Reflections from 2025 HYPSM admit(s)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you have to acknowledge that if a reader is going to remember you, you have to be memorable.

standard strong is not memorable in T20 pools. sorry. tell a story. make it easier on the reader to remember you, like you, want to admit you.

if you think that's a game, then just submit your 1540 and your AP scores and your essays about the big loss as a team that taught you more than the big win as an individual.

You have a point about being memorable but it may apply more to large publics than privates. Many feeder privates have a whopping 60-120 kids per class, among them only 20-30 kids max are considered top 10% and encouraged by CC to apply to T10 unhooked. When you do the math, that means on average T10 will only get 2-4 apps max from that high school. It won't be that hard for the regional rep assigned to the HS to remember the physics girl vs. the history boy.

Both are hard to remember in committee without a compelling story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are fortunate to have a daughter who was accepted to all of the HYPSM schools back in 2025. We are unhooked in every aspect of the word.

I am not here to engage with people who call me a troll or try to discredit the premise of the post; I am laying the facts of our experience down and you may choose whether or not you want to believe me. Quite frankly, I don't care if you don't believe me. If you choose to believe the post, I hope that it will be useful. I am also not here to discuss ethics.

It seems to me that the best way to get into these schools, nowadays, is to use what I call now a 'barb' instead of a 'spike.' What this means is to go all-in (extracurriculars, essays, classes) on one incredibly, incredibly niche field. This departs from the typical sense of a 'spike' in that a spike is far too broad. Spikes are often synonymous with a field of study: computer science, environmental science, politics, healthcare, etc. But a barb is far spikier than a spike. It means that you must specialize within that spike. Spikes have now become well-rounded, and well-rounded applicants have become rejects.

So, you could choose to go 'all-in' on ways that Native Americans interact with the environment. Or go all-in on compilers in computer science. Or spend your time lobbying for laws that challenge deceptive interrogation tactics. Or architecture in hospitals. Or a specific gene in the ostrich genome (this one's probably too specific Hahaha).

In a way, we found success by targeting all of our daughter's ECs at that one particular topic. This leaves no question for the AO as to what place the student will take on campus, what labs they will engage in, what classes they will take, what clubs they will join, and what their future looks like. It's makes your regional AO's job (advocating for you in committee) incredibly easy, because they can just refer to you as "that student who is interested in making exonerees" or "that student who has a deep passion for colonial Japan's rise" or "that student who has worked on protest theory for years."

Barbs also lend themselves to great awards to put on an application. Such deep intellectual rigor, research, and involvement is often rewarded.

And this might be a little unethical: what sweetens the deal at these schools is that you can change your major before you even arrive on campus. There is no commitment to any of these barbs. No self-respecting person is going to major in Inuit cosmologies, but a self-respecting high schooler may very well choose their barb in that field.

This is also a very high-variance strategy. If rejected by all T10s (or whatever), you may be stuck studying political science at UMD or UConn. This strategy has been very successful in recent years, but that's of course anecdotal.

Curious to hear thoughts, questions, etc.

You sound totally obnoxious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at your kids activities in 11th grade…promise you there’s a story.
Do independent research summer after 11th or during 11th if at private (and 12th).
Add one internship….

Done.

False. My kid did all that, perfect grades and SAT too.

Newsflash:
Your kids essays suck.

All this narrative curation requires absolutely stellar unique essays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you have to acknowledge that if a reader is going to remember you, you have to be memorable.

standard strong is not memorable in T20 pools. sorry. tell a story. make it easier on the reader to remember you, like you, want to admit you.

if you think that's a game, then just submit your 1540 and your AP scores and your essays about the big loss as a team that taught you more than the big win as an individual.

You have a point about being memorable but it may apply more to large publics than privates. Many feeder privates have a whopping 60-120 kids per class, among them only 20-30 kids max are considered top 10% and encouraged by CC to apply to T10 unhooked. When you do the math, that means on average T10 will only get 2-4 apps max from that high school. It won't be that hard for the regional rep assigned to the HS to remember the physics girl vs. the history boy.

My kid is at a top feeder in nyc. 150 in his class. College apps are limited. Still going to be 15-20 apps to every H Y P, Penn, Dartmouth Stanford, Duke, MIT, Northwestern, etc. These kids are all going to be top 15% of class (which Naviance shows is going to be good enough), all with an SAT 1540 plus, all great ECs. Some with be donor, legacy, questbridge, or athletes - mostly legacy or QB - or some other real bump. Harvard etc will take up to 4-5 so there's usually just 1 spot for the unhooked kid.

You better believe that one unhooked kid needs a narrative that is memorable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a professor and the idea of strategic position is so nauseating to me that I feel like writing a letter to our admissions office to let them know about what I read in this forum and others.

To be clear, I am not attacking the OP. She did what she felt she had to do to benefit her child. However, favoring students with unusual niche interests is clearly not the best way to find the most authentic students. Maybe this approach was more authentic 10 years ago before college admissions officers and parents pushed it en masse, but clearly this is no longer the way.

I always wonder how professors view their admissions offices and admission priorities.

Our child was told that activism was the essential key to admission to selective colleges. He followed a different path and somehow ended up at HYSPM.

He has met many classmates who were primarily involved in activism and impact-oriented activities. Sadly, he has seen those classmates struggle with the material to the confusion of their professors. I wonder if professors understand what the admissions offices are doing.

[Anonymous]

How is this new?

Listen to Yale or Dartmouth podcasts? Or the Game?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you have to acknowledge that if a reader is going to remember you, you have to be memorable.

standard strong is not memorable in T20 pools. sorry. tell a story. make it easier on the reader to remember you, like you, want to admit you.

if you think that's a game, then just submit your 1540 and your AP scores and your essays about the big loss as a team that taught you more than the big win as an individual.

You have a point about being memorable but it may apply more to large publics than privates. Many feeder privates have a whopping 60-120 kids per class, among them only 20-30 kids max are considered top 10% and encouraged by CC to apply to T10 unhooked. When you do the math, that means on average T10 will only get 2-4 apps max from that high school. It won't be that hard for the regional rep assigned to the HS to remember the physics girl vs. the history boy.

My kid is at a top feeder in nyc. 150 in his class. College apps are limited. Still going to be 15-20 apps to every H Y P, Penn, Dartmouth Stanford, Duke, MIT, Northwestern, etc. These kids are all going to be top 15% of class (which Naviance shows is going to be good enough), all with an SAT 1540 plus, all great ECs. Some with be donor, legacy, questbridge, or athletes - mostly legacy or QB - or some other real bump. Harvard etc will take up to 4-5 so there's usually just 1 spot for the unhooked kid.

You better believe that one unhooked kid needs a narrative that is memorable

15%? That clearly isn’t a top feeder in NYC. There are at least ten nyc schools that send 40% to Ivy League

[Anonymous]

OP is lying. It is all made up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think you have to acknowledge that if a reader is going to remember you, you have to be memorable.

standard strong is not memorable in T20 pools. sorry. tell a story. make it easier on the reader to remember you, like you, want to admit you.

if you think that's a game, then just submit your 1540 and your AP scores and your essays about the big loss as a team that taught you more than the big win as an individual.

That’s the ironic part — how is a young person developing into a NORMAL adult is not good enough? Don’t they have their own personalities, passions, and interests? The assumption that kids are just grades and a checklist of “typical” extracurriculars, and that anything outside of that doesn’t deserve a place in a good school, is deeply flawed. School is for learning. And if these teenagers put focus on learning during high school and get a good grades, why aren't they not GOOD ENOUGH? What exactly is the point of ranking these schools if they care other things more than academic? You might just call these institutes high end expensive youth clubs!

It’s sad that our society turn into this vanity fair values a narrow, manufactured version of success over the reality of everyday individuality.

It really comes down to a simple question: why can’t they just be themselves?

[Anonymous]

It’s always been like this. You just never realized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you have to acknowledge that if a reader is going to remember you, you have to be memorable.

standard strong is not memorable in T20 pools. sorry. tell a story. make it easier on the reader to remember you, like you, want to admit you.

if you think that's a game, then just submit your 1540 and your AP scores and your essays about the big loss as a team that taught you more than the big win as an individual.

You have a point about being memorable but it may apply more to large publics than privates. Many feeder privates have a whopping 60-120 kids per class, among them only 20-30 kids max are considered top 10% and encouraged by CC to apply to T10 unhooked. When you do the math, that means on average T10 will only get 2-4 apps max from that high school. It won't be that hard for the regional rep assigned to the HS to remember the physics girl vs. the history boy.

My kid is at a top feeder in nyc. 150 in his class. College apps are limited. Still going to be 15-20 apps to every H Y P, Penn, Dartmouth Stanford, Duke, MIT, Northwestern, etc. These kids are all going to be top 15% of class (which Naviance shows is going to be good enough), all with an SAT 1540 plus, all great ECs. Some with be donor, legacy, questbridge, or athletes - mostly legacy or QB - or some other real bump. Harvard etc will take up to 4-5 so there's usually just 1 spot for the unhooked kid.

You better believe that one unhooked kid needs a narrative that is memorable

15%? That clearly isn’t a top feeder in NYC. There are at least ten nyc schools that send 40% to Ivy League

No there's not. I think only Brearley is 40%. We send about 30% and that's normal for top tier. (There aren't even 10 top tier HS in nyc)

You can be top 30% and get into Cornell, Columbia, or UChicago. top 25% and get into Brown or Penn A&S. But counselors will only recommend you to HYP if you're top 15% unless very hooked. What you hope is all the billionaires get in during ED and they do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you have to acknowledge that if a reader is going to remember you, you have to be memorable.

standard strong is not memorable in T20 pools. sorry. tell a story. make it easier on the reader to remember you, like you, want to admit you.

if you think that's a game, then just submit your 1540 and your AP scores and your essays about the big loss as a team that taught you more than the big win as an individual.

That’s the ironic part — how is a young person developing into a NORMAL adult is not good enough? Don’t they have their own personalities, passions, and interests? The assumption that kids are just grades and a checklist of “typical” extracurriculars, and that anything outside of that doesn’t deserve a place in a good school, is deeply flawed. School is for learning. And if these teenagers put focus on learning during high school and get a good grades, why aren't they not GOOD ENOUGH? What exactly is the point of ranking these schools if they care other things more than academic? You might just call these institutes high end expensive youth clubs!

It’s sad that our society turn into this vanity fair values a narrow, manufactured version of success over the reality of everyday individuality.

It really comes down to a simple question: why can’t they just be themselves?

they can be and they do. hundreds of thousands of normal kids go to college. they just aren't among the 1900 accepted to harvard. big deal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you have to acknowledge that if a reader is going to remember you, you have to be memorable.

standard strong is not memorable in T20 pools. sorry. tell a story. make it easier on the reader to remember you, like you, want to admit you.

if you think that's a game, then just submit your 1540 and your AP scores and your essays about the big loss as a team that taught you more than the big win as an individual.

That’s the ironic part — how is a young person developing into a NORMAL adult is not good enough? Don’t they have their own personalities, passions, and interests? The assumption that kids are just grades and a checklist of “typical” extracurriculars, and that anything outside of that doesn’t deserve a place in a good school, is deeply flawed. School is for learning. And if these teenagers put focus on learning during high school and get a good grades, why aren't they not GOOD ENOUGH? What exactly is the point of ranking these schools if they care other things more than academic? You might just call these institutes high end expensive youth clubs!

It’s sad that our society turn into this vanity fair values a narrow, manufactured version of success over the reality of everyday individuality.

It really comes down to a simple question: why can’t they just be themselves?

they can be and they do. hundreds of thousands of normal kids go to college. they just aren't among the 1900 accepted to harvard. big deal

Sure. Glad the normal kids are majority. Screw that "standard excellent" lame label.

[Anonymous]

The key is doing this + 2 other institutional priorities:

legacy/ VIP/ undersubscribed major/ geo diversity = golden!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you have to acknowledge that if a reader is going to remember you, you have to be memorable.

standard strong is not memorable in T20 pools. sorry. tell a story. make it easier on the reader to remember you, like you, want to admit you.

if you think that's a game, then just submit your 1540 and your AP scores and your essays about the big loss as a team that taught you more than the big win as an individual.

You have a point about being memorable but it may apply more to large publics than privates. Many feeder privates have a whopping 60-120 kids per class, among them only 20-30 kids max are considered top 10% and encouraged by CC to apply to T10 unhooked. When you do the math, that means on average T10 will only get 2-4 apps max from that high school. It won't be that hard for the regional rep assigned to the HS to remember the physics girl vs. the history boy.

My kid is at a top feeder in nyc. 150 in his class. College apps are limited. Still going to be 15-20 apps to every H Y P, Penn, Dartmouth Stanford, Duke, MIT, Northwestern, etc. These kids are all going to be top 15% of class (which Naviance shows is going to be good enough), all with an SAT 1540 plus, all great ECs. Some with be donor, legacy, questbridge, or athletes - mostly legacy or QB - or some other real bump. Harvard etc will take up to 4-5 so there's usually just 1 spot for the unhooked kid.

You better believe that one unhooked kid needs a narrative that is memorable

15%? That clearly isn’t a top feeder in NYC. There are at least ten nyc schools that send 40% to Ivy League

No there's not. I think only Brearley is 40%. We send about 30% and that's normal for top tier. (There aren't even 10 top tier HS in nyc)

You can be top 30% and get into Cornell, Columbia, or UChicago. top 25% and get into Brown or Penn A&S. But counselors will only recommend you to HYP if you're top 15% unless very hooked. What you hope is all the billionaires get in during ED and they do.

This is Spence (https://www.instagram.com/spence26niors/ ) from ED where only 34 have posted results and almost all are top 20. That is almost 50% of the class which is usually around 65 kids.