What colleges are the rest of TJ students (not in the top 20%) going?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

Admissions officers were specifically downgrading the personality scores of Asian applicants. It wasn't the people who interviewed them that gave the low scores, it was the admissions office.
The colleges could do a race blind admissions, if they really want to claim that they are not discriminating against Asians.

Citation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

Admissions officers were specifically downgrading the personality scores of Asian applicants. It wasn't the people who interviewed them that gave the low scores, it was the admissions office.
The colleges could do a race blind admissions, if they really want to claim that they are not discriminating against Asians.

Citation?

Sounds like delusional paranoia. Look even if they did a race-blind selection process like TJ it wouldn't stop some people from imagining bias.

[Anonymous]

It seems to be really hard for certain segments of the population to understand that the very aspect of parenting in which they take so much pride is the same thing that makes their kids so much less attractive in elite admissions processes.

And it's not because there's anything wrong with that approach to parenting... it just tends to create too many kids who are indistinguishable on paper because they all seem to have the same idea about how to get into an elite school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

Admissions officers were specifically downgrading the personality scores of Asian applicants. It wasn't the people who interviewed them that gave the low scores, it was the admissions office.
The colleges could do a race blind admissions, if they really want to claim that they are not discriminating against Asians.

Citation?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollment-applicants.html

https://thehill.com/opinion/education/3704542-harvards-cult-of-personality/

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/06/15/politics/harvard-admissions-asian-american/index.html

[Anonymous]

https://issuu.com/tjtoday/docs/senior_issue_2022_combined

I see people referencing large numbers going to CMU (12) Michigan (11), UIUC (11) and Purdue (10) but what about Maryland (21)! I'm aware of UMD's strength in CS and engineering. That makes VT (7) even more puzzling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

Admissions officers were specifically downgrading the personality scores of Asian applicants. It wasn't the people who interviewed them that gave the low scores, it was the admissions office.
The colleges could do a race blind admissions, if they really want to claim that they are not discriminating against Asians.

Citation?

Sounds like delusional paranoia. Look even if they did a race-blind selection process like TJ it wouldn't stop some people from imagining bias.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://issuu.com/tjtoday/docs/senior_issue_2022_combined

I see people referencing large numbers going to CMU (12) Michigan (11), UIUC (11) and Purdue (10) but what about Maryland (21)! I'm aware of UMD's strength in CS and engineering. That makes VT (7) even more puzzling.

VT is in state but lacks MD strength in CS or engineering. Quite frankly UVA or GMU are stronger at CS than VT and that's not saying much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://issuu.com/tjtoday/docs/senior_issue_2022_combined

I see people referencing large numbers going to CMU (12) Michigan (11), UIUC (11) and Purdue (10) but what about Maryland (21)! I'm aware of UMD's strength in CS and engineering. That makes VT (7) even more puzzling.

VT is in state but lacks MD strength in CS or engineering. Quite frankly UVA or GMU are stronger at CS than VT and that's not saying much.

Lots of opinions and no facts. That's just what the world needs these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems to be really hard for certain segments of the population to understand that the very aspect of parenting in which they take so much pride is the same thing that makes their kids so much less attractive in elite admissions processes.

And it's not because there's anything wrong with that approach to parenting... it just tends to create too many kids who are indistinguishable on paper because they all seem to have the same idea about how to get into an elite school.

+10000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://issuu.com/tjtoday/docs/senior_issue_2022_combined

I see people referencing large numbers going to CMU (12) Michigan (11), UIUC (11) and Purdue (10) but what about Maryland (21)! I'm aware of UMD's strength in CS and engineering. That makes VT (7) even more puzzling.

That’s from last year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://issuu.com/tjtoday/docs/senior_issue_2022_combined

I see people referencing large numbers going to CMU (12) Michigan (11), UIUC (11) and Purdue (10) but what about Maryland (21)! I'm aware of UMD's strength in CS and engineering. That makes VT (7) even more puzzling.

VT is in state but lacks MD strength in CS or engineering. Quite frankly UVA or GMU are stronger at CS than VT and that's not saying much.

Depends on the ranking site, CS at VT is stronger than at UVA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://issuu.com/tjtoday/docs/senior_issue_2022_combined

I see people referencing large numbers going to CMU (12) Michigan (11), UIUC (11) and Purdue (10) but what about Maryland (21)! I'm aware of UMD's strength in CS and engineering. That makes VT (7) even more puzzling.

That’s from last year

Yes it is

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

What? That's so racist. Asian students are not the one dimensional prep robots that you seem to think. If you look at any elite musical ensembles, they're dominated by Asian students. Certain sports have a decent number of Asian participants. If Asian students had applications otherwise lacking in heft, elite colleges wouldn't need to create a 'personality' score and ding them on that to deny admissions.

PP. My statement did not come from any sort of racial animus, but from experience in application evaluation.

Your point about "any elite musical ensembles" is false. It is true only with respect to orchestras. Bands and choirs do not generally have high representation of Asian students. Furthermore, those orchestras overwhelmingly are dominated by East and Southeast Asian students, rather than South Asian. It is a matter of some note in college admissions circles that participation in orchestra is typical of East Asian applicants and is not generally a separator except in cases of national-level participation.

Certain sports do indeed have a decent number of Asian participants. For the most part, those are sports which are individual in nature - tennis, table tennis, and badminton are those most frequently observed. With the exception of recruitable athletes, participation in individual sports is not looked on as kindly in the admissions process as participation in team sports, for reasons that should be fairly obvious. If they're not, I'm happy to explain.

The students who are admitted to elite schools receive that honor because it is in the best interest of the school that they receive it. It's not the job of the admissions team to find "the best students" and admit them to the school - it's to admit the group of students as a collective who are most likely to raise the profile of the school - to inspire greater application numbers and greater levels of private investment.

Parents who wish to augment their child's chances at admission to elite colleges and universities would do well to understand that and significantly adjust their approaches to their children's education.

Tough pill to swallow but pp is absolutely spot on.

And none of it will likely be legally defensible when the Supreme Court rulings on Harvard and UNC are issued.

No ruling by the Supreme Court will effect what was stated above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

Admissions officers were specifically downgrading the personality scores of Asian applicants. It wasn't the people who interviewed them that gave the low scores, it was the admissions office.
The colleges could do a race blind admissions, if they really want to claim that they are not discriminating against Asians.

Citation?

Sounds like delusional paranoia. Look even if they did a race-blind selection process like TJ it wouldn't stop some people from imagining bias.

+100

You didn't notice the provided citations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

Admissions officers were specifically downgrading the personality scores of Asian applicants. It wasn't the people who interviewed them that gave the low scores, it was the admissions office.
The colleges could do a race blind admissions, if they really want to claim that they are not discriminating against Asians.

Citation?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollment-applicants.html

https://thehill.com/opinion/education/3704542-harvards-cult-of-personality/

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/06/15/politics/harvard-admissions-asian-american/index.html

Okay - what you cited here with these articles was that Asian-American students scored lower in "personality" scoring than other applicants.

Your statement implies that admissions officers were doing something intentional to grade these students lower from a personality perspective, rather than accepting the notion that they might simply score lower in these areas because their upbringing causes them to perform poorly on assessments of personality.

Once upon a time, I worked with students on their college interviewing skills. While not the case 100% of the time (more like, say, 95%), I usually had to spend significant time with Asian students on the way they carried themselves during the interviews. They were convinced in most cases that the job was to find ways to wedge all of their accomplishments into conversations, and their answers (at least when we started) were all rehearsed to the point of near deadpan.

They're not scoring low on personality because of some vast conspiracy - they're scoring low because what they offer in terms of personality, for better or for worse, is not what colleges are looking for.

Always remember this about college - it's a business. Colleges are looking for students who either a) are likely to donate directly to the university or b) are likely to inspire others to do so.