Big 3 (or thereabouts) College Results - Class of 2021

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[list]

Anonymous wrote:ok so your kid knows one smart athlete. when you get to a top college it is striking how different the academic strengths are of the athletes vs the non athlete.

I was an athlete in college and its always amusing to me that some people feel the need to put young people in categories.

If you are an Olympic swimmer ... OK cool, but the law of nature is assumed to be that that's all you got and you are - aside from that an idiot.

To the contrary, what is born out is that being a really good athlete takes more than talent. It requires a great deal of perseverance, determination, high pain threshold and enough of an imagination to dream big... then never give up.

In other words, after 3 hours a day of that for 4-6 years since age 13, AP Physics might just be a walk in the park. Especially, if Dad was a science geek.

I was an Ivy league athlete. While there were exceptions, my teammates were nowhere near as intellectual, well educated or thoughtful as my friends who weren't on the team. Some teams had a higher level of academics (mens crew, most womens sports), but the men's teams, gimme a break...

when was this, 1990? I think things have changed a bit in Ivy admissions since you attended...

Not according to the Harvard data.

The issue isn't whether athletic recruits are minimally qualified academically for Harvard, it's whether they are equally academically qualified compared to non-athletes, such as musicians who have practiced 3 hours day for many years. In most cases, as a group, athletes had inferior academic qualifications. It doesn't mean they aren't intelligent on an absolute basis, though.

So if it’s a difference if a very talented athlete with a 1470 SAT and 3.9 GPA(with difficult coursework in HS), vs yet another non athlete 4.3 and 1565 SAT applicant, they want some variety of skills and personality. Doesn’t mean the athlete isn’t very bright and highly able. If you are talking a 1250 SAT and 3.1 GPA student athlete taking a spot at Harvard because of athletic ability that would be different and not fair IMO. [/quote]

PP, this isn't left to whim of the Admissions team they use the AI ( Academic Index) and they have a quota limit on how many athletes the athletic department can give favor to based on the Academic Index of SAT/ACT and GPA: 1600/ 36 & 4.0 being an AI of 240.

they can favor only those within 1-3 standard deviations of that 240 with biggest block going to 2 SD of 240 and - mostly to football/ basketball players. An Ivy can only give athletic assist to a VERY few who fall 3 SD away from 240 ( 1-3 athletes ) AND that is only for big draw sports like FB.

In other words, maybe a great QB with a 3.7 and a 1400, but not a fencer or a wrestler

Good post. I would also that high-school GPA is not a good indicator of academic excellence, which should be defined as a professor at a top university. Very few Harvard undergraduates can become a professor at a top university. Only the super talented can. What are the indicators of such academic potential? Top competitors in Math Olympia, physics Olympia, and other national level academic competitions. Hard working high-school students with average intelligence have no shot at a professor, especially in the hard disciplines, in a top university. Outside academia, what really matters for becoming a leader is not GPA. Leadership, personality, and other intangibles matter more. How does a student gain those qualities? Athletic competition is one of the best ways to train toughness, perseverance, emotional control, dealing with failures, performance under pressure, etc.

The goal of Ivy schools is to produce leaders in various fields. Who are more likely to become leaders? Once passing certain intelligence, it is easy to get a high GPA or SAT. Indeed, so many students get a perfect SAT. A bad SAT or GPA is a good indicator of LOW chance of success, but not a good indicator of Great successes.

More proof that DCUM is a flat circle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You realized she transferred to Harvard Law as a 3L - something almost unheard of. She was at a low tier law school for the first two years. She was at Harvard Law for one year.

This can’t be true. In law school, your degree comes from the school where you attended the majority of the time. So, if her JD is from Harvard, she did at least two years there.

your degree is from the school that confers it, usually the last one attended that took the credits on transfer and where you then finished up. If I went to harvard as a Freshman and transferred to UMD after junior year and finished there, my degree would be from UMD, not Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You realized she transferred to Harvard Law as a 3L - something almost unheard of. She was at a low tier law school for the first two years. She was at Harvard Law for one year.

This can’t be true. In law school, your degree comes from the school where you attended the majority of the time. So, if her JD is from Harvard, she did at least two years there.

your degree is from the school that confers it, usually the last one attended that took the credits on transfer and where you then finished up. If I went to harvard as a Freshman and transferred to UMD after junior year and finished there, my degree would be from UMD, not Harvard.

That is true for undergraduate for sure, but is it the same tor law school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[list]

Anonymous wrote:ok so your kid knows one smart athlete. when you get to a top college it is striking how different the academic strengths are of the athletes vs the non athlete.

I was an athlete in college and its always amusing to me that some people feel the need to put young people in categories.

If you are an Olympic swimmer ... OK cool, but the law of nature is assumed to be that that's all you got and you are - aside from that an idiot.

To the contrary, what is born out is that being a really good athlete takes more than talent. It requires a great deal of perseverance, determination, high pain threshold and enough of an imagination to dream big... then never give up.

In other words, after 3 hours a day of that for 4-6 years since age 13, AP Physics might just be a walk in the park. Especially, if Dad was a science geek.

I was an Ivy league athlete. While there were exceptions, my teammates were nowhere near as intellectual, well educated or thoughtful as my friends who weren't on the team. Some teams had a higher level of academics (mens crew, most womens sports), but the men's teams, gimme a break...

when was this, 1990? I think things have changed a bit in Ivy admissions since you attended...

Not according to the Harvard data.

The issue isn't whether athletic recruits are minimally qualified academically for Harvard, it's whether they are equally academically qualified compared to non-athletes, such as musicians who have practiced 3 hours day for many years. In most cases, as a group, athletes had inferior academic qualifications. It doesn't mean they aren't intelligent on an absolute basis, though.

So if it’s a difference if a very talented athlete with a 1470 SAT and 3.9 GPA(with difficult coursework in HS), vs yet another non athlete 4.3 and 1565 SAT applicant, they want some variety of skills and personality. Doesn’t mean the athlete isn’t very bright and highly able. If you are talking a 1250 SAT and 3.1 GPA student athlete taking a spot at Harvard because of athletic ability that would be different and not fair IMO. [/quote]

PP, this isn't left to whim of the Admissions team they use the AI ( Academic Index) and they have a quota limit on how many athletes the athletic department can give favor to based on the Academic Index of SAT/ACT and GPA: 1600/ 36 & 4.0 being an AI of 240.

they can favor only those within 1-3 standard deviations of that 240 with biggest block going to 2 SD of 240 and - mostly to football/ basketball players. An Ivy can only give athletic assist to a VERY few who fall 3 SD away from 240 ( 1-3 athletes ) AND that is only for big draw sports like FB.

In other words, maybe a great QB with a 3.7 and a 1400, but not a fencer or a wrestler

Good post. I would also that high-school GPA is not a good indicator of academic excellence, which should be defined as a professor at a top university. Very few Harvard undergraduates can become a professor at a top university. Only the super talented can. What are the indicators of such academic potential? Top competitors in Math Olympia, physics Olympia, and other national level academic competitions. Hard working high-school students with average intelligence have no shot at a professor, especially in the hard disciplines, in a top university. Outside academia, what really matters for becoming a leader is not GPA. Leadership, personality, and other intangibles matter more. How does a student gain those qualities? Athletic competition is one of the best ways to train toughness, perseverance, emotional control, dealing with failures, performance under pressure, etc.

The goal of Ivy schools is to produce leaders in various fields. Who are more likely to become leaders? Once passing certain intelligence, it is easy to get a high GPA or SAT. Indeed, so many students get a perfect SAT. A bad SAT or GPA is a good indicator of LOW chance of success, but not a good indicator of Great successes.

It is simply untrue that so many students get a perfect SAT.”The maximum score on the SAT is a 1600. Out of the two million students who take the test every year, only about 500 get the highest possible SAT score. “

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[list]

Anonymous wrote:ok so your kid knows one smart athlete. when you get to a top college it is striking how different the academic strengths are of the athletes vs the non athlete.

I was an athlete in college and its always amusing to me that some people feel the need to put young people in categories.

If you are an Olympic swimmer ... OK cool, but the law of nature is assumed to be that that's all you got and you are - aside from that an idiot.

To the contrary, what is born out is that being a really good athlete takes more than talent. It requires a great deal of perseverance, determination, high pain threshold and enough of an imagination to dream big... then never give up.

In other words, after 3 hours a day of that for 4-6 years since age 13, AP Physics might just be a walk in the park. Especially, if Dad was a science geek.

I was an Ivy league athlete. While there were exceptions, my teammates were nowhere near as intellectual, well educated or thoughtful as my friends who weren't on the team. Some teams had a higher level of academics (mens crew, most womens sports), but the men's teams, gimme a break...

when was this, 1990? I think things have changed a bit in Ivy admissions since you attended...

Not according to the Harvard data.

The issue isn't whether athletic recruits are minimally qualified academically for Harvard, it's whether they are equally academically qualified compared to non-athletes, such as musicians who have practiced 3 hours day for many years. In most cases, as a group, athletes had inferior academic qualifications. It doesn't mean they aren't intelligent on an absolute basis, though.

So if it’s a difference if a very talented athlete with a 1470 SAT and 3.9 GPA(with difficult coursework in HS), vs yet another non athlete 4.3 and 1565 SAT applicant, they want some variety of skills and personality. Doesn’t mean the athlete isn’t very bright and highly able. If you are talking a 1250 SAT and 3.1 GPA student athlete taking a spot at Harvard because of athletic ability that would be different and not fair IMO. [/quote]

PP, this isn't left to whim of the Admissions team they use the AI ( Academic Index) and they have a quota limit on how many athletes the athletic department can give favor to based on the Academic Index of SAT/ACT and GPA: 1600/ 36 & 4.0 being an AI of 240.

they can favor only those within 1-3 standard deviations of that 240 with biggest block going to 2 SD of 240 and - mostly to football/ basketball players. An Ivy can only give athletic assist to a VERY few who fall 3 SD away from 240 ( 1-3 athletes ) AND that is only for big draw sports like FB.

In other words, maybe a great QB with a 3.7 and a 1400, but not a fencer or a wrestler

Good post. I would also that high-school GPA is not a good indicator of academic excellence, which should be defined as a professor at a top university. Very few Harvard undergraduates can become a professor at a top university. Only the super talented can. What are the indicators of such academic potential? Top competitors in Math Olympia, physics Olympia, and other national level academic competitions. Hard working high-school students with average intelligence have no shot at a professor, especially in the hard disciplines, in a top university. Outside academia, what really matters for becoming a leader is not GPA. Leadership, personality, and other intangibles matter more. How does a student gain those qualities? Athletic competition is one of the best ways to train toughness, perseverance, emotional control, dealing with failures, performance under pressure, etc.

The goal of Ivy schools is to produce leaders in various fields. Who are more likely to become leaders? Once passing certain intelligence, it is easy to get a high GPA or SAT. Indeed, so many students get a perfect SAT. A bad SAT or GPA is a good indicator of LOW chance of success, but not a good indicator of Great successes.

It is simply untrue that so many students get a perfect SAT.”The maximum score on the SAT is a 1600. Out of the two million students who take the test every year, only about 500 get the highest possible SAT score. “

Well, what difference does it make if you score 1580 instead of 1600? How many are in the 99 percentile? Out of 2 millions, 20,000 are in the 99 percentile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[list]

Anonymous wrote:ok so your kid knows one smart athlete. when you get to a top college it is striking how different the academic strengths are of the athletes vs the non athlete.

I was an athlete in college and its always amusing to me that some people feel the need to put young people in categories.

If you are an Olympic swimmer ... OK cool, but the law of nature is assumed to be that that's all you got and you are - aside from that an idiot.

To the contrary, what is born out is that being a really good athlete takes more than talent. It requires a great deal of perseverance, determination, high pain threshold and enough of an imagination to dream big... then never give up.

In other words, after 3 hours a day of that for 4-6 years since age 13, AP Physics might just be a walk in the park. Especially, if Dad was a science geek.

I was an Ivy league athlete. While there were exceptions, my teammates were nowhere near as intellectual, well educated or thoughtful as my friends who weren't on the team. Some teams had a higher level of academics (mens crew, most womens sports), but the men's teams, gimme a break...

when was this, 1990? I think things have changed a bit in Ivy admissions since you attended...

Not according to the Harvard data.

The issue isn't whether athletic recruits are minimally qualified academically for Harvard, it's whether they are equally academically qualified compared to non-athletes, such as musicians who have practiced 3 hours day for many years. In most cases, as a group, athletes had inferior academic qualifications. It doesn't mean they aren't intelligent on an absolute basis, though.

So if it’s a difference if a very talented athlete with a 1470 SAT and 3.9 GPA(with difficult coursework in HS), vs yet another non athlete 4.3 and 1565 SAT applicant, they want some variety of skills and personality. Doesn’t mean the athlete isn’t very bright and highly able. If you are talking a 1250 SAT and 3.1 GPA student athlete taking a spot at Harvard because of athletic ability that would be different and not fair IMO. [/quote]

PP, this isn't left to whim of the Admissions team they use the AI ( Academic Index) and they have a quota limit on how many athletes the athletic department can give favor to based on the Academic Index of SAT/ACT and GPA: 1600/ 36 & 4.0 being an AI of 240.

they can favor only those within 1-3 standard deviations of that 240 with biggest block going to 2 SD of 240 and - mostly to football/ basketball players. An Ivy can only give athletic assist to a VERY few who fall 3 SD away from 240 ( 1-3 athletes ) AND that is only for big draw sports like FB.

In other words, maybe a great QB with a 3.7 and a 1400, but not a fencer or a wrestler

Good post. I would also that high-school GPA is not a good indicator of academic excellence, which should be defined as a professor at a top university. Very few Harvard undergraduates can become a professor at a top university. Only the super talented can. What are the indicators of such academic potential? Top competitors in Math Olympia, physics Olympia, and other national level academic competitions. Hard working high-school students with average intelligence have no shot at a professor, especially in the hard disciplines, in a top university. Outside academia, what really matters for becoming a leader is not GPA. Leadership, personality, and other intangibles matter more. How does a student gain those qualities? Athletic competition is one of the best ways to train toughness, perseverance, emotional control, dealing with failures, performance under pressure, etc.

The goal of Ivy schools is to produce leaders in various fields. Who are more likely to become leaders? Once passing certain intelligence, it is easy to get a high GPA or SAT. Indeed, so many students get a perfect SAT. A bad SAT or GPA is a good indicator of LOW chance of success, but not a good indicator of Great successes.

It is simply untrue that so many students get a perfect SAT.”The maximum score on the SAT is a 1600. Out of the two million students who take the test every year, only about 500 get the highest possible SAT score. “

Well, what difference does it make if you score 1580 instead of 1600? How many are in the 99 percentile? Out of 2 millions, 20,000 are in the 99 percentile.

scoring in the 99th percentile is different then 99 percent of 2 million. That means two different things!

[Anonymous]

It's been a disaster. The parents are beyond panicked. Even the kids are starting to realize that the pandemic has an almost unimaginable ripple effect.

[Anonymous]

Can you define diasaster? I have a Senior at a DMV private. Lots of deferrals. Seems everyone has at least one acceptance so far, even if it isn’t their top choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I interviewed a kid from the "Big 3" for my HYPS alma mater and I'm sad she got deferred. She seemed great!

Did she tell you she got deferred or does the school tell you that?

The school tells me. You can login to your alumni reviewer portal and check on the status of kids you’ve interviewed. They ask you to contact anyone who got in to say congrats; they ask you not to contact anyone who didn’t. Anyways, I just really liked this kid — one of the best two I’ve interviewed in about 10 years — so I was disappointed she ended up deferred. No doubt she’ll get in somewhere great though.

This confirms that the whole purpose of the HYPS alumni interview is to feed the ego of the interviewer. If the kid was one of your top two ever and the interview had any sway whatsoever the kid would have gotten in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You realized she transferred to Harvard Law as a 3L - something almost unheard of. She was at a low tier law school for the first two years. She was at Harvard Law for one year.

This can’t be true. In law school, your degree comes from the school where you attended the majority of the time. So, if her JD is from Harvard, she did at least two years there.

your degree is from the school that confers it, usually the last one attended that took the credits on transfer and where you then finished up. If I went to harvard as a Freshman and transferred to UMD after junior year and finished there, my degree would be from UMD, not Harvard.

That is true for undergraduate for sure, but is it the same tor law school?

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Rumors are circulating that across the board ED admissions are down from the Big 5 this year. Do any of you in these schools know if this is true and what have your college advisors suggested as causes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's been a disaster. The parents are beyond panicked. Even the kids are starting to realize that the pandemic has an almost unimaginable ripple effect.

Yes, STA seniors and their families are freaking out. So far, majority have not gotten the EA/EDs they were hoping for. Lots of disappointment all around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's been a disaster. The parents are beyond panicked. Even the kids are starting to realize that the pandemic has an almost unimaginable ripple effect.

Yes, STA seniors and their families are freaking out. So far, majority have not gotten the EA/EDs they were hoping for. Lots of disappointment all around.

+2 Big 3 parent. DC received their 6th deferral this weekend. We have no idea what is happening.

[Anonymous]

relax. they will all get in to great places in the RD round. This happens every year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rumors are circulating that across the board ED admissions are down from the Big 5 this year. Do any of you in these schools know if this is true and what have your college advisors suggested as causes?

DC knows people in at Harvard, Yale, Brown, Columbia, Penn, etc. (not all ED, but early). No past experience to compare to, but friends seem to be doing pretty well.