Any high school teachers here who can give some frank talk about which types of students get into the top colleges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think individual teachers necessarily have the broad, big-picture view of a student that OP seems to think they do - at least not very often. They know how a kid performed in their class and what they wrote in a rec letter, but may have minimal insight into other areas of the student’s academic or extracurricular performance and interests.

Not always, of course - there are certainly cases where a teacher and student really click and the teacher becomes more of a mentor and confidante and therefore does have a lot if insight into the student beyond that teacher’s own class, but I doubt that’s the majority experience.

As a former high school teacher I can say this is mostly true. I had 120-140 students every year. There were very few students I knew well enough to know their whole profile well as in knew how they did in all their classes, how they did on standardized tests, knew what extracurriculars they did, etc. Most students I didn’t know anything about their parents/family situation, financial situation. If they asked me for a letter of recommendation then I obviously got more info but for majority of students, I knew very little if anything about their stats or their college app process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feeder school aka mostly private

lol facts say otherwise
Public’s do better overall

Private high school grads make up a disproportionately large percentage of the incoming freshmen classes at private T20 colleges.
They are a small overall % of US high school graduates - but a large percentage of incoming freshman at private colleges. Ask yourself how. And why?

This is a very obvious/easy one: Bc their parents can afford it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feeder school aka mostly private

lol facts say otherwise
Public’s do better overall

Private high school grads make up a disproportionately large percentage of the incoming freshmen classes at private T20 colleges.
They are a small overall % of US high school graduates - but a large percentage of incoming freshman at private colleges. Ask yourself how. And why?

This is a very obvious/easy one: Bc their parents can afford it.

Not necessarily, especially when they’ve often spent nearly a million dollars in private school tuition that public school families are investing or otherwise saving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been teaching AP for many, many years. Most of my students are the 4.0 unweighted GPA types. They volunteer, are varsity athletes, and they are doing all they can to look good for college. Some truly stand out, but most are very strong candidates.

And then college admissions come and the results appear random. The true stand-outs face surprising rejections and the “just” strong candidate got in instead.

Here’s what I think: students have to meet a threshold to make it into the “considered” pile at a college. But after making it into that pile, the choice itself appears random.

All the kids can really do is get themselves into the pile. Then cross fingers and hope for the best.

This is basically what Jeff Selingo’s book says - that it is that colleges need a well-rounded class, not that you need to be a well-rounded student. So, you can’t predict that, beyond ending up in the considered pile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a simple formula - rich or hooked - for everyone else it's a lottery

Hardly a lottery for unhooked applicants without the stats.

Yeah you're right - it's not a lottery. The admissions rate at Stanford this most recent cycle (24/25) was 3.6%
Is there really a marked difference between 100% not happening or 97% chance not happening???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Being sociable, friendly and engaging with classmates/teachers, a contributor in the classroom, is much more important than people realize.

Teachers talk amongst each other, "Oh you have Jimmy next year? He's a great kid."

The more community-oriented and outgoing the kid is, the likelier their reputation will smooth the way for great recommendations and other soft support.

So, basically, you’re promoting extroverted kids only? If a student is quiet by nature, they are perceived as not friendly and not contributing?

I hate it that teachers are so shallow.

[Anonymous]

Top colleges require:
1. Be foreign and willing to full-pay
2. Be connected to the current staff or a prominent person
3. Be a nationally-ranked something

My nephew who graduated with a crazy high GPA (4.5?) and very high SATs, and was a college great-but not top- left-handed baseball pitcher got into CalPoly and a couple of UCs, and the Coast Guard Academy - but no school that I would consider top. No Stanford. No Harvard. No Ivies at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a simple formula - rich or hooked - for everyone else it's a lottery

Hardly a lottery for unhooked applicants without the stats.

Yeah you're right - it's not a lottery. The admissions rate at Stanford this most recent cycle (24/25) was 3.6%
Is there really a marked difference between 100% not happening or 97% chance not happening???

You're assuming that all applicants have a 3.6 percent chance. The reality is that most applicants are close to zero, and then a smaller fraction have a better than 3.6 percent chance (but still low and it's essentially a lottery for them).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The immense majority of teachers do not have any insight into college admissions, OP. They're just like the rest of the population. US colleges are that opaque. It's not like this in any other country.

It's silly to compare to other countries if you are really just focused on getting into a small handful of colleges. Because here, anyone who wants to go to college can find a way to do so. Can everyone go to the same 5 colleges that only have 11,000 seats available when 1.2 million students are applying to colleges? No. Does that mean admissions to those schools can feel random for a high stats kid? Of course. The odds are just no in anyones favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been teaching AP for many, many years. Most of my students are the 4.0 unweighted GPA types. They volunteer, are varsity athletes, and they are doing all they can to look good for college. Some truly stand out, but most are very strong candidates.

And then college admissions come and the results appear random. The true stand-outs face surprising rejections and the “just” strong candidate got in instead.

Here’s what I think: students have to meet a threshold to make it into the “considered” pile at a college. But after making it into that pile, the choice itself appears random.

All the kids can really do is get themselves into the pile. Then cross fingers and hope for the best.

I think you are accurate all the way until your point about the threshold to be considered pile. After that, it is not random though it may look that way to the outside. The decisions are based on things like.:
- Major (classics gets in over bio; gender studies over engineering; English over CS)
- Talent/ability (National award winning squash player gets in over varsity baseball captain; neither recruited. National ranked figure skater gets on over state champion soccer player; neither recruited)
- essays (what kids reveal in essays matters a lot more than people think.) There is a right way to do essays in the wrong way to do essays. Unfortunately, most HS English teachers advise kids to do the wrong thing. It’s not about overcomplicated sentence and essay structures. The writing should be at easy to read/grasp level; varied sentences, including some very short sentences; poignant, personal, and touching on at least 3-4 of your personal values. It should also not repeat anything covered anywhere else in the application, including your major.
- LOR (an exceptional LOR can make a difference)

Look at the T10 scoring rubrics. You can see why certain kids get in once you understand the scoring.

What makes a LOR “exceptional”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think individual teachers necessarily have the broad, big-picture view of a student that OP seems to think they do - at least not very often. They know how a kid performed in their class and what they wrote in a rec letter, but may have minimal insight into other areas of the student’s academic or extracurricular performance and interests.

Not always, of course - there are certainly cases where a teacher and student really click and the teacher becomes more of a mentor and confidante and therefore does have a lot if insight into the student beyond that teacher’s own class, but I doubt that’s the majority experience.

As a former high school teacher I can say this is mostly true. I had 120-140 students every year. There were very few students I knew well enough to know their whole profile well as in knew how they did in all their classes, how they did on standardized tests, knew what extracurriculars they did, etc. Most students I didn’t know anything about their parents/family situation, financial situation. If they asked me for a letter of recommendation then I obviously got more info but for majority of students, I knew very little if anything about their stats or their college app process.

My understanding is that this is 100% fine.

Unless I understand things wrong, I thought the point of a teacher LOR is to convey first-hand experience of how the student shows up in the classroom. Are they more engaged, curious, and thoughtful in class than the average kid? (Are they exceptionally so?) Example? How do they handle tension or disagreement in classroom discussions? How motivated have they been to ask for additional help or go the extra mile on assignments? How do they interact with their peers in class (and how are they perceived/seen by their peers?) Are they a “leader” in the classroom or a standout thinker/writer etc. Examples?

Overall GPA, ECs etc. are all described elsewhere. Unless the teacher also coaches the kid in sports or advises them in a key EC (i.e. first-hand experience) why would a teacher waste words repeating that info?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At our FCPS, the kids getting into top 10 schools + ivies are overwhelmingly from these 3 categories:

ROTC with very good grades/SATs who are usually also getting appointed to one of the military academies

Underrepresented minorities with good grades/SATs This is the biggest group. Our school is almost entirely upper middle class, if that make a difference. Some are immigrant families, not from asia though.

Music students with very good grades and high SATs. Not necessarily music majors though, just good enough at an instrument or vocally to submit a very high level music supplement.

I don't recall the last time a high stat white or asian kid from our high school got into an Ivy level school without music or ROTC. Based on our school, the biggest hooks are URM, ROTC and music, all 3 with high grades and SATs.

As an FCPS teacher, I fully agree. ROTC and/or URM students are getting into top schools. I haven't seen the music hook, but maybe it's not as big at my school.

No athletes?

To play their sport? No. Each year a very small handful get recruited to play for a state flagship (like 1-2 out of a graduating class of 600+) and another 15ish go on to play at tiny schools I’ve had to google to learn where they are.

If you mean “are the kids who get into top schools athletes”, some are, but not to the level it would differentiate them from the kid who has any other hobby for 4 years. The drama kid, church volunteer kid, art kid, animal shelter volunteer, or debate kid all are pretty evenly successful (or not successful) in gaining admission to top schools.

Oh, one other one. I’ve had 2 kids in 2 years who got into the same Ivy their parent went to. Would they have gotten in anyway? Maybe. They were good, capable kids, but I suspect the fact that in one case the interviewer was dad’s old roommate in college helped!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:human being. Her interpretations of literature were stunning. So the teachers wrote her really special recs that highlighted this unique personal quality, of the "Most unique student in my entire teaching career" "rare ability" "stands out above any person I ever met" kind of thing.

You can keep writing that every year… who is vetting you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being sociable, friendly and engaging with classmates/teachers, a contributor in the classroom, is much more important than people realize.

Teachers talk amongst each other, "Oh you have Jimmy next year? He's a great kid."

The more community-oriented and outgoing the kid is, the likelier their reputation will smooth the way for great recommendations and other soft support.

So, basically, you’re promoting extroverted kids only? If a student is quiet by nature, they are perceived as not friendly and not contributing?

I hate it that teachers are so shallow.

So one teacher writes something you infer as negative, and now all teachers are shallow? Ugh.

And, just to get you off our collective backs, I have written stellar LORs for quieter kids. As have we all. Of COURSE quieter children can contribute positively to the classroom environment. I was one of those students myself.

But let’s not kid ourselves. Being friendly and sociable are good traits and they are going to be acknowledged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been teaching AP for many, many years. Most of my students are the 4.0 unweighted GPA types. They volunteer, are varsity athletes, and they are doing all they can to look good for college. Some truly stand out, but most are very strong candidates.

And then college admissions come and the results appear random. The true stand-outs face surprising rejections and the “just” strong candidate got in instead.

Here’s what I think: students have to meet a threshold to make it into the “considered” pile at a college. But after making it into that pile, the choice itself appears random.

All the kids can really do is get themselves into the pile. Then cross fingers and hope for the best.

I think you are accurate all the way until your point about the threshold to be considered pile. After that, it is not random though it may look that way to the outside. The decisions are based on things like.:
- Major (classics gets in over bio; gender studies over engineering; English over CS)
- Talent/ability (National award winning squash player gets in over varsity baseball captain; neither recruited. National ranked figure skater gets on over state champion soccer player; neither recruited)
- essays (what kids reveal in essays matters a lot more than people think.) There is a right way to do essays in the wrong way to do essays. Unfortunately, most HS English teachers advise kids to do the wrong thing. It’s not about overcomplicated sentence and essay structures. The writing should be at easy to read/grasp level; varied sentences, including some very short sentences; poignant, personal, and touching on at least 3-4 of your personal values. It should also not repeat anything covered anywhere else in the application, including your major.
- LOR (an exceptional LOR can make a difference)

Look at the T10 scoring rubrics. You can see why certain kids get in once you understand the scoring.

What makes a LOR “exceptional”?

NP:

The best LORs I’ve written have anecdotes where the kid’s uniqueness or passion shine through. A kid who does exactly what they are supposed to do, no more or less, is really hard to write anything special about.

I’ve been asked to write 6 so far for next fall. 5 will be fine, positive letters—the kid “works hard, asks good questions, is a strong student, very reliable.” Kind, but bland.

The 6th will be stellar, because the kid has shown me all year they are stellar.
—Proactively reached out to me before school started to tell me they’d miss the first week due to an opportunity to volunteer on the presidential campaign, could they pick up the first week’s assignments during open house?
—When the software we were using for homework crashed, kid took it upon themself to borrow the textbook from the library and do the questions by hand, while classmates used it as an opportunity to have no hw for a night.
—When AP exam time was coming, kid organized weekly study sessions for classmates (started as a few friends, expanded to 10 kids as others kept asking to join) and prepared materials to work through with their peers.
—Asked good questions, but then researched and applied those concepts to questions they were curious about beyond material in the class. Came and shared with me excitedly during lunch one day how they had wondered whether about xyz, and showed me their mathematical process to collect random data, build a confidence interval, and run a hypothesis test to prove a theory. For funsies.

I could write 5 pages instead of 5 paragraphs. Because that kid exudes passion and interest in the world around them.

I’ve also written phenomenal LORs for the quiet shy kid who didn’t do a million ECs but overcame a LOT to participate in class discussions and tackle school—but that’s because the child opened up to me about life beyond the classroom before school every day.

If I don’t know your kid well, the letter will be bland no matter how wonderful they are in your eyes. Encourage your kid to form relationships and chat about life, interests, current events when teachers are open to it.