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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP If a kid is qualified to do well at Harvard then I have no problem with Harvard offering them admission. Once you hit the threshold mark of qualified to do well then it's basically Harvard's choice to decide what makes a good class and which of those qualified students will fulfill that vision of a good class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So what? There’s nothing in that to suggest that they get in instead of your kid. You posit a scenario that is nice for you to believe but has no connection to reality. If they want your kid they’ll take them and if they don’t it just as easily (and by the numbers much more likely) because some other kid in some other school was more interesting than the URM in your school. I understand the great white urge to scapegoat URMs but it’s just not reality.


Your kid didn’t get in because of some lax player from Connecticut or a donor kid from NYC or a double legacy from Florida. But yeah keep blaming the 20%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

There are not hundreds of thousands of top students. NMF across the country are only 15000 students. They usually have top grades and ACT/SAT scores to become a finalist along with high PSAT scores. These students have been shut out at many of the “top colleges”. Colleges take who they want based on criteria that has nothing to do with merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

There are not hundreds of thousands of top students. NMF across the country are only 15000 students. They usually have top grades and ACT/SAT scores to become a finalist along with high PSAT scores. These students have been shut out at many of the “top colleges”. Colleges take who they want based on criteria that has nothing to do with merit.

According to whom?

And I will say that, at least as a math major, my classmates who may have had high SAT math scores had atrocious social skills. You can be smart as a whip but you still have to get through job interviews, and a lot of my math classmates couldn’t get basic campus jobs. Of course there are low SAT students with terrible social skills as well, but I suspect they’re farther between, because someone who spent a lot of time socializing versus studying is likely to do poorly on the SAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

There are not hundreds of thousands of top students. NMF across the country are only 15000 students. They usually have top grades and ACT/SAT scores to become a finalist along with high PSAT scores. These students have been shut out at many of the “top colleges”. Colleges take who they want based on criteria that has nothing to do with merit.

Roughly 30,000 students get a 34 or above on the ACT each year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

There are not hundreds of thousands of top students. NMF across the country are only 15000 students. They usually have top grades and ACT/SAT scores to become a finalist along with high PSAT scores. These students have been shut out at many of the “top colleges”. Colleges take who they want based on criteria that has nothing to do with merit.

To whom much is given, much is expected. Go look at the high schools that have the most NMSFs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

There are not hundreds of thousands of top students. NMF across the country are only 15000 students. They usually have top grades and ACT/SAT scores to become a finalist along with high PSAT scores. These students have been shut out at many of the “top colleges”. Colleges take who they want based on criteria that has nothing to do with merit.

If you think NMF is an accurate measurement of a top student then you don’t understand how it’s determined. It’s just ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

There are not hundreds of thousands of top students. NMF across the country are only 15000 students. They usually have top grades and ACT/SAT scores to become a finalist along with high PSAT scores. These students have been shut out at many of the “top colleges”. Colleges take who they want based on criteria that has nothing to do with merit.

Roughly 30,000 students get a 34 or above on the ACT each year.

That is only the kids who score 34+ outright in one sitting. That doesn’t count superscores or the kids who are 1500+ on the SAT (there is overlap but probably not that much - mostly kids focus on one test oe the other).

I bet there are 100,000 kids who have a 34/1500. It is just not that big of a deal anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP If a kid is qualified to do well at Harvard then I have no problem with Harvard offering them admission. Once you hit the threshold mark of qualified to do well then it's basically Harvard's choice to decide what makes a good class and which of those qualified students will fulfill that vision of a good class.

Well, yes. Exactly. If you think that discriminating on the basis of race is a good thing, go for it. Just don’t try to deny that it’s happening.

[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.

And at our school they where white athletes who got into HYPSM so I guess that’s just another fact to add to your list of facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

There are not hundreds of thousands of top students. NMF across the country are only 15000 students. They usually have top grades and ACT/SAT scores to become a finalist along with high PSAT scores. These students have been shut out at many of the “top colleges”. Colleges take who they want based on criteria that has nothing to do with merit.

If you think NMF is an accurate measurement of a top student then you don’t understand how it’s determined. It’s just ignorant.

I assume this poster thinks race is a better indicator of a top student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP If a kid is qualified to do well at Harvard then I have no problem with Harvard offering them admission. Once you hit the threshold mark of qualified to do well then it's basically Harvard's choice to decide what makes a good class and which of those qualified students will fulfill that vision of a good class.

Well, yes. Exactly. If you think that discriminating on the basis of race is a good thing, go for it. Just don’t try to deny that it’s happening.

Equality isn’t oppression.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

There are not hundreds of thousands of top students. NMF across the country are only 15000 students. They usually have top grades and ACT/SAT scores to become a finalist along with high PSAT scores. These students have been shut out at many of the “top colleges”. Colleges take who they want based on criteria that has nothing to do with my noon very narrow definition of merit that suits my needs.

FIFY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

There are not hundreds of thousands of top students. NMF across the country are only 15000 students. They usually have top grades and ACT/SAT scores to become a finalist along with high PSAT scores. These students have been shut out at many of the “top colleges”. Colleges take who they want based on criteria that has nothing to do with merit.

But no college uses NMF to define top students. What about the students that scored 34+ on the ACT or superscored 1500+ on the SATs? Yes, there is overlap but it’s not 15000 students. If colleges only accepted scores from one sitting you would be correct but colleges don’t care how students got high scores and most elite schools consider 1400+ as academically prepared for advance college coursework/1050-1100 as college-ready (https://satsuite.collegeboard.org/k12-educators/about/understand-scores-benchmarks/benchmarks). I served on two admissions committees as a faculty member: a T10 and a public university. These are the baseline metrics that were used in addition to grades/rigor. And yes, you are correct that high stats kids do get shut out of elite institutions. But it is happening because of a combination of increased number of high stats students applying to the same schools AND institutional priorities, e.g. first gen, development, athletic priorities, URMs, dept needs more majors, impacted majors, etc. Even the upcoming Supreme Court decision has increased the shift towards prioritizing first gen students over URM students to achieve institutional goals, this is the case at my university and my colleagues at other top universities have reported the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So what? There’s nothing in that to suggest that they get in instead of your kid. You posit a scenario that is nice for you to believe but has no connection to reality. If they want your kid they’ll take them and if they don’t it just as easily (and by the numbers much more likely) because some other kid in some other school was more interesting than the URM in your school. I understand the great white urge to scapegoat URMs but it’s just not reality.


Your kid didn’t get in because of some lax player from Connecticut or a donor kid from NYC or a double legacy from Florida. But yeah keep blaming the 20%.

+1 Well said