Applying to Harvard and Princeton “for fun”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I similarly take issue with high stats kids who apply to Pitt with absolutely no intention of going because it's fun to get an acceptance in September ("it makes it official that I'm going to college," said by 4.9 GPA IB kids with higher SAT scores is pretty ridiculous!). My average good kid who loved Pitt for whom Pitt is a solid target will have to compete with those kids next year and it seems really unfair.

Your average good kid who loved Pitt should have worked harder in high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I similarly take issue with high stats kids who apply to Pitt with absolutely no intention of going because it's fun to get an acceptance in September ("it makes it official that I'm going to college," said by 4.9 GPA IB kids with higher SAT scores is pretty ridiculous!). My average good kid who loved Pitt for whom Pitt is a solid target will have to compete with those kids next year and it seems really unfair.

They have no obligation to you or your kid. Get over yourself.

Did you say that to the many people on this thread who have said it's unfair that the kid who's applying to Harvard and Princeton for fun is taking away other kids' spots?

Yes. One- you don’t know if they’re being accurate about the other kid applying for fun. They’re just trying to shame the kid. Two, if their kid was going to get rejected it was going to happen regardless- this is just scapegoating. Three - it’s a free country - if they have a .05% inclination that they might be interested they have every right to apply. Why should they make a decision to accommodate some other kid?

Of course, right? Let everyone be as selfish as possible—forget collaboration. Who cares, anyway? Imagine becoming a billionaire and telling people they won’t need to work anymore… because you’ve made them unnecessary.
Geez, don’t we have enough selfish people already?

You are ridiculous. College admissions is not a collaborative endeavor. Shaming a kid who wants to apply where you kid is applying is what this is all about.

Who really lacks a moral compass? Usually it’s not the child—it’s the parents and the zero-sum culture such a family carry around them. Just imagine the kind of person this child will grow up to become.

Just imagine how entitled your kid must be. “Don’t apply to a college because I want to go there.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I similarly take issue with high stats kids who apply to Pitt with absolutely no intention of going because it's fun to get an acceptance in September ("it makes it official that I'm going to college," said by 4.9 GPA IB kids with higher SAT scores is pretty ridiculous!). My average good kid who loved Pitt for whom Pitt is a solid target will have to compete with those kids next year and it seems really unfair.

Your average good kid who loved Pitt should have worked harder in high school.

I don’t think you can begrudge kids who apply as a legit safety meaning they would go there. But no need to have two safeties. Pick one and measure your other choices against it. If you would choose school X over Pitt then don’t apply to Pitt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD's friend last year REA'd to Harvard and got in, but proceeded to apply to MIT, Princeton and Yale (despite our school discouraging this). She told my DD she had no plans of going to MIT but wanted to see if she could get in. Just that type of kid. Not surprised though, she also told DD she felt pressured by her parents to apply as "low income" (they have a cash business but are clearly not poor- designer clothes, fancy car, able to fly anywhere they want). Using every advantage.

Financial aid offices check stuff like this and honestly why would she risk that? You can have your admission rescinded even after arriving on campus if you lie on forms.

I know if a student who arrived at an Ivy for grad school and in the middle of year 1 (even after a check was done) they found out person lied in a major way- kicked them out of the program. This was years ago. Yale expelled someone for falsifying information recently. Schools can always check again especially if something comes up.

Also admissions at top universities usually communicate with one another especially if there’s an issue / lying on applications or financial aid forms (allegedly and according to friends who work or worked at top universities including Ivies and equivalent). Why someone would risk it is beyond me!

lol some FA offices don’t care. I helped a student get into Stanford last year. They have multiple homes all registered to this LLC. They have a business. Dad was in the newspaper because of leasing a huge place. Stanford gave her 60+ k. After she was picked for verification, she even said her mom’s taxes had changed so could they consider that. They have her an extra $20k/yr. FGLI. Sickened me and I stopped volunteering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No it's greedy. Never would hire someone like that

+1 Same here. Will watch out for these

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD's friend last year REA'd to Harvard and got in, but proceeded to apply to MIT, Princeton and Yale (despite our school discouraging this). She told my DD she had no plans of going to MIT but wanted to see if she could get in. Just that type of kid. Not surprised though, she also told DD she felt pressured by her parents to apply as "low income" (they have a cash business but are clearly not poor- designer clothes, fancy car, able to fly anywhere they want). Using every advantage.

Financial aid offices check stuff like this and honestly why would she risk that? You can have your admission rescinded even after arriving on campus if you lie on forms.

I know if a student who arrived at an Ivy for grad school and in the middle of year 1 (even after a check was done) they found out person lied in a major way- kicked them out of the program. This was years ago. Yale expelled someone for falsifying information recently. Schools can always check again especially if something comes up.

Also admissions at top universities usually communicate with one another especially if there’s an issue / lying on applications or financial aid forms (allegedly and according to friends who work or worked at top universities including Ivies and equivalent). Why someone would risk it is beyond me!

lol some FA offices don’t care. I helped a student get into Stanford last year. They have multiple homes all registered to this LLC. They have a business. Dad was in the newspaper because of leasing a huge place. Stanford gave her 60+ k. After she was picked for verification, she even said her mom’s taxes had changed so could they consider that. They have her an extra $20k/yr. FGLI. Sickened me and I stopped volunteering.

Pp here. Parents were willing to pay for a certain school that she did not get into. They were not low income. She did not get free lunch at school because they had never applied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I similarly take issue with high stats kids who apply to Pitt with absolutely no intention of going because it's fun to get an acceptance in September ("it makes it official that I'm going to college," said by 4.9 GPA IB kids with higher SAT scores is pretty ridiculous!). My average good kid who loved Pitt for whom Pitt is a solid target will have to compete with those kids next year and it seems really unfair.

Your average good kid who loved Pitt should have worked harder in high school.

I don’t think you can begrudge kids who apply as a legit safety meaning they would go there. But no need to have two safeties. Pick one and measure your other choices against it. If you would choose school X over Pitt then don’t apply to Pitt.

Plenty of kids out there who get into a Yale and rejected from safeties. Kids have to do what is in their own best interest not meet your bizarre sense of fairness

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No it's greedy. Never would hire someone like that

+1 Same here. Will watch out for these

You often ask applicants to outline where they applied to college in high school and when they submitted those applications? If so, you’re insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No it's greedy. Never would hire someone like that

+1 Same here. Will watch out for these

You often ask applicants to outline where they applied to college in high school and when they submitted those applications? If so, you’re insane.

It’s actually quite easy to recognize someone who was raised in—or comes from—a zero-sum culture. It is not hard. Try reading your own post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I similarly take issue with high stats kids who apply to Pitt with absolutely no intention of going because it's fun to get an acceptance in September ("it makes it official that I'm going to college," said by 4.9 GPA IB kids with higher SAT scores is pretty ridiculous!). My average good kid who loved Pitt for whom Pitt is a solid target will have to compete with those kids next year and it seems really unfair.

Did your kid not apply to safeties? You understand how this works right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No it's greedy. Never would hire someone like that

+1 Same here. Will watch out for these

You often ask applicants to outline where they applied to college in high school and when they submitted those applications? If so, you’re insane.

It’s actually quite easy to recognize someone who was raised in—or comes from—a zero-sum culture. It is not hard. Try reading your own post.

And it’s pretty easy to see who thinks their own personal gain should require sacrifices from everyone else - and then attack a bunch of high school kids who are making one of the biggest decisions of their lives up to that point. Are you going to repeat this for grad school? For jobs? Promotions? If I live in a nice house am I not allowed to buy a house you want?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No it's greedy. Never would hire someone like that

+1 Same here. Will watch out for these

You often ask applicants to outline where they applied to college in high school and when they submitted those applications? If so, you’re insane.

It’s actually quite easy to recognize someone who was raised in—or comes from—a zero-sum culture. It is not hard. Try reading your own post.

And it’s pretty easy to see who thinks their own personal gain should require sacrifices from everyone else - and then attack a bunch of high school kids who are making one of the biggest decisions of their lives up to that point. Are you going to repeat this for grad school? For jobs? Promotions? If I live in a nice house am I not allowed to buy a house you want?

You sound like those people from xhs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I similarly take issue with high stats kids who apply to Pitt with absolutely no intention of going because it's fun to get an acceptance in September ("it makes it official that I'm going to college," said by 4.9 GPA IB kids with higher SAT scores is pretty ridiculous!). My average good kid who loved Pitt for whom Pitt is a solid target will have to compete with those kids next year and it seems really unfair.

Your average good kid who loved Pitt should have worked harder in high school.

I don’t think you can begrudge kids who apply as a legit safety meaning they would go there. But no need to have two safeties. Pick one and measure your other choices against it. If you would choose school X over Pitt then don’t apply to Pitt.

Plenty of kids out there who get into a Yale and rejected from safeties. Kids have to do what is in their own best interest not meet your bizarre sense of fairness

To use your example, if they got into Yale why would they need unlimited safeties?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I similarly take issue with high stats kids who apply to Pitt with absolutely no intention of going because it's fun to get an acceptance in September ("it makes it official that I'm going to college," said by 4.9 GPA IB kids with higher SAT scores is pretty ridiculous!). My average good kid who loved Pitt for whom Pitt is a solid target will have to compete with those kids next year and it seems really unfair.

Your average good kid who loved Pitt should have worked harder in high school.

I don’t think you can begrudge kids who apply as a legit safety meaning they would go there. But no need to have two safeties. Pick one and measure your other choices against it. If you would choose school X over Pitt then don’t apply to Pitt.

A lot of these kids you are talking about aren't viewing Pitt as safety. A lot of them are kids whose families have real concerns about paying for college and they are applying to Pitt because they offer merit money, including some full rides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I similarly take issue with high stats kids who apply to Pitt with absolutely no intention of going because it's fun to get an acceptance in September ("it makes it official that I'm going to college," said by 4.9 GPA IB kids with higher SAT scores is pretty ridiculous!). My average good kid who loved Pitt for whom Pitt is a solid target will have to compete with those kids next year and it seems really unfair.

Your average good kid who loved Pitt should have worked harder in high school.

I don’t think you can begrudge kids who apply as a legit safety meaning they would go there. But no need to have two safeties. Pick one and measure your other choices against it. If you would choose school X over Pitt then don’t apply to Pitt.

Well I’m sorry to inform you, but my DC has multiple safeties. At least 4.