Where are the top unhooked kids at your Big3 going this year (not legacy, URM or sports recruit).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Athletes from these schools really don't have much of a "hook" getting into the "top" schools. Going through the process now with my kid. Highy desired by coaches almost universally, but can't get past the pre-reads because they're around the 25th percentile for the very academic schools. Middle of the pack "big 3" student and athletics not the hook everyone thinks it is.

Yeah, I don't think people understand that for the schools everyone on this Board worries about, you still need really strong academics to get into the top D3 schools, and to get into an Ivy, you need both the academics and to be a good enough athlete to compete at the D1 level. Everyone acts like that's nothing. I don't get it. When DC graduated a Big3 several years ago two classmates were recruited to play a sport at top Ivies. They were really strong athletes, who had worked really hard at their sports, but also had always taken the hardest classes and had high GPAs. It was not as if they just wandered in and said "here I am."

I don’t think you understand the amount of parental time and resources a kid needs to have access to in order to be recruitable for most d1, d2 (often forgotten!), and d3 sports. Additionally, a lot of the sports that you can get recruited for garner no fanfare whatsoever.

Okay cool. What does that have to do with the misperception that athletes going to high academic schools have a "hook" and are less qualified academically? I'll answer that: nothing.

I’d like to abolish athletic preference in admissions, especially for sports that don’t generate revenue.

Of course you would! You would like for elite colleges to focus exclusively on children just like your own, just like every other parent who thinks it is unfair that kids they deem inferior were accepted to schools that rejected those parents’ children.

Not at all. I would like admissions to also focus on children that couldn’t access club swimming or travel soccer.

Or sailing, fencing, golf, squash, water polo, riding, etc. The athletic preference is biased toward helping more affluent kids gain admission.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am an HYPS alum who does a lot of interviewing. What the OP seems to have missed is that it is incumbent upon applicants to convince these universities that they have the passion, leadership potential, and abilities to change the world in some way. That is what they are solving for. The admissions process is not a quantitive ranking based on test scores and gpa. Harvard could fill its class several times over with students who scored 1500+ on the SATs but they choose to take other factors into consideration because they have a long and successful track record of identifying who is going to be a change maker in the world and that is what they solve for.

That said, your child seems to have the ability to attend a great university, receive top grades, and continue on to the grad school or industry of their choice. Things seem pretty good.

THIS. Going to a "great" but not top ten college/university is what matters. Fit is important too in terms of location, size desired, major, minor, etc options for involvement that match *sincere* interests. They will do their best at a college where they feel fulfilled and involved. Then they will be more likely to get the grades, research opps, mentors, etc that allow them to go on to professions they want. You have to take the LONG view. Almost all the adults I know who went to Harvard Law (I am not a lawyer so it is almost odd that I know at least five people personally off the top of my head), none of them went to an Ivy like school for undergrad(think more in the lines of top 50 to top 30). They all have had, and continue to have, fantastic careers and are balanced, well adjusted seeming people. A slow and steady climb in one's youth and into your twenties can have a longer lasting and more impactful outcome in many cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am an HYPS alum who does a lot of interviewing. What the OP seems to have missed is that it is incumbent upon applicants to convince these universities that they have the passion, leadership potential, and abilities to change the world in some way. That is what they are solving for. The admissions process is not a quantitive ranking based on test scores and gpa. Harvard could fill its class several times over with students who scored 1500+ on the SATs but they choose to take other factors into consideration because they have a long and successful track record of identifying who is going to be a change maker in the world and that is what they solve for.

That said, your child seems to have the ability to attend a great university, receive top grades, and continue on to the grad school or industry of their choice. Things seem pretty good.

they want LEADERS. say and do whatever to show that.

No offense but I’m not sure they are looking for changemakers. Some of the kids I know who got in are nice kids but most decidedly NOT change-makers. In fact They appear to be more let’s preserve the status quo. I want to go to college and then law or business school and make a lot of money. (Not exaggerating. This is what some of the kids I know say they want to do.).

Wow, what school do your kids go to around here? How practical.

My kids schools tout writing comics and being a comedian as cool careers. They don’t know anything about economics or medical disciplines or types of law besides attacking policy and rights.

[Anonymous]

Awful how this children are treated like commodities when it comes to college acceptances. This thread epitomizes the problem, even the fact that kids are labeled as “unhooked” in the subject line. Gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So where do the unhooked kids from Maret end up attending?

Places like Rochester, Wash U, BU, Tulane etc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:21:16, it seems a little pretentious to suggest that HYP know how to identify the ruling class when it is well established that a significant portion of the class is dedicated to identifying a backup linebacker or a right fielder.

It seems pretentious to suggest that the "backup linebacker" or "right fielder" might not also be a future leader/change maker.

Agree. I am the HYPS alum from above and the recruited (starting) linebacker I dated in college is now a leading neurosurgeon. The assumptions people make in here - that students with “hooks” (gross term) are inherently less accomplished or promising than those without, is false.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Athletes from these schools really don't have much of a "hook" getting into the "top" schools. Going through the process now with my kid. Highy desired by coaches almost universally, but can't get past the pre-reads because they're around the 25th percentile for the very academic schools. Middle of the pack "big 3" student and athletics not the hook everyone thinks it is.

Yeah, I don't think people understand that for the schools everyone on this Board worries about, you still need really strong academics to get into the top D3 schools, and to get into an Ivy, you need both the academics and to be a good enough athlete to compete at the D1 level. Everyone acts like that's nothing. I don't get it. When DC graduated a Big3 several years ago two classmates were recruited to play a sport at top Ivies. They were really strong athletes, who had worked really hard at their sports, but also had always taken the hardest classes and had high GPAs. It was not as if they just wandered in and said "here I am."

I don’t think you understand the amount of parental time and resources a kid needs to have access to in order to be recruitable for most d1, d2 (often forgotten!), and d3 sports. Additionally, a lot of the sports that you can get recruited for garner no fanfare whatsoever.

Okay cool. What does that have to do with the misperception that athletes going to high academic schools have a "hook" and are less qualified academically? I'll answer that: nothing.

I’d like to abolish athletic preference in admissions, especially for sports that don’t generate revenue.

Of course you would! You would like for elite colleges to focus exclusively on children just like your own, just like every other parent who thinks it is unfair that kids they deem inferior were accepted to schools that rejected those parents’ children.

Not at all. I would like admissions to also focus on children that couldn’t access club swimming or travel soccer.

Or sailing, fencing, golf, squash, water polo, riding, etc. The athletic preference is biased toward helping more affluent kids gain admission.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Athletes from these schools really don't have much of a "hook" getting into the "top" schools. Going through the process now with my kid. Highy desired by coaches almost universally, but can't get past the pre-reads because they're around the 25th percentile for the very academic schools. Middle of the pack "big 3" student and athletics not the hook everyone thinks it is.

Yeah, I don't think people understand that for the schools everyone on this Board worries about, you still need really strong academics to get into the top D3 schools, and to get into an Ivy, you need both the academics and to be a good enough athlete to compete at the D1 level. Everyone acts like that's nothing. I don't get it. When DC graduated a Big3 several years ago two classmates were recruited to play a sport at top Ivies. They were really strong athletes, who had worked really hard at their sports, but also had always taken the hardest classes and had high GPAs. It was not as if they just wandered in and said "here I am."

I don’t think you understand the amount of parental time and resources a kid needs to have access to in order to be recruitable for most d1, d2 (often forgotten!), and d3 sports. Additionally, a lot of the sports that you can get recruited for garner no fanfare whatsoever.

Okay cool. What does that have to do with the misperception that athletes going to high academic schools have a "hook" and are less qualified academically? I'll answer that: nothing.

I’d like to abolish athletic preference in admissions, especially for sports that don’t generate revenue.

Of course you would! You would like for elite colleges to focus exclusively on children just like your own, just like every other parent who thinks it is unfair that kids they deem inferior were accepted to schools that rejected those parents’ children.

Not at all. I would like admissions to also focus on children that couldn’t access club swimming or travel soccer.

Or sailing, fencing, golf, squash, water polo, riding, etc. The athletic preference is biased toward helping more affluent kids gain admission.

+1

In terms of sheer numbers, the recruits associated with these teams are tiny. Sailing and riding are not varsity sports and thus can’t pull kids in. Fencing and golf maybe recruit like two kids per year. The rowers I know from these schools tend to be affluent, but also tend to be among the most driven and academically successful students. Hockey, football, bball pull in a lot of kids and tend to be less affluent. Lax is probably the best example of giving a leg up to affluent kids. They all go on to be investment bankers and probably donate a lot/ come to all the reunions so I guess the schools like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Athletes from these schools really don't have much of a "hook" getting into the "top" schools. Going through the process now with my kid. Highy desired by coaches almost universally, but can't get past the pre-reads because they're around the 25th percentile for the very academic schools. Middle of the pack "big 3" student and athletics not the hook everyone thinks it is.

Yeah, I don't think people understand that for the schools everyone on this Board worries about, you still need really strong academics to get into the top D3 schools, and to get into an Ivy, you need both the academics and to be a good enough athlete to compete at the D1 level. Everyone acts like that's nothing. I don't get it. When DC graduated a Big3 several years ago two classmates were recruited to play a sport at top Ivies. They were really strong athletes, who had worked really hard at their sports, but also had always taken the hardest classes and had high GPAs. It was not as if they just wandered in and said "here I am."

I don’t think you understand the amount of parental time and resources a kid needs to have access to in order to be recruitable for most d1, d2 (often forgotten!), and d3 sports. Additionally, a lot of the sports that you can get recruited for garner no fanfare whatsoever.

Okay cool. What does that have to do with the misperception that athletes going to high academic schools have a "hook" and are less qualified academically? I'll answer that: nothing.

I’d like to abolish athletic preference in admissions, especially for sports that don’t generate revenue.

Of course you would! You would like for elite colleges to focus exclusively on children just like your own, just like every other parent who thinks it is unfair that kids they deem inferior were accepted to schools that rejected those parents’ children.

Not at all. I would like admissions to also focus on children that couldn’t access club swimming or travel soccer.

Or sailing, fencing, golf, squash, water polo, riding, etc. The athletic preference is biased toward helping more affluent kids gain admission.

+1

In terms of sheer numbers, the recruits associated with these teams are tiny. Sailing and riding are not varsity sports and thus can’t pull kids in. Fencing and golf maybe recruit like two kids per year. The rowers I know from these schools tend to be affluent, but also tend to be among the most driven and academically successful students. Hockey, football, bball pull in a lot of kids and tend to be less affluent. Lax is probably the best example of giving a leg up to affluent kids. They all go on to be investment bankers and probably donate a lot/ come to all the reunions so I guess the schools like that.

Cross-country, soccer, swimming, lacrosse, field hockey and hockey rosters are filled with kids from affluent towns and schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:21:16, it seems a little pretentious to suggest that HYP know how to identify the ruling class when it is well established that a significant portion of the class is dedicated to identifying a backup linebacker or a right fielder.

It seems pretentious to suggest that the "backup linebacker" or "right fielder" might not also be a future leader/change maker.

Agree. I am the HYPS alum from above and the recruited (starting) linebacker I dated in college is now a leading neurosurgeon. The assumptions people make in here - that students with “hooks” (gross term) are inherently less accomplished or promising than those without, is false.

My point was, these schools fill their classes with the kids they think are the most likely future leaders (for better or for worse). Once you internalize that, it starts to make more sense. Your kid will do great in life regardless. These schools aren’t the be all end all anyway.

[Anonymous]

Northeastern

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am an HYPS alum who does a lot of interviewing. What the OP seems to have missed is that it is incumbent upon applicants to convince these universities that they have the passion, leadership potential, and abilities to change the world in some way. That is what they are solving for. The admissions process is not a quantitive ranking based on test scores and gpa. Harvard could fill its class several times over with students who scored 1500+ on the SATs but they choose to take other factors into consideration because they have a long and successful track record of identifying who is going to be a change maker in the world and that is what they solve for.

That said, your child seems to have the ability to attend a great university, receive top grades, and continue on to the grad school or industry of their choice. Things seem pretty good.

they want LEADERS. say and do whatever to show that.

No offense but I’m not sure they are looking for changemakers. Some of the kids I know who got in are nice kids but most decidedly NOT change-makers. In fact They appear to be more let’s preserve the status quo. I want to go to college and then law or business school and make a lot of money. (Not exaggerating. This is what some of the kids I know say they want to do.).

Wow, what school do your kids go to around here? How practical.

My kids schools tout writing comics and being a comedian as cool careers. They don’t know anything about economics or medical disciplines or types of law besides attacking policy and rights.

LOL. I too doubt the previous previous poster is from the area. ANy kid wanting to go into law or business around DC would get shamed silent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Athletes from these schools really don't have much of a "hook" getting into the "top" schools. Going through the process now with my kid. Highy desired by coaches almost universally, but can't get past the pre-reads because they're around the 25th percentile for the very academic schools. Middle of the pack "big 3" student and athletics not the hook everyone thinks it is.

Yeah, I don't think people understand that for the schools everyone on this Board worries about, you still need really strong academics to get into the top D3 schools, and to get into an Ivy, you need both the academics and to be a good enough athlete to compete at the D1 level. Everyone acts like that's nothing. I don't get it. When DC graduated a Big3 several years ago two classmates were recruited to play a sport at top Ivies. They were really strong athletes, who had worked really hard at their sports, but also had always taken the hardest classes and had high GPAs. It was not as if they just wandered in and said "here I am."

I don’t think you understand the amount of parental time and resources a kid needs to have access to in order to be recruitable for most d1, d2 (often forgotten!), and d3 sports. Additionally, a lot of the sports that you can get recruited for garner no fanfare whatsoever.

D2 is never mentioned here because they are crappy Colleges that anyone smart enough to go to private school in DMV is unlikely to want or need a hook to get in. The term hook specifically means help getting into a school that is hard to get into normally (on just grades and test scores).

Also, it IS harder for an athlete to get a high caliber D3 offer - like from a NESCAC, W&L, Swarthmore and the like as those schools will not bend the admissions standards - than an Ivy or other academic D1 offer. Ivies have standards for athletes but there is more wiggle room academically for the athletes they want than there is at a top academic D3.

Is this true?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am an HYPS alum who does a lot of interviewing. What the OP seems to have missed is that it is incumbent upon applicants to convince these universities that they have the passion, leadership potential, and abilities to change the world in some way. That is what they are solving for. The admissions process is not a quantitive ranking based on test scores and gpa. Harvard could fill its class several times over with students who scored 1500+ on the SATs but they choose to take other factors into consideration because they have a long and successful track record of identifying who is going to be a change maker in the world and that is what they solve for.

That said, your child seems to have the ability to attend a great university, receive top grades, and continue on to the grad school or industry of their choice. Things seem pretty good.

they want LEADERS. say and do whatever to show that.

No offense but I’m not sure they are looking for changemakers. Some of the kids I know who got in are nice kids but most decidedly NOT change-makers. In fact They appear to be more let’s preserve the status quo. I want to go to college and then law or business school and make a lot of money. (Not exaggerating. This is what some of the kids I know say they want to do.).

Wow, what school do your kids go to around here? How practical.

My kids schools tout writing comics and being a comedian as cool careers. They don’t know anything about economics or medical disciplines or types of law besides attacking policy and rights.

LOL. I too doubt the previous previous poster is from the area. ANy kid wanting to go into law or business around DC would get shamed silent.

This is so funny. This area is crawling with lawyers in lobbyists and they’re not ashamed and they’re not quiet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Athletes from these schools really don't have much of a "hook" getting into the "top" schools. Going through the process now with my kid. Highy desired by coaches almost universally, but can't get past the pre-reads because they're around the 25th percentile for the very academic schools. Middle of the pack "big 3" student and athletics not the hook everyone thinks it is.

4 or more of the so called " athlete hooks " at STA last year were also cum laude society ( top 15% of their class ) so its really a trope that an athletic hook can't get in academically