A-/B+ Student from Big 3 - Admission chances at popular state schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really likely that an admissions office employee at UCLA or University of wisconsin will be wowed by a DC private school?

If I paid DC private tuition, I would be asking to speak with a counselor sooner.

Don’t underestimate admissions officers, even at public colleges. There is a reason they ALL segment by region. There are certainly readers very familiar with those HS, and for the ones they aren’t it is easy for them to gauge based on the school profile they receive.

They work hard and long hours to get it right. Not saying they always do, but they certainly try.

There are a lot of schools systems and private schools in the US with different levels of grade inflation. Also not all school use the same grading scale. And that is even before trying to fairly evaluate home-schooled kids who have a straight 4.0 GPA from the School of Mom&Dad. Admissions offices in competitive schools deal with this stuff all the time.

Also, in this case there is a natural feedback loop. Michigan and UCLA are not only attractive in their own right, but are great safety schools for many very high scoring students. So, if 20-30 kids apply each year from a school to Michigan, say, and they find that kids with GPA of 3.5 and above almost never accept an admission offer they can very quickly calibrate what that school's GPA means relative to their standards. Three years ago Michigan and UCLA would have been fairly safe bets for someone with a GPA of 3.4 or 3.5 from my kid's school. The bigger concern, especially with Michigan, was that they were getting a little annoyed at being used as a safety, so that kids with higher GPAs were being advised to show interest in the school by visiting etc. or risk being waitlisted. Not sure how this has played out since then.

Not exactly sure what your point is, but if you are trying to imply that adcoms can’t tell the value of HS transcripts, even from schools that aren’t “famous”, you are 100% wrong.

They also have ready data to know how the graduates of HS they have admitted previously have fared at their college. Funny how you think they use that data for yield but not for assessing an applicant’s chance of success.

They know what they are doing. The idea that they can be “tricked” by “grade inflation” is a myth.

You should try reading with more care! If you do, you will find out that I am making exactly the points that you are also making.

You should try writing with more clarity. I read your post a few times and found it self-contradictory, and that is why I started mine with "Not exactly sure what your point is". Plus you used the term "grade inflation" which is a bellwether for people making the opposite point of what you now claim you are making, and spoke of school using different "grading scales".

I'll take you at your now clarified word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really likely that an admissions office employee at UCLA or University of wisconsin will be wowed by a DC private school?

If I paid DC private tuition, I would be asking to speak with a counselor sooner.

Don’t underestimate admissions officers, even at public colleges. There is a reason they ALL segment by region. There are certainly readers very familiar with those HS, and for the ones they aren’t it is easy for them to gauge based on the school profile they receive.

They work hard and long hours to get it right. Not saying they always do, but they certainly try.

There are a lot of schools systems and private schools in the US with different levels of grade inflation. Also not all school use the same grading scale. And that is even before trying to fairly evaluate home-schooled kids who have a straight 4.0 GPA from the School of Mom&Dad. Admissions offices in competitive schools deal with this stuff all the time.

Also, in this case there is a natural feedback loop. Michigan and UCLA are not only attractive in their own right, but are great safety schools for many very high scoring students. So, if 20-30 kids apply each year from a school to Michigan, say, and they find that kids with GPA of 3.5 and above almost never accept an admission offer they can very quickly calibrate what that school's GPA means relative to their standards. Three years ago Michigan and UCLA would have been fairly safe bets for someone with a GPA of 3.4 or 3.5 from my kid's school. The bigger concern, especially with Michigan, was that they were getting a little annoyed at being used as a safety, so that kids with higher GPAs were being advised to show interest in the school by visiting etc. or risk being waitlisted. Not sure how this has played out since then.

Not exactly sure what your point is, but if you are trying to imply that adcoms can’t tell the value of HS transcripts, even from schools that aren’t “famous”, you are 100% wrong.

They also have ready data to know how the graduates of HS they have admitted previously have fared at their college. Funny how you think they use that data for yield but not for assessing an applicant’s chance of success.

They know what they are doing. The idea that they can be “tricked” by “grade inflation” is a myth.

You should try reading with more care! If you do, you will find out that I am making exactly the points that you are also making.

You should try writing with more clarity. I read your post a few times and found it self-contradictory, and that is why I started mine with "Not exactly sure what your point is". Plus you used the term "grade inflation" which is a bellwether for people making the opposite point of what you now claim you are making, and spoke of school using different "grading scales".

I'll take you at your now clarified word.

NP here with kids at a Big 3. I read the prior post and understood exactly what the poster was saying. S/he is spot on. Not sure what needed to be clarified.