thing. No volunteering. No other activities. Everthing is related to that one thing and only one thing. Wrote the essay about that, supplemental are about that, recommendation letters are about that, activities are about that.

I did not thing DC even had a chance with that profile, but two of HYPSM bit. I don't think anyone can figure these things out. From what I know the above would be automatic shut out.

Porn?

[Anonymous]

of you’re reading this, congrats! ur one of the crazy parents!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL

Zero!

I saw that crazy 10-bulletpoint activity list yesterday, no way a kid is willing to go through that without "pushing". No. No matter what you say.

Wrong
I did my youngest sister did

When you want it you do it

Were you both within the last 2-3 years? Otherwise, not really relevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure, but I think this is the kid that ivies want. They want Barrack Obama at 16-years-old, not a lot of SAT tutoring or curating, with an organically developed passion for community activism. Only they would've wanted him with a 4.0. Not sure what his actual GPA was at the time but pretty sure it wasn't a 4.0.

Obama went to THE most elite private high in Hawaii. They don’t give out As easily, I am pretty sure he didn’t have 4.0. Most likely no one at his school had 4.0.

I don’t think he was a community activist back in high school. He was raised by his white grandparents.

And college admissions were much much easier at his time. Just different times.

He also didn’t get into an Ivy. I do think if he’d had the 4.0 and the community activism, he would’ve been exactly what Princeton was looking for. Today’s ivies want kids that will become adults who bring them glory. They try to poke through the curation to the authenticity, because future leaders probably do have inner drives that go beyond resume building. If they had a crystal ball that told them the marijuana smoking 3.7 kid from Hawaii would one day be president, they would use that ball every time.

These colleges are not aligned with parents, who want kids to be safe, secure, comfortable and in the right networks and social circles.

Obama went to Occidental then transfer to Columbia so I consider he being in an ivy (but not Trump).
3.7 or not, those elite high school is highly selective at first place, to get in and to survive for four years. I have no doubt about his aptitude.
Harris is another example, a great future leader who didn't get in ivies.
Anyway, I don't think Ivies are particularly good at screening for future leaders. People are reading too much into it.

Harris? Kamala Harris??? An example of a great future leader?????? Did you fall out of a coconut tree?