Pulling Back the Veil on College Admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, admissions are over for this year. Take a chill pill and get over it.

College admissions are never over.


You've got parents in - middle school - asking questions about college admissions for their kids. Now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm.

The article:

* Legacies
* Children of faculty or donors
* URMs
* First gen
* Students from upscale private schools
* Top 1% of applicants

Other than the top 1%, with such a large group of non-meritorious admits, I can’t understand how these schools will remain “elite” in the eyes of employers. The top schools seem to want to ruin their reputations.

All of these students have merit. It may not be the limited dara points you want. The top schools can take top academic students who also have other qualities that merit them and/or will add to the diversity (and education experience) of the whole class. You could potentially argue your point on legacies, but tgey are highly qualified too. There are far more top students than spots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm.

The article:

* Legacies
* Children of faculty or donors
* URMs
* First gen
* Students from upscale private schools
* Top 1% of applicants

Other than the top 1%, with such a large group of non-meritorious admits, I can’t understand how these schools will remain “elite” in the eyes of employers. The top schools seem to want to ruin their reputations.

All of these students have merit. It may not be the limited dara points you want. The top schools can take top academic students who also have other qualities that merit them and/or will add to the diversity (and education experience) of the whole class. You could potentially argue your point on legacies, but tgey are highly qualified too. There are far more top students than spots.

They may have merit (and most people do), but they aren’t admitted on that basis. This assumes meritorious kids not in one of those categories have gone elsewhere. So why are these schools “elite” in comparison?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm.

The article:

* Legacies
* Children of faculty or donors
* URMs
* First gen
* Students from upscale private schools
* Top 1% of applicants

Other than the top 1%, with such a large group of non-meritorious admits, I can’t understand how these schools will remain “elite” in the eyes of employers. The top schools seem to want to ruin their reputations.

All of these students have merit. It may not be the limited dara points you want. The top schools can take top academic students who also have other qualities that merit them and/or will add to the diversity (and education experience) of the whole class. You could potentially argue your point on legacies, but tgey are highly qualified too. There are far more top students than spots.

They may have merit (and most people do), but they aren’t admitted on that basis. This assumes meritorious kids not in one of those categories have gone elsewhere. So why are these schools “elite” in comparison?

Of course they are admitted on merit. In addition to academic merit, there are other things that elite colleges want as well. When there are only around 1500 spits or so, the college dictates the terms they want. And it's not only a homogeneous pointy population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm.

The article:

* Legacies
* Children of faculty or donors
* URMs
* First gen
* Students from upscale private schools
* Top 1% of applicants

Other than the top 1%, with such a large group of non-meritorious admits, I can’t understand how these schools will remain “elite” in the eyes of employers. The top schools seem to want to ruin their reputations.

The categories are not mutually exclusive.

The top schools are doing fine and will continue to do so.