Compared Against Peers - T20 Admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, friend at top NYC private with top academics did not get into first choice Ivy because there were 2 kids with bigger hooks ahead in line.

My DD from a DMV private had 4 of 4 admitted ED to an Ivy only 1 year after 0 of 3 were admitted. There is no quota or limit per class even in ED.

Interesting. Can you name the school?!?

All athletes, legacy and hooked

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see. My DD is up against a few kids from her school for ED. She took all the hardest classes, has a 3.9+. One of the other girls has a 4.0 and took all the easiest classes. My DD has better ECs but all else being equal I’m interested in the outcome. There is a significant difference between the easy classes and the hard ones at our school. I know she was very protective of her GPA and her choices were deliberate.

It is possible that all of them or none of them will get into their "top" choices.

It is a lottery for 3% admission schools.

Absolutely, it's that I would have less faith if the girl who took the easy classes got in. I would be pleasantly surprised if DD gets in but I know she will be fine wherever she lands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 1/2 pages through this thread and not a single mention of test scores. Just GPA. Or rank, which is derivative of GPA. A little nod to rigor, which can be very subjective, too. But nothing about test scores.

How embarrassing. What a flawed system, regardless the type of class a college is trying to build through admissions.

Everybody’s got a 34; 35 or 36. That really does not make a difference to admissions officers. Hate to break it to you.

That’s not accurate. And who cares about 34 or 35 if we’re writing off 3.8 and 3.9 GPAs?

Less than 2,500 per year with a composite 1600 or 36 in their first and only administration. That’s your 4.0 unweighted equivalent.

My daughter has a friend who scored 36 in one sitting and was rejected from Princeton, Middlebury, Williams, and Wesleyan and waitlisted at Syracuse last spring. Excellent grades and rigor at a top 5 boarding school in Mass. That made me lose my faith in test scores mattering 😂

If all those schools reached the same decision - it’s not an accident

All those schools. All four of them, all with extremely low acceptance rates across the board. 😂🤣😭

Well I guess you can ignore being waitlisted at Syracuse with its 52% acceptance rate

It was a reply with anecdotal information and they didn’t provide context (exact GPA, unweighted and weighted, number of AP classes, etc.), so I technically ignored all of it. But felt compelled to comment on the lack of surprise re: the four schools that rejected the applicant.

Well first it’s five schools. Second the schools serve as a proxy for all the context you say is missing. They had all that information and didn’t admit. How much more do you need to know?

Well, no - it was four that rejected (reaching the same conclusion) the candidate. The fifth, Syracuse, waitlisted the candidate. That’s a different conclusion.

I’ll repeat - there is no detail beyond the ACT 36. Excellent grades - what is that? 4.00 unweighted? 3.90? 3.80?

And then nothing to help quantify all of the other parts on the package.

Proxy for all the context? No, to use those outcomes as any kind of reliable proxy, we need to know the actual other measurables (beyond the ACT score) to then apply that information to a prospective applicant’s probability of suffering the same fate, or getting an acceptance where the so-called proxy didn’t.

By way of example, if one person’s “excellent grades” are a 3.62 / 3.74 with 2 APs, with essays that are poorly written, and 2-3 meandering ECs, how would that information (undisclosed at this point) serve as a reliable proxy for, say, a 3.76 / 4.38 with 12 APs, well-written essays, and 10 ECs, six of which bore into a particular area of interest that ties into a unified theme?

And what if the former applied for a CS, engineering or math seat and the latter applied for a psychology or biological sciences seat?

So, yeah, context is necessary …

do you do your own research on vaccines, too?unless you read the actual file you will never have the full picture. But if five (not four) offices read the file and decide not to admit, that tells you that there was a problem that a 36 ACT couldn’t fix.

Being waitlisted at Syracuse is a rejection by any other name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am confused as to why this is more of an issue at private schools. At public schools, dozens of kids apply to the same competitive schools and the chips fall where they may. There isn’t the same level of ownership over the process. Everyone knows they have zero control and they have a “might as well try” attitude.

It’s an issue at some privates because families are paying and many expect a return on their investment. That’s not the case at public school. In addition, private families appear to prefer top private colleges and they all have low acceptance rates.

[Anonymous]

I think it's an issue at private schools because some of these families are so entitled and oblivious. Kid is a double legacy at yale, parents can buy a building at yale, parents hired yale squash coach for private training during summer and -just a coincidence! - kid is not being recruited by yale for squash. that baby picture used in the yearbook? baby kid in a yale onesie.

kid gets into yale.

family decides for the hell of it to apply to 15 other t20 schools with essays "edited" by hired help and with all that money for a building still out there and a decent squash player.

and *some* private schools will say, this is bullshit. Hudson is going to Yale, let's close this file so other kids can have a chance at these other 15 schools.

this doesn't happen 20 times a year at most public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am confused as to why this is more of an issue at private schools. At public schools, dozens of kids apply to the same competitive schools and the chips fall where they may. There isn’t the same level of ownership over the process. Everyone knows they have zero control and they have a “might as well try” attitude.

It’s an issue at some privates because families are paying and many expect a return on their investment. That’s not the case at public school. In addition, private families appear to prefer top private colleges and they all have low acceptance rates.

And those selective private universities tend to prefer high performing kids from good public schools. Compare the college lists from the W schools to the privates.

If elite college acceptances are the goal, it's a very poor return on investment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am confused as to why this is more of an issue at private schools. At public schools, dozens of kids apply to the same competitive schools and the chips fall where they may. There isn’t the same level of ownership over the process. Everyone knows they have zero control and they have a “might as well try” attitude.

It’s an issue at some privates because families are paying and many expect a return on their investment. That’s not the case at public school. In addition, private families appear to prefer top private colleges and they all have low acceptance rates.

And those selective private universities tend to prefer high performing kids from good public schools. Compare the college lists from the W schools to the privates.

If elite college acceptances are the goal, it's a very poor return on investment

Huh? The private schools still have better matriculation on a per capita basis. Rich or upper middle class kids are not an institutional priority at any school, public or private, unless they are donors or legacy. Smart kids from poor rural or urban districts are in demand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 1/2 pages through this thread and not a single mention of test scores. Just GPA. Or rank, which is derivative of GPA. A little nod to rigor, which can be very subjective, too. But nothing about test scores.

How embarrassing. What a flawed system, regardless the type of class a college is trying to build through admissions.

Everybody’s got a 34; 35 or 36. That really does not make a difference to admissions officers. Hate to break it to you.

That’s not accurate. And who cares about 34 or 35 if we’re writing off 3.8 and 3.9 GPAs?

Less than 2,500 per year with a composite 1600 or 36 in their first and only administration. That’s your 4.0 unweighted equivalent.

My daughter has a friend who scored 36 in one sitting and was rejected from Princeton, Middlebury, Williams, and Wesleyan and waitlisted at Syracuse last spring. Excellent grades and rigor at a top 5 boarding school in Mass. That made me lose my faith in test scores mattering 😂

It wasn’t the test score that got her rejected. Unless you saw her transcript you can’t be sure of her grades. Some of those schools should have been a given if what she claims about her grades and everything else is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 1/2 pages through this thread and not a single mention of test scores. Just GPA. Or rank, which is derivative of GPA. A little nod to rigor, which can be very subjective, too. But nothing about test scores.

How embarrassing. What a flawed system, regardless the type of class a college is trying to build through admissions.

Everybody’s got a 34; 35 or 36. That really does not make a difference to admissions officers. Hate to break it to you.

That’s not accurate. And who cares about 34 or 35 if we’re writing off 3.8 and 3.9 GPAs?

Less than 2,500 per year with a composite 1600 or 36 in their first and only administration. That’s your 4.0 unweighted equivalent.

My daughter has a friend who scored 36 in one sitting and was rejected from Princeton, Middlebury, Williams, and Wesleyan and waitlisted at Syracuse last spring. Excellent grades and rigor at a top 5 boarding school in Mass. That made me lose my faith in test scores mattering 😂

It wasn’t the test score that got her rejected. Unless you saw her transcript you can’t be sure of her grades. Some of those schools should have been a given if what she claims about her grades and everything else is true.

what if school counselor essentially hurt her application with bad recommendation? These recommendations should be open to see after you have graduated.

[Anonymous]

For top ivies, Stanford, Duke, MIT, etc. they really have the luxury of picking in context of the school so you kind of are competing internally. Some years they’ll take more from certain schools but really the range is somewhat limited

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 1/2 pages through this thread and not a single mention of test scores. Just GPA. Or rank, which is derivative of GPA. A little nod to rigor, which can be very subjective, too. But nothing about test scores.

How embarrassing. What a flawed system, regardless the type of class a college is trying to build through admissions.

Everybody’s got a 34; 35 or 36. That really does not make a difference to admissions officers. Hate to break it to you.

That’s not accurate. And who cares about 34 or 35 if we’re writing off 3.8 and 3.9 GPAs?

Less than 2,500 per year with a composite 1600 or 36 in their first and only administration. That’s your 4.0 unweighted equivalent.

My daughter has a friend who scored 36 in one sitting and was rejected from Princeton, Middlebury, Williams, and Wesleyan and waitlisted at Syracuse last spring. Excellent grades and rigor at a top 5 boarding school in Mass. That made me lose my faith in test scores mattering 😂

It wasn’t the test score that got her rejected. Unless you saw her transcript you can’t be sure of her grades. Some of those schools should have been a given if what she claims about her grades and everything else is true.

what if school counselor essentially hurt her application with bad recommendation? These recommendations should be open to see after you have graduated.

This. Something in her recs if everything was really true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For top ivies, Stanford, Duke, MIT, etc. they really have the luxury of picking in context of the school so you kind of are competing internally. Some years they’ll take more from certain schools but really the range is somewhat limited

So freshman year, scout out the top competition and puck a distinct niche!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am confused as to why this is more of an issue at private schools. At public schools, dozens of kids apply to the same competitive schools and the chips fall where they may. There isn’t the same level of ownership over the process. Everyone knows they have zero control and they have a “might as well try” attitude.

It’s an issue at some privates because families are paying and many expect a return on their investment. That’s not the case at public school. In addition, private families appear to prefer top private colleges and they all have low acceptance rates.

And those selective private universities tend to prefer high performing kids from good public schools. Compare the college lists from the W schools to the privates.

If elite college acceptances are the goal, it's a very poor return on investment

Huh? The private schools still have better matriculation on a per capita basis. Rich or upper middle class kids are not an institutional priority at any school, public or private, unless they are donors or legacy. Smart kids from poor rural or urban districts are in demand.

+1 If someone wants a SLAC in particular, they definitely prefer private school kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see. My DD is up against a few kids from her school for ED. She took all the hardest classes, has a 3.9+. One of the other girls has a 4.0 and took all the easiest classes. My DD has better ECs but all else being equal I’m interested in the outcome. There is a significant difference between the easy classes and the hard ones at our school. I know she was very protective of her GPA and her choices were deliberate.

It is possible that all of them or none of them will get into their "top" choices.

It is a lottery for 3% admission schools.

Absolutely, it's that I would have less faith if the girl who took the easy classes got in. I would be pleasantly surprised if DD gets in but I know she will be fine wherever she lands.

NP. Come back and let us know!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am confused as to why this is more of an issue at private schools. At public schools, dozens of kids apply to the same competitive schools and the chips fall where they may. There isn’t the same level of ownership over the process. Everyone knows they have zero control and they have a “might as well try” attitude.

It’s an issue at some privates because families are paying and many expect a return on their investment. That’s not the case at public school. In addition, private families appear to prefer top private colleges and they all have low acceptance rates.

And those selective private universities tend to prefer high performing kids from good public schools. Compare the college lists from the W schools to the privates.

If elite college acceptances are the goal, it's a very poor return on investment

Huh? The private schools still have better matriculation on a per capita basis. Rich or upper middle class kids are not an institutional priority at any school, public or private, unless they are donors or legacy. Smart kids from poor rural or urban districts are in demand.

And there are more and more qualified public school kids than ever. They outnumber kids in private schools by a wide margin.

There will always be the NYC private schools and New England prep schools who send an impressive amount of students to Ivy leagues. There’s also the science public schools around the country who only take top students who are sending an impressive amount to MIT and other top schools.

All things considered with GPAs, tests etc being equal, mediocre private schools probably have the least desirable student.