Venting about multiple acceptances (warning: not a pretty sight)

[Anonymous]

PP here. I just wanted to make clear that I am not criticizing or making one of those "oh you're too self-absorbed" comments I sometimes see on these boards. I can totally understand why all of us focus so much on these issues and why we take this stuff so personally. Everyone who takes the time to post here -- even the ones I really disagree with -- clearly loves her DC and is not too self-absorbed. I just wonder if we all are too self-critical (and not self-confident) by thinking that schools are rejecting DC for some perceived flaw in our own character.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Could it be that the schools really aren't evaluating *us* at all? Perhaps they don't care much at all about our professions, income, zip code, etc (except at the margins for billionaires and senators), and they're really just evaluating our children after all.

Bingo. Because it's a buyer's market (the 'buying' being the granting of admissions), schools don't have to spend a lot of time "weighing" parents' schwack. For those of you feeling judged -- don't worry, they're not spending all that much time thinking about you -- be it good or bad.

With so many smart, successful parents who can afford the tuition, and so many bright, affable kids, who can do the work, the top schools have their pick -- and can sort of "cast" the class (as one would a play), mixing and matching as they go.

All you can do is throw your hat in the ring and see what happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Could it be that the schools really aren't evaluating *us* at all? Perhaps they don't care much at all about our professions, income, zip code, etc (except at the margins for billionaires and senators), and they're really just evaluating our children after all.

Bingo. Because it's a buyer's market (the 'buying' being the granting of admissions), schools don't have to spend a lot of time "weighing" parents' schwack. For those of you feeling judged -- don't worry, they're not spending all that much time thinking about you -- be it good or bad.

With so many smart, successful parents who can afford the tuition, and so many bright, affable kids, who can do the work, the top schools have their pick -- and can sort of "cast" the class (as one would a play), mixing and matching as they go.

All you can do is throw your hat in the ring and see what happens.

How refreshing. I have always beleived that this is how the process works, and after the few tours were I noticed how the composition of the classes seemed so well "planned" I idea had been reenforced. Just like a weighted lottery, some are lucky, some are not.

[Anonymous]

It would be a lot easier to accept that if there was not someone with first-hand knowledge of the admissions process telling us that they do look at the parents - at least at the lower grades. Whether people think this person is full of it or not is a separate question.

[Anonymous]

Oh, you're back again... the "I'm telling you, it's just not fair!" person. Keep grinding that axe.

And keep placing so much stock on what you have "been told" on an anonymous message board -- "Well, sorry, but we have been told they DO look at parents by Former Admissions Directors."

Yes, silly, they do look at parents, but what they find is that they're mostly interchangable: smart, successful, solvent -- so they move on to the kids.

Also -- did you know the PP is the Queen of England?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh, you're back again... the "I'm telling you, it's just not fair!" person. Keep grinding that axe.

And keep placing so much stock on what you have "been told" on an anonymous message board -- "Well, sorry, but we have been told they DO look at parents by Former Admissions Directors."

Yes, silly, they do look at parents, but what they find is that they're mostly interchangable: smart, successful, solvent -- so they move on to the kids.

Also -- did you know the PP is the Queen of England?

Yes, but HER children got in to their school because of their mother's connections. It's really not fair to the rest of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh, you're back again... the "I'm telling you, it's just not fair!" person. Keep grinding that axe.

And keep placing so much stock on what you have "been told" on an anonymous message board -- "Well, sorry, but we have been told they DO look at parents by Former Admissions Directors."

Yes, silly, they do look at parents, but what they find is that they're mostly interchangable: smart, successful, solvent -- so they move on to the kids.

Also -- did you know the PP is the Queen of England?

Wow the quality of the snark on these boards is just so high that I have to keep coming back to read it. (Irony alert.)

I think you accidentally proved PP's point. The parents are indeed mostly interchangable, especially the lawyers and government workers. Which is precisely why the political appointees, journalists, and artists stand out, and their kids get in. Unless you are seriously insisting that a school can make an accurate assessment about a 3- or 4-year-old -- that's the REAL silliness, IMHO.

Honestly, there's a handfull or less of moms on this board who keep coming back to insist that the playing field is level. It's not. And dismissing the posts of former admissions people and school staff won't make it true. And good grief, why should we believe your anonymous posts instead???

It's pretty clear that the schools divide incoming classes into buckets of diversity, of rich, of well-connected, and of normal, with each bucket of some target size. So yes, the normal kids do have a chance, but guess what, there are tons more normal kids applying for this smallish bucket. So if you're normal, your chances are much worse.

Why, may I ask, are you such a craven apologist for these schools? Coming back here repeatedly (yes, one of these defenders often uses the word "silly", it must be you) to insist that everybody is equal before the admissions committee is doing a huge disservice to parents who are applying this year. You are simply spreading misinformation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
...
Why, may I ask, are you such a craven apologist for these schools? Coming back here repeatedly (yes, one of these defenders often uses the word "silly", it must be you) to insist that everybody is equal before the admissions committee is doing a huge disservice to parents who are applying this year. You are simply spreading misinformation.

Isn't it obvious? She's an admissions director herself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh, you're back again... the "I'm telling you, it's just not fair!" person. Keep grinding that axe.

And keep placing so much stock on what you have "been told" on an anonymous message board -- "Well, sorry, but we have been told they DO look at parents by Former Admissions Directors."

Yes, silly, they do look at parents, but what they find is that they're mostly interchangable: smart, successful, solvent -- so they move on to the kids.

Also -- did you know the PP is the Queen of England?

Wow the quality of the snark on these boards is just so high that I have to keep coming back to read it. (Irony alert.)

I think you accidentally proved PP's point. The parents are indeed mostly interchangable, especially the lawyers and government workers. Which is precisely why the political appointees, journalists, and artists stand out, and their kids get in. Unless you are seriously insisting that a school can make an accurate assessment about a 3- or 4-year-old -- that's the REAL silliness, IMHO.

Honestly, there's a handfull or less of moms on this board who keep coming back to insist that the playing field is level. It's not. And dismissing the posts of former admissions people and school staff won't make it true. And good grief, why should we believe your anonymous posts instead???

It's pretty clear that the schools divide incoming classes into buckets of diversity, of rich, of well-connected, and of normal, with each bucket of some target size. So yes, the normal kids do have a chance, but guess what, there are tons more normal kids applying for this smallish bucket. So if you're normal, your chances are much worse.

Why, may I ask, are you such a craven apologist for these schools? Coming back here repeatedly (yes, one of these defenders often uses the word "silly", it must be you) to insist that everybody is equal before the admissions committee is doing a huge disservice to parents who are applying this year. You are simply spreading misinformation.

How is it a "huge disservice"? I suspect people already know these schools are incredibly difficult to get into, even if you feel like you've got some kind of "in," (whatever it may be) and still more so if you do not. If that's your big insight, it's a pretty banal one.

[Anonymous]

PP, would you remind responding to the points about how the admissions offices pick kids? Because they refute your earlier points.

Calling somebody "banal" isn't really an answer, in fact it's sort of ... banal.

C'mon, let's have some facts or stats from you, at least something in the nature of an actual response. You come on here all the time with your Pollyanna "it's all a level playing field" and never offer anything to back this up.

[Anonymous]

OK, asking for stats was a little tough.

But really, do you have any proof AT ALL for your contention that the playing field is truly level?

I mean, other than "this is what I think" and "those posters from admissions offers are wrong, you should trust me instead".

Otherwise you are indeed doing people a disservice by posting that it's all about the kid and not about the family, as you did in your 20:23 post.

And mocking people (Queen of England, axe to grind -- I'm quoting you here) because they don't agree with your unprovable point -- well, this isn't really a disservice. It's a really cheap negotiating tactic that people use when they don't have any logic on their side.

[Anonymous]

Hello, anybody out there?

No, I see that instead you've started a thread on age and admissions. Because lame humor and mean sarcasm seem to be your only tools in this debate.

[Anonymous]

OK, @17:00 checking back again. Sorry to have started such a fight between you two (20:23 & 11:33)! I think you two should quit pretending and just admit that you really like one another. I feel like I am watching a Meg Ryan movie (Harry Met Sally, You've Got Mail, French Kiss) where the opposites fight all movie but finally realize they love each other in the end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And mocking people (Queen of England, axe to grind -- I'm quoting you here) because they don't agree with your unprovable point -- well, this isn't really a disservice. It's a really cheap negotiating tactic that people use when they don't have any logic on their side.

ITA.

[Anonymous]

What does "ITA" mean?