If your kid was a top student and didn’t get into a top college

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s roughly 400 kids graduating from DCs school this year. The top kids have been in the same classes all 4 years and know each other’s ranking and test scores. The top 2% of graduating class (8 kids) all had 4.0 uw and 1500+ SATs. This is how acceptances went for them:

1. Carnegie Mellon (shut out of Ivies)
2. UMD (shut out of Ivies and top SLACs)
3. UMD (shut out of Ivies)
4. Johns Hopkins (recruited athlete)
5. Yale (first gen)
6. UMD
7. Penn (first gen)
8. Princeton (URM)

All great, hard working, top scores, excellent EC kids, but like PP said there just isn’t enough room for all high achievers at the tippy top.

I'm confused. This is a list of 8 top colleges. Well, 6 since once is there 3 times. So, every kid in the top 2% of your kid's high school got into a top school.

Agree. This list by PP is impressive and doesn’t really illustrate the point OP was trying to make.

Disagree - 37.5% attended the state flagship. And while UMD may be a great school it is not elite academically/socially/etc. A Princeton/Yale/Penn grad will have doors opened for them that a UMD grad will never experience.

In the past that has been true, but things are changing rapidly. The current generation of kids aren’t interested in being bankers or consultants anyhow (too corporate).

[Anonymous]

You need to redefine your idea of 'top college'. How can you have hundreds of thousands of 'top' students across the country not getting into 'top' colleges? There's no logic to thinking all of them SHOULD have gotten in. It's that your idea of what makes a 'top college' is simply wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s roughly 400 kids graduating from DCs school this year. The top kids have been in the same classes all 4 years and know each other’s ranking and test scores. The top 2% of graduating class (8 kids) all had 4.0 uw and 1500+ SATs. This is how acceptances went for them:

1. Carnegie Mellon (shut out of Ivies)
2. UMD (shut out of Ivies and top SLACs)
3. UMD (shut out of Ivies)
4. Johns Hopkins (recruited athlete)
5. Yale (first gen)
6. UMD
7. Penn (first gen)
8. Princeton (URM)

All great, hard working, top scores, excellent EC kids, but like PP said there just isn’t enough room for all high achievers at the tippy top.

Thank you for posting this.

Interesting enough my DD was in a similar position when she graduated - top 2% - 1550 - etc.

Was similarly shut out and elected to attend our State Flagship.

I remember move in day - she was in the honors cohort - and the other students were similarly academically credentialed.

My own observations regarding college admissions have been:

student athletes punch way above their weight. On the performance scale - academics vs athletics - ie both 99 percentile - the athlete has a much better shot at a top tier admit.

students from elite privates (Dalton, etc) - very strong placement.

Students whose parents are well placed in business and full pay - very strong placement.

I think there is a reality to admissions that we have to acknowledge.

If you are wealthy and/or influential your DC is going to have an advantage.

If you are full pay your DC will have an advantage.

I am ok with the above - but then perhaps colleges should not be not-for-profit and they should be paying their fair share in taxes on their RE holdings and endowments. If Harvard is the bastion of the ultra wealthy then it really shouldn't be non profit.

I will admit the upper tier rejections were hard on my DD and while my DD had very nice offers from the tier below it was hard to say no to the offer from our state flagship. It basically worked out that DD was paying for room and board. Not a bad deal these days.

And I tell her - sometimes it takes a little longer - but cream rises.

Excuse my ignorance as my kids are still young and I was not an athlete.

When everyone refers to athletes, you are referring to athletes who are recruited and play on the college team, correct?

I have a son who is an excellent tennis player. He is not yet in high school but I am sure he will be a starter. He does well in tennis tournaments for his age group. I am not sure if he will be good enough to be a tennis recruit but will still be a top tennis player at his school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s roughly 400 kids graduating from DCs school this year. The top kids have been in the same classes all 4 years and know each other’s ranking and test scores. The top 2% of graduating class (8 kids) all had 4.0 uw and 1500+ SATs. This is how acceptances went for them:

1. Carnegie Mellon (shut out of Ivies)
2. UMD (shut out of Ivies and top SLACs)
3. UMD (shut out of Ivies)
4. Johns Hopkins (recruited athlete)
5. Yale (first gen)
6. UMD
7. Penn (first gen)
8. Princeton (URM)

All great, hard working, top scores, excellent EC kids, but like PP said there just isn’t enough room for all high achievers at the tippy top.

Thank you for posting this.

Interesting enough my DD was in a similar position when she graduated - top 2% - 1550 - etc.

Was similarly shut out and elected to attend our State Flagship.

I remember move in day - she was in the honors cohort - and the other students were similarly academically credentialed.

My own observations regarding college admissions have been:

student athletes punch way above their weight. On the performance scale - academics vs athletics - ie both 99 percentile - the athlete has a much better shot at a top tier admit.

students from elite privates (Dalton, etc) - very strong placement.

Students whose parents are well placed in business and full pay - very strong placement.

I think there is a reality to admissions that we have to acknowledge.

If you are wealthy and/or influential your DC is going to have an advantage.

If you are full pay your DC will have an advantage.

I am ok with the above - but then perhaps colleges should not be not-for-profit and they should be paying their fair share in taxes on their RE holdings and endowments. If Harvard is the bastion of the ultra wealthy then it really shouldn't be non profit.

I will admit the upper tier rejections were hard on my DD and while my DD had very nice offers from the tier below it was hard to say no to the offer from our state flagship. It basically worked out that DD was paying for room and board. Not a bad deal these days.

And I tell her - sometimes it takes a little longer - but cream rises.

Excuse my ignorance as my kids are still young and I was not an athlete.

When everyone refers to athletes, you are referring to athletes who are recruited and play on the college team, correct?

I have a son who is an excellent tennis player. He is not yet in high school but I am sure he will be a starter. He does well in tennis tournaments for his age group. I am not sure if he will be good enough to be a tennis recruit but will still be a top tennis player at his school.

Possibly D3 but unless he’s playing national matches in high school, no chance of D1. Most D1 recruits are international now with a sprinkling of high ranked US kids. You would easily spend $40,000+ a year on coaching, camps, and competition to prepare for college tennis. And that assumes he has the talent and will, too. It’s a really hard path to scholarships now. Major money and lots of travel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s roughly 400 kids graduating from DCs school this year. The top kids have been in the same classes all 4 years and know each other’s ranking and test scores. The top 2% of graduating class (8 kids) all had 4.0 uw and 1500+ SATs. This is how acceptances went for them:

1. Carnegie Mellon (shut out of Ivies)
2. UMD (shut out of Ivies and top SLACs)
3. UMD (shut out of Ivies)
4. Johns Hopkins (recruited athlete)
5. Yale (first gen)
6. UMD
7. Penn (first gen)
8. Princeton (URM)

All great, hard working, top scores, excellent EC kids, but like PP said there just isn’t enough room for all high achievers at the tippy top.

Thank you for posting this.

Interesting enough my DD was in a similar position when she graduated - top 2% - 1550 - etc.

Was similarly shut out and elected to attend our State Flagship.

I remember move in day - she was in the honors cohort - and the other students were similarly academically credentialed.

My own observations regarding college admissions have been:

student athletes punch way above their weight. On the performance scale - academics vs athletics - ie both 99 percentile - the athlete has a much better shot at a top tier admit.

students from elite privates (Dalton, etc) - very strong placement.

Students whose parents are well placed in business and full pay - very strong placement.

I think there is a reality to admissions that we have to acknowledge.

If you are wealthy and/or influential your DC is going to have an advantage.

If you are full pay your DC will have an advantage.

I am ok with the above - but then perhaps colleges should not be not-for-profit and they should be paying their fair share in taxes on their RE holdings and endowments. If Harvard is the bastion of the ultra wealthy then it really shouldn't be non profit.

I will admit the upper tier rejections were hard on my DD and while my DD had very nice offers from the tier below it was hard to say no to the offer from our state flagship. It basically worked out that DD was paying for room and board. Not a bad deal these days.

And I tell her - sometimes it takes a little longer - but cream rises.

Excuse my ignorance as my kids are still young and I was not an athlete.

When everyone refers to athletes, you are referring to athletes who are recruited and play on the college team, correct?

I have a son who is an excellent tennis player. He is not yet in high school but I am sure he will be a starter. He does well in tennis tournaments for his age group. I am not sure if he will be good enough to be a tennis recruit but will still be a top tennis player at his school.

Possibly D3 but unless he’s playing national matches in high school, no chance of D1. Most D1 recruits are international now with a sprinkling of high ranked US kids. You would easily spend $40,000+ a year on coaching, camps, and competition to prepare for college tennis. And that assumes he has the talent and will, too. It’s a really hard path to scholarships now. Major money and lots of travel.

I don’t expect him to be a D1 athlete. I just wanted to confirm that when everyone refers to athletes when discussing college admissions, it means the kid was recruited to play on the college team.

My son would not be considered an athlete for college even though he plays tennis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's simple math, 30,000 HS in the US, 20,000 ivy seats, so even if only the val's are considered there are still 1/3 rejected.

Add in all the sal's, athletes, and other types of applicants and you realize even as the top student at your HS, admission to a top 20 school is incredibly good fortune (assuming you want that).

There is no shame in a top student not getting admitted, no flaw in application, nothing other than bad luck of a sort (even though painful).

Top students who have been rejected are still top students, with much to be proud of, and as every study shows, highly likely to remain successful in life regardless of their alma mater!

My kid was very disappointed in not getting into HYPSM. I tried to foam the runways, but there was no way to prevent the profound disappointment. The kids from my kid's high school who got into HYPSM are all minorities with excellent stats, ECs. Sorry if that sounds racist, it's just a fact, like it or not. DC is going to a terrific school, not as elite as desired, but that's life. DC's older sibling went to a HYPSM college, and DC has even better grades, etc. than older DC. BUT older DC is 10 years older, and that decade really changed things in college admissions.

What school? I'm curious what you think of as "not as elite." Why group HYPSM in terms of admissions? They are very different schools. Kids should apply for the best fit which may include some or all of these, but it sound like it's just about prestige, and that really isn't what a college education is about. Mine got into Brown, and we are thrilled. I won't lie and say I don't care if it's an Ivy -- she is the first in the family to go to an Ivy league school. (Though it isn't HYPSM, so maybe "not elite enough"). But, she chose it for it's campus academically curious and collaborative community, open curriculum and great teaching. She did not apply to Harvard because that did not appeal (competitive vibe and snobbery from friends who went there). I don't understand why people lump all these schools together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's simple math, 30,000 HS in the US, 20,000 ivy seats, so even if only the val's are considered there are still 1/3 rejected.

Add in all the sal's, athletes, and other types of applicants and you realize even as the top student at your HS, admission to a top 20 school is incredibly good fortune (assuming you want that).

There is no shame in a top student not getting admitted, no flaw in application, nothing other than bad luck of a sort (even though painful).

Top students who have been rejected are still top students, with much to be proud of, and as every study shows, highly likely to remain successful in life regardless of their alma mater!

My kid was very disappointed in not getting into HYPSM. I tried to foam the runways, but there was no way to prevent the profound disappointment. The kids from my kid's high school who got into HYPSM are all minorities with excellent stats, ECs. Sorry if that sounds racist, it's just a fact, like it or not. DC is going to a terrific school, not as elite as desired, but that's life. DC's older sibling went to a HYPSM college, and DC has even better grades, etc. than older DC. BUT older DC is 10 years older, and that decade really changed things in college admissions.

What school? I'm curious what you think of as "not as elite." Why group HYPSM in terms of admissions? They are very different schools. Kids should apply for the best fit which may include some or all of these, but it sound like it's just about prestige, and that really isn't what a college education is about. Mine got into Brown, and we are thrilled. I won't lie and say I don't care if it's an Ivy -- she is the first in the family to go to an Ivy league school. (Though it isn't HYPSM, so maybe "not elite enough"). But, she chose it for it's campus academically curious and collaborative community, open curriculum and great teaching. She did not apply to Harvard because that did not appeal (competitive vibe and snobbery from friends who went there). I don't understand why people lump all these schools together.

Because they are the top 5 schools and most prestigious.

NP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s roughly 400 kids graduating from DCs school this year. The top kids have been in the same classes all 4 years and know each other’s ranking and test scores. The top 2% of graduating class (8 kids) all had 4.0 uw and 1500+ SATs. This is how acceptances went for them:

1. Carnegie Mellon (shut out of Ivies)
2. UMD (shut out of Ivies and top SLACs)
3. UMD (shut out of Ivies)
4. Johns Hopkins (recruited athlete)
5. Yale (first gen)
6. UMD
7. Penn (first gen)
8. Princeton (URM)

All great, hard working, top scores, excellent EC kids, but like PP said there just isn’t enough room for all high achievers at the tippy top.

I'm confused. This is a list of 8 top colleges. Well, 6 since once is there 3 times. So, every kid in the top 2% of your kid's high school got into a top school.

Agree. This list by PP is impressive and doesn’t really illustrate the point OP was trying to make.

Disagree - 37.5% attended the state flagship. And while UMD may be a great school it is not elite academically/socially/etc. A Princeton/Yale/Penn grad will have doors opened for them that a UMD grad will never experience.

So you’re saying that the kids with the top 10 GPAs in every high school should be entitled to an Ivy League admission? The numbers simply don’t add up.

[Anonymous]

If your kid was smart, he/she would realize that they could get an excellent education in a lot of schools. "Top" colleges are for suckers who can't imagine the possibilities. Just look at the schools that successful people in different areas attended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's simple math, 30,000 HS in the US, 20,000 ivy seats, so even if only the val's are considered there are still 1/3 rejected.

Add in all the sal's, athletes, and other types of applicants and you realize even as the top student at your HS, admission to a top 20 school is incredibly good fortune (assuming you want that).

There is no shame in a top student not getting admitted, no flaw in application, nothing other than bad luck of a sort (even though painful).

Top students who have been rejected are still top students, with much to be proud of, and as every study shows, highly likely to remain successful in life regardless of their alma mater!

My kid was very disappointed in not getting into HYPSM. I tried to foam the runways, but there was no way to prevent the profound disappointment. The kids from my kid's high school who got into HYPSM are all minorities with excellent stats, ECs. Sorry if that sounds racist, it's just a fact, like it or not. DC is going to a terrific school, not as elite as desired, but that's life. DC's older sibling went to a HYPSM college, and DC has even better grades, etc. than older DC. BUT older DC is 10 years older, and that decade really changed things in college admissions.

You’re not sorry.

URM populations at these schools is at the high end around 20% and in some cases, closer to 15%. Making the claim that URMs are the ones taking your precious kid’s spot is just ludicrous. I’m sure you know this but made the claim anyway.

You people do realize the M in URM stands for minority, right? Minority means a small percentage of the Country’s overall population - probably less than 20% of the country’s overall population. So if a college has a higher percentage of students in a specific minority than the overall country’s population of said minority, it’s doing a phenomenal job at bringing in URMs. See how that works? A minority of one type in the general public does not mean it should be a majority in a college unless that college is specifically for that minority (see. HBCU).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's simple math, 30,000 HS in the US, 20,000 ivy seats, so even if only the val's are considered there are still 1/3 rejected.

Add in all the sal's, athletes, and other types of applicants and you realize even as the top student at your HS, admission to a top 20 school is incredibly good fortune (assuming you want that).

There is no shame in a top student not getting admitted, no flaw in application, nothing other than bad luck of a sort (even though painful).

Top students who have been rejected are still top students, with much to be proud of, and as every study shows, highly likely to remain successful in life regardless of their alma mater!

My kid was very disappointed in not getting into HYPSM. I tried to foam the runways, but there was no way to prevent the profound disappointment. The kids from my kid's high school who got into HYPSM are all minorities with excellent stats, ECs. Sorry if that sounds racist, it's just a fact, like it or not. DC is going to a terrific school, not as elite as desired, but that's life. DC's older sibling went to a HYPSM college, and DC has even better grades, etc. than older DC. BUT older DC is 10 years older, and that decade really changed things in college admissions.

What school? I'm curious what you think of as "not as elite." Why group HYPSM in terms of admissions? They are very different schools. Kids should apply for the best fit which may include some or all of these, but it sound like it's just about prestige, and that really isn't what a college education is about. Mine got into Brown, and we are thrilled. I won't lie and say I don't care if it's an Ivy -- she is the first in the family to go to an Ivy league school. (Though it isn't HYPSM, so maybe "not elite enough"). But, she chose it for it's campus academically curious and collaborative community, open curriculum and great teaching. She did not apply to Harvard because that did not appeal (competitive vibe and snobbery from friends who went there). I don't understand why people lump all these schools together.

Because they are the top 5 schools and most prestigious.

NP

Either you didn't read my post or just didn't comprehend the thoughts in it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s roughly 400 kids graduating from DCs school this year. The top kids have been in the same classes all 4 years and know each other’s ranking and test scores. The top 2% of graduating class (8 kids) all had 4.0 uw and 1500+ SATs. This is how acceptances went for them:

1. Carnegie Mellon (shut out of Ivies)
2. UMD (shut out of Ivies and top SLACs)
3. UMD (shut out of Ivies)
4. Johns Hopkins (recruited athlete)
5. Yale (first gen)
6. UMD
7. Penn (first gen)
8. Princeton (URM)

All great, hard working, top scores, excellent EC kids, but like PP said there just isn’t enough room for all high achievers at the tippy top.

Thank you for posting this.

Interesting enough my DD was in a similar position when she graduated - top 2% - 1550 - etc.

Was similarly shut out and elected to attend our State Flagship.

I remember move in day - she was in the honors cohort - and the other students were similarly academically credentialed.

My own observations regarding college admissions have been:

student athletes punch way above their weight. On the performance scale - academics vs athletics - ie both 99 percentile - the athlete has a much better shot at a top tier admit.

students from elite privates (Dalton, etc) - very strong placement.

Students whose parents are well placed in business and full pay - very strong placement.

I think there is a reality to admissions that we have to acknowledge.

If you are wealthy and/or influential your DC is going to have an advantage.

If you are full pay your DC will have an advantage.

I am ok with the above - but then perhaps colleges should not be not-for-profit and they should be paying their fair share in taxes on their RE holdings and endowments. If Harvard is the bastion of the ultra wealthy then it really shouldn't be non profit.

I will admit the upper tier rejections were hard on my DD and while my DD had very nice offers from the tier below it was hard to say no to the offer from our state flagship. It basically worked out that DD was paying for room and board. Not a bad deal these days.

And I tell her - sometimes it takes a little longer - but cream rises.

Excuse my ignorance as my kids are still young and I was not an athlete.

When everyone refers to athletes, you are referring to athletes who are recruited and play on the college team, correct?

I have a son who is an excellent tennis player. He is not yet in high school but I am sure he will be a starter. He does well in tennis tournaments for his age group. I am not sure if he will be good enough to be a tennis recruit but will still be a top tennis player at his school.

Possibly D3 but unless he’s playing national matches in high school, no chance of D1. Most D1 recruits are international now with a sprinkling of high ranked US kids. You would easily spend $40,000+ a year on coaching, camps, and competition to prepare for college tennis. And that assumes he has the talent and will, too. It’s a really hard path to scholarships now. Major money and lots of travel.

I don’t expect him to be a D1 athlete. I just wanted to confirm that when everyone refers to athletes when discussing college admissions, it means the kid was recruited to play on the college team.

My son would not be considered an athlete for college even though he plays tennis.

Be aware that not every kid who plays on the college team was given a recruiting spot for admissions. There are very few of those for most sports. The rest of the team are walk ons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's simple math, 30,000 HS in the US, 20,000 ivy seats, so even if only the val's are considered there are still 1/3 rejected.

Add in all the sal's, athletes, and other types of applicants and you realize even as the top student at your HS, admission to a top 20 school is incredibly good fortune (assuming you want that).

There is no shame in a top student not getting admitted, no flaw in application, nothing other than bad luck of a sort (even though painful).

Top students who have been rejected are still top students, with much to be proud of, and as every study shows, highly likely to remain successful in life regardless of their alma mater!

My kid was very disappointed in not getting into HYPSM. I tried to foam the runways, but there was no way to prevent the profound disappointment. The kids from my kid's high school who got into HYPSM are all minorities with excellent stats, ECs. Sorry if that sounds racist, it's just a fact, like it or not. DC is going to a terrific school, not as elite as desired, but that's life. DC's older sibling went to a HYPSM college, and DC has even better grades, etc. than older DC. BUT older DC is 10 years older, and that decade really changed things in college admissions.

You’re not sorry.

URM populations at these schools is at the high end around 20% and in some cases, closer to 15%. Making the claim that URMs are the ones taking your precious kid’s spot is just ludicrous. I’m sure you know this but made the claim anyway.

You people do realize the M in URM stands for minority, right? Minority means a small percentage of the Country’s overall population - probably less than 20% of the country’s overall population. So if a college has a higher percentage of students in a specific minority than the overall country’s population of said minority, it’s doing a phenomenal job at bringing in URMs. See how that works? A minority of one type in the general public does not mean it should be a majority in a college unless that college is specifically for that minority (see. HBCU).

Not sure what your point is. The fact that they are at 20% is why it is ludicrous to point the finger at minority admissions as the reason why your kid don’t get in. There’s another 80% of the student body that isn’t URM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your kid had perfect or close to perfect grades in AP classes, high SAT scores, strong extracurricular activities and got rejected from all the top schools, what do you think went wrong?

Didn't make strategic use of ED?

Agree. People seem blind to this. It isn’t a silver bullet, but it’s as close as you’re going to get for the kids we’re talking about on this thread.

ED is a small advantage, but it isn’t as good as it looks, once you pull out recruited athletes, legacies, Questbridge etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's simple math, 30,000 HS in the US, 20,000 ivy seats, so even if only the val's are considered there are still 1/3 rejected.

Add in all the sal's, athletes, and other types of applicants and you realize even as the top student at your HS, admission to a top 20 school is incredibly good fortune (assuming you want that).

There is no shame in a top student not getting admitted, no flaw in application, nothing other than bad luck of a sort (even though painful).

Top students who have been rejected are still top students, with much to be proud of, and as every study shows, highly likely to remain successful in life regardless of their alma mater!

My kid was very disappointed in not getting into HYPSM. I tried to foam the runways, but there was no way to prevent the profound disappointment. The kids from my kid's high school who got into HYPSM are all minorities with excellent stats, ECs. Sorry if that sounds racist, it's just a fact, like it or not. DC is going to a terrific school, not as elite as desired, but that's life. DC's older sibling went to a HYPSM college, and DC has even better grades, etc. than older DC. BUT older DC is 10 years older, and that decade really changed things in college admissions.

You’re not sorry.

URM populations at these schools is at the high end around 20% and in some cases, closer to 15%. Making the claim that URMs are the ones taking your precious kid’s spot is just ludicrous. I’m sure you know this but made the claim anyway.

You people do realize the M in URM stands for minority, right? Minority means a small percentage of the Country’s overall population - probably less than 20% of the country’s overall population. So if a college has a higher percentage of students in a specific minority than the overall country’s population of said minority, it’s doing a phenomenal job at bringing in URMs. See how that works? A minority of one type in the general public does not mean it should be a majority in a college unless that college is specifically for that minority (see. HBCU).

Not sure what your point is. The fact that they are at 20% is why it is ludicrous to point the finger at minority admissions as the reason why your kid don’t get in. There’s another 80% of the student body that isn’t URM.

DP. Just in case you really don’t get this — the point is not how many kids attend, but rather what are the chances if any one kid being admitted. Fewer URM students apply and they are admitted at a much higher rate, and with lower credentials, than an equally situated non-URM student (i.e., non-Recruited athlete, non-legacy). The list pp provided from MD is exactly what one would expect. Harvard will take — 10/10 times — the URM with the #9 class rank over the similarly situated non-URM #1 student. Is the #9 kid qualified to do well at Harvard? Sure. You can argue about whether it’s fair and the right thing to do or not, but it’s just a fact.