What has surprised you - as your kid comes to the end of this process

[Anonymous]

This is cliched by now but just how many high stats (1550+, 10+ AP’s, all A’s highest rigor) kids with demonstrated extracurricular involvement are turned away. Not even waitlisted but rejected outright .I understand that no college wants to fill its class with so-called robots, but I have a hard time believe that there isn’t something that these kids bring to the table. (And no, my kid doesn’t fit this high stats profile, so this isn’t personal)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is cliched by now but just how many high stats (1550+, 10+ AP’s, all A’s highest rigor) kids with demonstrated extracurricular involvement are turned away. Not even waitlisted but rejected outright .I understand that no college wants to fill its class with so-called robots, but I have a hard time believe that there isn’t something that these kids bring to the table. (And no, my kid doesn’t fit this high stats profile, so this isn’t personal)

Yes and I don’t even like the robot label. I think it’s more a problem of being indistinguishable, the masses apply to like 3 different majors and it hurts them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is cliched by now but just how many high stats (1550+, 10+ AP’s, all A’s highest rigor) kids with demonstrated extracurricular involvement are turned away. Not even waitlisted but rejected outright .I understand that no college wants to fill its class with so-called robots, but I have a hard time believe that there isn’t something that these kids bring to the table. (And no, my kid doesn’t fit this high stats profile, so this isn’t personal)

Ofc they bring something. But the sheer stats don’t make them more compelling (especially if an oversubscribed major) than a slightly lower stat kid with stellar effusive LOR and sparkly essays in **humanities**.

It’s holistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Learned: 1) the system can be gamed 2) tune out the "must have highest rigor in every class" bs. Creates unnecessary stress and toxic hs experience. Just get highest uw gpa you can get. 3) lean heavily into your kids academic strengths/interest and excel in those. Go deep, show curiosity and impact beyond your hs. Don't need fancy expensive programs but need a plan. 5) Every essay should be custom. Thats the ultimate demonstrated interest- kids who can write about specific programs and resources that will help them achieve their goals. Show them how well you fit. Lead them to water, so to speak. Be reflective. 6) be distinct from your hs peers. 7) choose major and schools that tightly fit your profile. Be intentional about school fit. Applying to every ivy or t20 doesn't make sense unless you are status hunting. They are so diffferent... 8) reviewing historical data from your hs is very important when deciding where to ed. 9) most elite ed acceptances from our private were urm and legacy. Rd still tbd. 10) process will feel 'unfair' when lower stats kids get in but that's the problem with predicting outcomes under a 'holistic admissions' process. Can't control the outcome but can have a plan to increase odds

This may actually be good advice for most kids but understand that it will rule them out for the very top schools.

Not necessarily

It most definately will, assuming your HS offers those other AP courses. Sure take Calc AB instead of Calc BC, but if you don't take AP FL or any AP history or English, even if a STEM major, you most likely are NOT getting into a T25. Why? Because there are plenty of kids who did take those and got 3.95+UW and 10+ APs. So unless your kid really has a way to shine with national awards, they are put in a different category.

That being said---my kid skipped the AP History and AP English and stopped FL after 4 years (junior year). Had 1520/3.98UW/8APs and didn't get into any of the T20 (applied 2), WL at a T30 and got in everywhere else. Now we won't know if the coursework was the reason, but it likely didn't help. My kid knew that when they made the choices and we are all fine with it. They had a much happier HS because of it, and ultimately where they ended up would not have taken any AP History or AP English credits anyhow (you can use AP for major but not for core curriculum). So it was a win for them to skip the stress

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is cliched by now but just how many high stats (1550+, 10+ AP’s, all A’s highest rigor) kids with demonstrated extracurricular involvement are turned away. Not even waitlisted but rejected outright .I understand that no college wants to fill its class with so-called robots, but I have a hard time believe that there isn’t something that these kids bring to the table. (And no, my kid doesn’t fit this high stats profile, so this isn’t personal)

It's unfortunately personal to our family. My straight A, 10 AP, 1550+ SAT, Eagle Scout, varsity sport captain, part-time retail job and camp counsellor son was rejected or waitlisted from every T50 engineering program he applied to except U of Washington (Seattle). I'm happy he got U Dub and he is relieved to have a good offer in hand. But I expected this rat race to yield more options and choice I guess.

[Anonymous]

DS recruited athlete at many T20 SLACs. Had his pick of many. Could have done D1 but wasn’t interested in 50/50 split athletics/academics.

The process for athletes is very long but there is so much more transparency with pre reads. Yes, the kid has to be really wanted for a coach to use up their spots on them but if they are, the process works well.

Top ranking SLACs still don’t guarantee anything no matter how good you are (though coaches in those below T20 seem to have more pull or get more assurances from admissions than those schools at the top who still want really qualified kids).

Looking at the stats of these high performers who are struggling, it scares me for my next child who is highly intelligent but not as concerned with perfect grades or sports. He’ll need a hook and it’s not that easy to find a good one.

[Anonymous]

Going to a competitive high school screws you in admissions.

[Anonymous]

I never thought about people hoarding acceptances or trophy hunting for top college acceptances until now. I attended a small private school that sent a good number to T-25’s 30 years ago and this just wasn’t an issue. The people going to Harvard or Yale back then weren’t shotgunning the T-25’s. They felt confident enough to submit just 5-6 applications and call it a day. How times have changed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Going to a competitive high school screws you in admissions.

Or gives you opportunities if you are a 3.75/3.8uw with a crazy unique pointy interest

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is cliched by now but just how many high stats (1550+, 10+ AP’s, all A’s highest rigor) kids with demonstrated extracurricular involvement are turned away. Not even waitlisted but rejected outright .I understand that no college wants to fill its class with so-called robots, but I have a hard time believe that there isn’t something that these kids bring to the table. (And no, my kid doesn’t fit this high stats profile, so this isn’t personal)

It's unfortunately personal to our family. My straight A, 10 AP, 1550+ SAT, Eagle Scout, varsity sport captain, part-time retail job and camp counsellor son was rejected or waitlisted from every T50 engineering program he applied to except U of Washington (Seattle). I'm happy he got U Dub and he is relieved to have a good offer in hand. But I expected this rat race to yield more options and choice I guess.

Too many other kids applied with 12 APs and 1580 SATs and national awards.

“Varsity sport captain” is competing against Olympic gold medalists at top schools.

There is ALWAYS someone with higher achievements. T10 and Oxbridge are drawing from a pool of the most accomplished 18 year olds on the planet.

Malala had a Nobel Peace Prize listed under “awards”, but I’m sure DC’s Eagle Scout project was very nice too.

What DCUM thinks is special and competitive is not what these AOs are seeing- your kids are great but they might be competing against literally Natalie Portman for that Harvard slot.

Is YOUR kid a household name and movie star? How many Star Wars movies did they star in? Any Nobels? How about Emmys?

You (not PP but generically) can’t claim on one hand that everything should be decided on competitive merit only and then also say it’s unfair and disappointing when Superman and Wonder Woman show up to play.

Holistic admissions is what gives regular mortal kids even a remote chance at these schools.

[Anonymous]

What surprised me the most is how different and strange Stanford's acceptance criteria are. The kids from DD's school who got into Stanford today are mediocre in every way and didn't get into any good school prior to today (public or private).

[Anonymous]

How many kids were born in 2007!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is cliched by now but just how many high stats (1550+, 10+ AP’s, all A’s highest rigor) kids with demonstrated extracurricular involvement are turned away. Not even waitlisted but rejected outright .I understand that no college wants to fill its class with so-called robots, but I have a hard time believe that there isn’t something that these kids bring to the table. (And no, my kid doesn’t fit this high stats profile, so this isn’t personal)

It’s more of a lottery. Did the AO who read your file have a bad or good morning.
Ofc they bring something. But the sheer stats don’t make them more compelling (especially if an oversubscribed major) than a slightly lower stat kid with stellar effusive LOR and sparkly essays in **humanities**.

It’s holistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What surprised me the most is how different and strange Stanford's acceptance criteria are. The kids from DD's school who got into Stanford today are mediocre in every way and didn't get into any good school prior to today (public or private).

What a horrible thing to say

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Going to a competitive high school screws you in admissions.

yes!!!