All these smart kids are getting rejected across the board

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that there are so many "top" students with great grades, APs, DEs, extra curriculars... they can't all go to the "top" colleges. It's a lottery. But the parents feel like the kids "deserve" a spot at these schools and the kids end up not applying to non-lottery matches. It doesn't help that parents in this area are ridiculously biased against really good schools that aren't in the 1% of good schools. Comments like, "never heard of it" and stuff like that. It's so harmful.

So if all those "top" students are going to "second-tier" schools, then they aren't really second-tier, are they?

What would be considered second tier?

My 45 year old self would consider Boston University second tier and Northeastern third tier. Now it seems anything in the top 100 is top tier.

Yeah, those are both hard to get into now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that there are so many "top" students with great grades, APs, DEs, extra curriculars... they can't all go to the "top" colleges. It's a lottery. But the parents feel like the kids "deserve" a spot at these schools and the kids end up not applying to non-lottery matches. It doesn't help that parents in this area are ridiculously biased against really good schools that aren't in the 1% of good schools. Comments like, "never heard of it" and stuff like that. It's so harmful.

It is and we regret moving here before he graduated. Toxic competition and status-seeking.

We moved to McLean and wonder if we made the right decision. There is just so much competition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am hearing about these kids who have near perfect grades, super high SAT scores and strong extracurricular activities and they are getting rejected across the board. The parents are well educated professionals. The kids are getting rejected from their parents’ alma maters.

I feel like this same kids would be ivy bound 20-30 years ago.

This is not happening. Stop the fear mongering.

This is 100% happening. Where have you been?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But, because DC is not URM, and we are not low income, that's a strike against DC.

This often repeated line just isn't true. Our private admissions counselor said only first gen kids are getting a bump (in addition to recruited athletes, major donors, geographic diversity etc). There are just so many variable now that you really can't predict what will help or hurt your kid. An Asian male applying to CS or Engineering with have tough competition from other Asian males, but that same kid might have an advantage if he wants to be a nurse or a teacher.

white people are going to blame URMs no matter what you say.

I think because there are "white people" (ie: not brown, not yellow) who were, just one or two generations ago, who were first generation, and they got nothing.

Well, yeah. White people benefited MASSIVELY from New Deal policies aimed at creating a sustaining a white middle class, and those benefits were not equally distributed or even accessible to BIPOC.

Having a great-grandparent who didn't attend college is not a major disadvantage the way not having anyone in your family ever attend college is. As a (white) first generation college student, I faced some really specific challenges that my own kids will never have to face. It's fine with me that they don't get a bump up as a result, because their entire lives have been easier because I was able to access a college education.

You are fine with it. I am not. I was a true "first gen" student. I got nothing. Worked multiple jobs (and have worked since I was 14). I received zero parent/grandparent support. It was hard. Really hard. There were times i had, quite literally, hundreds of dollars as my savings. And that was after grad school and working full time. I sacrificed a lot of earning potential b/c of the things I had to do to get by.

Fast forward, my kid is dinged b/c of my hard work? We do well now but by no means are rich such that we can just bankroll college, at full cost, if DC even gets in. DC is just another UMC kid who gets painted as "privileged." It's bullsh--.

If colleges want to "shape" their class to reflect whatever their priorities are- fine. Just say it up front. They are not transparent. Not fair, either, imo (and I direct that to all sorts of classes including legacies). The whole process is effed up, imo, and to the advantages of the schools only.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am hearing about these kids who have near perfect grades, super high SAT scores and strong extracurricular activities and they are getting rejected across the board. The parents are well educated professionals. The kids are getting rejected from their parents’ alma maters.

I feel like this same kids would be ivy bound 20-30 years ago.

There are lots of others who are getting accepted for other reasons then academic merit. Colleges need athletes, donors, powerful connections, racial diversity, financial diversity, major diversity, geographical variety etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that there are so many "top" students with great grades, APs, DEs, extra curriculars... they can't all go to the "top" colleges. It's a lottery. But the parents feel like the kids "deserve" a spot at these schools and the kids end up not applying to non-lottery matches. It doesn't help that parents in this area are ridiculously biased against really good schools that aren't in the 1% of good schools. Comments like, "never heard of it" and stuff like that. It's so harmful.

So if all those "top" students are going to "second-tier" schools, then they aren't really second-tier, are they?

THat's my point. They're great schools. Your kid can get an excellent education at so many colleges and universities. It's toxicity from the parents that is causing this crisis.

[Anonymous]

Same applicant has better chance if from a private school or a magnet than from a big public school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am hearing about these kids who have near perfect grades, super high SAT scores and strong extracurricular activities and they are getting rejected across the board. The parents are well educated professionals. The kids are getting rejected from their parents’ alma maters.

I feel like this same kids would be ivy bound 20-30 years ago.

This is not happening. Stop the fear mongering.

This is 100% happening. Where have you been?

rejected across the board? Really? did your kid apply to Harvard and nowhere else?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that there are so many "top" students with great grades, APs, DEs, extra curriculars... they can't all go to the "top" colleges. It's a lottery. But the parents feel like the kids "deserve" a spot at these schools and the kids end up not applying to non-lottery matches. It doesn't help that parents in this area are ridiculously biased against really good schools that aren't in the 1% of good schools. Comments like, "never heard of it" and stuff like that. It's so harmful.

So if all those "top" students are going to "second-tier" schools, then they aren't really second-tier, are they?

THat's my point. They're great schools. Your kid can get an excellent education at so many colleges and universities. It's toxicity from the parents that is causing this crisis.

They go to places who value academics more, e.g. UC Berkeley, CalTech, Rice, CMU and Hopkins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A typical scenario:
- I have 4.5 GPAs and 10 AP courses:  there are ten thousands Asian kids with the same stat, you are not special,
- I have 1550+ on the SAT:  there are ten thousands Asian kids with the same stat, you are not special
- I play level 10 piano and first chair in violin:  there are thousands Asian kidsthat you do, you are not special
- I play high school sport and am a member of the varsity team:  there are thousands Asian kids that do what you do, you are not special
- I volunteer after school:  there are thousands Asian kids that do what you do, you are not special

- I am a rapper, tiktok and a youtube star with millions of followers:  Now you're different from other Asian kids.    Ivies will admit you.

so the Asians that made up 28% of this year's class at Harvard are all in your last bucket?

Without some of the 'guard rails' from the Ivies the full entering classes would be Asian. That's been fact for about 15 years. Those schools just let legacies, etc think they were on par. You know to keep that harmony.

Another bitter Asian parent heard from.

Nope. I'm Black.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am hearing about these kids who have near perfect grades, super high SAT scores and strong extracurricular activities and they are getting rejected across the board. The parents are well educated professionals. The kids are getting rejected from their parents’ alma maters.

I feel like this same kids would be ivy bound 20-30 years ago.

This is not happening. Stop the fear mongering.

This is 100% happening. Where have you been?

rejected across the board? Really? did your kid apply to Harvard and nowhere else?

This^. They only get rejected from Ivy, Stanford, MIT but are still getting in at other elites and state flagships, not attending community college or commuter state satellite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that there are so many "top" students with great grades, APs, DEs, extra curriculars... they can't all go to the "top" colleges. It's a lottery. But the parents feel like the kids "deserve" a spot at these schools and the kids end up not applying to non-lottery matches. It doesn't help that parents in this area are ridiculously biased against really good schools that aren't in the 1% of good schools. Comments like, "never heard of it" and stuff like that. It's so harmful.

So if all those "top" students are going to "second-tier" schools, then they aren't really second-tier, are they?

THat's my point. They're great schools. Your kid can get an excellent education at so many colleges and universities. It's toxicity from the parents that is causing this crisis.

They go to places who value academics more, e.g. UC Berkeley, CalTech, Rice, CMU and Hopkins.

Those schools were top tier 30 years ago and still are. Those are exactly the schools everyone wants to attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that there are so many "top" students with great grades, APs, DEs, extra curriculars... they can't all go to the "top" colleges. It's a lottery. But the parents feel like the kids "deserve" a spot at these schools and the kids end up not applying to non-lottery matches. It doesn't help that parents in this area are ridiculously biased against really good schools that aren't in the 1% of good schools. Comments like, "never heard of it" and stuff like that. It's so harmful.

So if all those "top" students are going to "second-tier" schools, then they aren't really second-tier, are they?

What would be considered second tier?

My 45 year old self would consider Boston University second tier and Northeastern third tier. Now it seems anything in the top 100 is top tier.

Yeah, those are both hard to get into now.

No top student dreams to attend BU or NEU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that there are so many "top" students with great grades, APs, DEs, extra curriculars... they can't all go to the "top" colleges. It's a lottery. But the parents feel like the kids "deserve" a spot at these schools and the kids end up not applying to non-lottery matches. It doesn't help that parents in this area are ridiculously biased against really good schools that aren't in the 1% of good schools. Comments like, "never heard of it" and stuff like that. It's so harmful.

So if all those "top" students are going to "second-tier" schools, then they aren't really second-tier, are they?

What would be considered second tier?

My 45 year old self would consider Boston University second tier and Northeastern third tier. Now it seems anything in the top 100 is top tier.

Yeah, those are both hard to get into now.

No top student dreams to attend BU or NEU.

I went to BU for graduate school. I wasn't impressed at all. Most of these schools are nothing special and it really just depends on the professors you get. Most jobs know don't care except a select few where you go to school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents of seniors at our school are using words like bloodbath to describe the seniors acceptances. Kids who worked hard and did everything they were supposed to are not getting in to top 20-50 schools. Too many white, UMC families who saved and can pay full price are not getting in whereas 10 years ago they would have. It's partly due to test-optional and partly due to more diversity (socio-economic and racial) being sought after at top schools.

No, it’s due to everyone “shooting their shot” at the same colleges. Stop blaming testing and diversity. Colleges have been looking for diverse classes for decades. It’s not new.

What’s new is clear. The applications are exploding at top schools and falling at the rest. The reason is probably layered, from subtle things like adults belittling good options that aren’t impressive (my gosh, even JMU gets ripped here) to grade inflation making parents think their middle of the pack student is at the top of the class…again there are many reasons.

Stop blaming stupid stuff that makes you made and use reason.

I'll start by saying I don't have a problem with what's going on currently in admissions.

I agree with you that everyone is too focuses on the same set of colleges. BUT, I do think that with COVID, test optional, and recent cultural changes that some schools have truly expanded their horizons on how they evaluate candidates. I think in the past that they were more skewed towards test scores aligning with grades and adding in some ECs. Now without test scores, I think they are genuinely looking at other parts of the application in a new way.. It could also be that they are simply recognizing that they have so many applicants who were "qualified" that they should really stop just skewing admissions to those with the highest GPA/test stats and put increased thought into what each applicant might bring to campus (they were doing this before but I think with a smaller pool of high stats kids).

I personally think this is a good thing and will create all kinds of diversity (including the type of white UMC kids they accept). It also means the tip top gpa/test stat kids may not have the same advantages they had before and definitely need to cast a wider net.

But to say that test optional and diversity didn't change anything isn't quite right.