Yale breaks own record with # of applications for 2016

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A large part of the problem can be attributed to the great desire of international students to study here. If you scan the wait lists (waiting for sCEA results) for Ivies and some of the great state schools and Tech Schools, you see a number of posts coming in from China and India from anxious students waiting to hear. The overseas students apply to the schools they've heard about, just like we naturally would think of Oxbridge. But, yeah, the schools DO want as many applicants as possible so as to drive down that selectivity number below 6%. That's why SAT II tests were no longer requires but "strongly suggested". The Ivies in competition for that no. one slot need as many applicants as possible (so they can turn them down) so decided "requiring" the SAT II was too restrictive so changed the language. But you better submit them or else!

The top schools in those countries are way more competitive vs Yale.

India? Do you know some of those kids are so poor they can't even get to a test site, much less pay for one. So they take MIT online courses to prove they can do the work. Yes, there are wealthy indians but those that I've read on College Confdential are dying to come to any U.S. institution.

Because it is easier to get into MIT or Yale vs IIT

The admissions test for the Indian Institutes of Technology, known as the Joint Entrance Examination or JEE, may be the most competitive test in the world. In 2012, half a million Indian high school students sat for the JEE. Over six grueling hours of chemistry, physics, and math questions, the students competed for one of ten thousand spots at India’s most prestigious engineering universities. ...
...Only two percent of students will be rewarded for their hard work. In 2012, Harvard accepted 5.9% of applicants. Top engineering schools MIT and Stanford had acceptance rates of 8.9% and 6.63%. The acceptance rate at the IITs, as represented by the pass rate in the JEE, was 2%. Every year, when the results are announced and the media swarms the accepted students, 490,000 students receive disappointing news.

http://priceonomics.com/the-iit-entrance-exam/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I suspect the poster above is also minority. Lots of asian concerto winners with higher sats were denied. Certainly your kid with the mediocre scores was not the only musician to apply. LOL

You don't have to be a minority, just not Asian. White kids playing underrepresented instruments are in demand, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think that that kind of story works well for many upper middle class (private school?) kids. It's just as generic as the other parts of the application.

What the privates offer wrt college admissions is not so much advice re packaging/storytelling as insight re which colleges are looking for kids like yours. In my admittedly limited experience, they also do a good job with recs and deadlines and keeping everyone involved in the process on task and on time.

Why wouldn't it work for upper middle class kids?. I basically provided the formula for how to articulate the course you have charted as per 10:13, who said the same thing but was a bit vaguer in advice. Obviously don't sit there and spew off those sentences fill in the blank style, but if you can cover all those points with compelling, personal answers, you will drastically increase you me chances of getting in.

In part because it *is* a formula. And in part because the obstacles are usually fairly trivial/similar (and the ones that are real -- e.g. serious depression -- may send up red flags). Also, there's no way you can know these stories "worked" because you haven't seen the rest of the pool and other parts of the applications (e.g. recs).

I think that the difference between your answer and mine is not primarily the degree of specificity but a focus on where kids put their energy and why in the years leading up to college vs. a focus on how to play the applications game. (I'd have different answers from yours re the latter question as well).

*shrug* Well, if you have any specific advice, feel free to provide it instead of making vague arguments against mine. Once you have a certain level of accomplishment, it's all about how you sell your story.

Me: What types of activities are you involved with? Can you tell me a bit about that?

Kid A: I play softball for my school team year-round. I made captain my junior year. I really like it because it of the teamwork and it pushes me out of my comfort zone as a leader. We were state champions last year.

Kid B: I play softball for my school team year-round. I made captain my junior year. I was an only child growing up and the neighborhood kids would get together in a nearby field, so that's how I discovered my love of softball and the kind of teamwork it entails. Last year we lost one of our key players due to a really bad injury halfway through the season, and it really pushed me out of my comfort zone as a leader because team morale was really low. I pulled the team together by organizing trips to the hospital to visit our teammate, and we ended up becoming state champions.

Me: What are you interested in studying?

Kid A: I like science. It's my best subject.

Kid B: I like science. Last year in AP Biology we studied suriname toads, and I thought it was so interesting how their baby toads just pop out of their backs. It's my best subject.

Whether that's in an essay, rec, or interview, Kid B is way more memorable and likely to get in.

[Anonymous]

In other words, it's about how mom or dad or the college counselor or the person at your private school frames your story for you to tell. YOu can't tell me that a hs student came up with the first scenario by himself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think that that kind of story works well for many upper middle class (private school?) kids. It's just as generic as the other parts of the application.

What the privates offer wrt college admissions is not so much advice re packaging/storytelling as insight re which colleges are looking for kids like yours. In my admittedly limited experience, they also do a good job with recs and deadlines and keeping everyone involved in the process on task and on time.

Why wouldn't it work for upper middle class kids?. I basically provided the formula for how to articulate the course you have charted as per 10:13, who said the same thing but was a bit vaguer in advice. Obviously don't sit there and spew off those sentences fill in the blank style, but if you can cover all those points with compelling, personal answers, you will drastically increase you me chances of getting in.

In part because it *is* a formula. And in part because the obstacles are usually fairly trivial/similar (and the ones that are real -- e.g. serious depression -- may send up red flags). Also, there's no way you can know these stories "worked" because you haven't seen the rest of the pool and other parts of the applications (e.g. recs).

I think that the difference between your answer and mine is not primarily the degree of specificity but a focus on where kids put their energy and why in the years leading up to college vs. a focus on how to play the applications game. (I'd have different answers from yours re the latter question as well).

*shrug* Well, if you have any specific advice, feel free to provide it instead of making vague arguments against mine. Once you have a certain level of accomplishment, it's all about how you sell your story.

Me: What types of activities are you involved with? Can you tell me a bit about that?

Kid A: I play softball for my school team year-round. I made captain my junior year. I really like it because it of the teamwork and it pushes me out of my comfort zone as a leader. We were state champions last year.

Kid B: I play softball for my school team year-round. I made captain my junior year. I was an only child growing up and the neighborhood kids would get together in a nearby field, so that's how I discovered my love of softball and the kind of teamwork it entails. Last year we lost one of our key players due to a really bad injury halfway through the season, and it really pushed me out of my comfort zone as a leader because team morale was really low. I pulled the team together by organizing trips to the hospital to visit our teammate, and we ended up becoming state champions.

Me: What are you interested in studying?

Kid A: I like science. It's my best subject.

Kid B: I like science. Last year in AP Biology we studied suriname toads, and I thought it was so interesting how their baby toads just pop out of their backs. It's my best subject.

Whether that's in an essay, rec, or interview, Kid B is way more memorable and likely to get in.

NP here. I teach a STEM subject at a local university and I agree with you that kid B comes across better *to the low level HR-type folks who run college admissions*. The extra fluff B puts in does nothing for me, and in fact would be a turnoff. But it seems to appeal to the admissions folks who don't have much STEM background, are themselves way less talented than the students they are evaluating, and are looking for something not too challenging to break up the monotony of reading lots of files. I have always thought it weird that essays are evaluated by inexperienced folks who themselves have fairly low writing skills on the basis of pop-psychology. I guess that as long as the SATs and GPAs are in a certain band, it really doesn't matter to the faculty who they pick to admit in schools with many more qualified applicants than places --- making the tie-breakers into an opaque self-promotion game anyone can play creates a hoopla and drives up the applications, which is good for the brand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In other words, it's about how mom or dad or the college counselor or the person at your private school frames your story for you to tell. YOu can't tell me that a hs student came up with the first scenario by himself.

Exactly. But that's the entire point of the formula I wrote out. Lots of kids have these experiences but can't articulate it in the "college admissions" style. It is really stupid that college essay prompts are so vague and do such a disservice to kids who don't have the "in" of adults helping them. I think many are capable of thinking about their experiences more deeply when pushed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think that that kind of story works well for many upper middle class (private school?) kids. It's just as generic as the other parts of the application.

What the privates offer wrt college admissions is not so much advice re packaging/storytelling as insight re which colleges are looking for kids like yours. In my admittedly limited experience, they also do a good job with recs and deadlines and keeping everyone involved in the process on task and on time.

Why wouldn't it work for upper middle class kids?. I basically provided the formula for how to articulate the course you have charted as per 10:13, who said the same thing but was a bit vaguer in advice. Obviously don't sit there and spew off those sentences fill in the blank style, but if you can cover all those points with compelling, personal answers, you will drastically increase you me chances of getting in.

In part because it *is* a formula. And in part because the obstacles are usually fairly trivial/similar (and the ones that are real -- e.g. serious depression -- may send up red flags). Also, there's no way you can know these stories "worked" because you haven't seen the rest of the pool and other parts of the applications (e.g. recs).

I think that the difference between your answer and mine is not primarily the degree of specificity but a focus on where kids put their energy and why in the years leading up to college vs. a focus on how to play the applications game. (I'd have different answers from yours re the latter question as well).

*shrug* Well, if you have any specific advice, feel free to provide it instead of making vague arguments against mine. Once you have a certain level of accomplishment, it's all about how you sell your story.

Me: What types of activities are you involved with? Can you tell me a bit about that?

Kid A: I play softball for my school team year-round. I made captain my junior year. I really like it because it of the teamwork and it pushes me out of my comfort zone as a leader. We were state champions last year.

Kid B: I play softball for my school team year-round. I made captain my junior year. I was an only child growing up and the neighborhood kids would get together in a nearby field, so that's how I discovered my love of softball and the kind of teamwork it entails. Last year we lost one of our key players due to a really bad injury halfway through the season, and it really pushed me out of my comfort zone as a leader because team morale was really low. I pulled the team together by organizing trips to the hospital to visit our teammate, and we ended up becoming state champions.

Me: What are you interested in studying?

Kid A: I like science. It's my best subject.

Kid B: I like science. Last year in AP Biology we studied suriname toads, and I thought it was so interesting how their baby toads just pop out of their backs. It's my best subject.

Whether that's in an essay, rec, or interview, Kid B is way more memorable and likely to get in.

NP here. I teach a STEM subject at a local university and I agree with you that kid B comes across better *to the low level HR-type folks who run college admissions*. The extra fluff B puts in does nothing for me, and in fact would be a turnoff. But it seems to appeal to the admissions folks who don't have much STEM background, are themselves way less talented than the students they are evaluating, and are looking for something not too challenging to break up the monotony of reading lots of files. I have always thought it weird that essays are evaluated by inexperienced folks who themselves have fairly low writing skills on the basis of pop-psychology. I guess that as long as the SATs and GPAs are in a certain band, it really doesn't matter to the faculty who they pick to admit in schools with many more qualified applicants than places --- making the tie-breakers into an opaque self-promotion game anyone can play creates a hoopla and drives up the applications, which is good for the brand.

I think your response is unfair. The college admissions officers look for these type of responses not because they are low-level, uneducated, or too stupid to know better, but because creating compelling student profiles for marketing materials, getting a job, getting into graduate school, and convincing other people that what you are working on deserves funding and recognition are all impacted by story-telling ability and the ability to connect with other people. Whether or not you think soft skills should count as qualifications, they are extremely important in life.

[Anonymous]

I agree wth 12:58. My DC is at one of these extraordinary schools and I've met some of DC's STEM friends. They are incredibly bright, busy on original research teams as underclassman (and some started in high school), and have an enthusiasm for their studies that is infectiously delightful. I am sure some may be less articulate, but my DC's STEM friends make for great guests over the dinner table, and can discuss current events, literature, etc. as well as STEM. If his friends had an edge in admission because they are interesting and articulate, I don't consider that to be fluff. Recommendations play a role here too. When you are one of 10 typically strong kids in a great high school, that's great and certainly can make you competitive. When the teachers say a kid is one of the best the teacher has seen in 10 -15 years of teaching, that is something different. The equally bright kid who is also interesting and likable will have an edge here too.

[Anonymous]

I'm the poster above. I'm white. And I'm not the parent of the musician (though I am the PP whose post s/he bolded).

[Anonymous]

Oops, missed a page. 15:37 was a response to 11:21.

[Anonymous]

Re what appeals to college admissions types. Probably depends on the school. But a fun fact about Suriname toads learned in AP bio isn't going to greatly increase your odds of admission to Harvard. Neither student A nor student B in either of your scenarios gets in based on the kind of essays/experiences/attitudes you're proposing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I agree wth 12:58. My DC is at one of these extraordinary schools and I've met some of DC's STEM friends. They are incredibly bright, busy on original research teams as underclassman (and some started in high school), and have an enthusiasm for their studies that is infectiously delightful. I am sure some may be less articulate, but my DC's STEM friends make for great guests over the dinner table, and can discuss current events, literature, etc. as well as STEM. If his friends had an edge in admission because they are interesting and articulate, I don't consider that to be fluff. Recommendations play a role here too. When you are one of 10 typically strong kids in a great high school, that's great and certainly can make you competitive. When the teachers say a kid is one of the best the teacher has seen in 10 -15 years of teaching, that is something different. The equally bright kid who is also interesting and likable will have an edge here too.

The point is not that being articulate, being likable, and having wide interests are somehow bad for a STEM kid. The point is that process by which those characteristics are being assessed in essays etc using totally ad-hoc criteria by the admissions folks. People can run tests on the association between SAT scores and outcomes, and psychologists can validate personality questionnaires and measure personality traits. Instead, we have an arbitrary system operated by amateurs. And this system can be gamed fairly easily -- as suggested by a previous poster's examples A and B. Just curious why it works this way. My guess is that if it were important to design a a valid system and schools really cared about the outcomes they would put better measures in place. There is a reason why they don't. Probably most faculty don't care who gets admitted as long as the GPAs and SATs are high, and most university administrations like an seemingly unpredictable hard to quantify system because it allows them lots of freedom at the margin to pick whoever they want in order to satisfy unrelated institutional constraints.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I suspect the poster above is also minority. Lots of asian concerto winners with higher sats were denied. Certainly your kid with the mediocre scores was not the only musician to apply. LOL

Most likely the Asian concerto winners with higher sas were violinists or cellists which are a dime a dozen (no insult intended). A harpist, if needed in a university orchestra, will be a strong hoop regardless of color.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect the poster above is also minority. Lots of asian concerto winners with higher sats were denied. Certainly your kid with the mediocre scores was not the only musician to apply. LOL

Most likely the Asian concerto winners with higher sas were violinists or cellists which are a dime a dozen (no insult intended). A harpist, if needed in a university orchestra, will be a strong hoop regardless of color.

**hook**

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I agree wth 12:58. My DC is at one of these extraordinary schools and I've met some of DC's STEM friends. They are incredibly bright, busy on original research teams as underclassman (and some started in high school), and have an enthusiasm for their studies that is infectiously delightful. I am sure some may be less articulate, but my DC's STEM friends make for great guests over the dinner table, and can discuss current events, literature, etc. as well as STEM. If his friends had an edge in admission because they are interesting and articulate, I don't consider that to be fluff. Recommendations play a role here too. When you are one of 10 typically strong kids in a great high school, that's great and certainly can make you competitive. When the teachers say a kid is one of the best the teacher has seen in 10 -15 years of teaching, that is something different. The equally bright kid who is also interesting and likable will have an edge here too.

The point is not that being articulate, being likable, and having wide interests are somehow bad for a STEM kid. The point is that process by which those characteristics are being assessed in essays etc using totally ad-hoc criteria by the admissions folks. People can run tests on the association between SAT scores and outcomes, and psychologists can validate personality questionnaires and measure personality traits. Instead, we have an arbitrary system operated by amateurs. And this system can be gamed fairly easily -- as suggested by a previous poster's examples A and B. Just curious why it works this way. My guess is that if it were important to design a a valid system and schools really cared about the outcomes they would put better measures in place. There is a reason why they don't. Probably most faculty don't care who gets admitted as long as the GPAs and SATs are high, and most university administrations like an seemingly unpredictable hard to quantify system because it allows them lots of freedom at the margin to pick whoever they want in order to satisfy unrelated institutional constraints.

I agree with this poster. It's such a sad statement that we are not doing our utmost to tease out the best in class STEM students because given the state of affairs we really need them. If you look at the rate of transfers out of the hard majors such as engineering, too many seats are being wasted. I would guess though that faculty does care.