Top 10 Universities - Holistic Admissions Fact or Fiction

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2100 is not good enough for top 10 universities. There were plenty of kids from my child's HS with 2300 or better SAT scores, in the top 15% of class with tons of ECs and national recognitions and awards being rejected by top 10 universities unless the applicant happens to be URM.

Absolutely wrong. My own DC got into a Top 5 with a score of exactly 2100. Granted, this score was in the 25% percentile for this Top 5 university, but still well within the range.

Maybe there were other factors such as legacy, athlete or other hook or being in the top 1% of the class etc. Applicant with 2100 SAT score with no hooks, not URM and so so GPA/ranking will NOT be admitted to the top 5 university unless the kid is URM.

Nope. DC is a white girl from the DMV suburbs - two anti-hooks, if anything. DC is not a legacy or an athletic recruit, either. DC does happen to excel, at the national level, in a particular passion. Building a class with kids with many talents is the very definition of "holistic admissions," my friend.

WTF is wrong with you? You have already been told similar facts many times.

For 1 white kid with 2100 score being admitted to the top 5 university without any hooks, there are 1,000 white kids with 2100 score without any hooks but with national recognition being rejected. Thank your lucky star your kid got accepted instead of being nasty.

You deserve nastiness, you racist scumbag.

Maybe she checked African American box and received AA benefits. You sound like an angry black woman.

Yikes. She said her DD is white with no URM preferences (which would apply with even one AA parent). I'm white too. You really are a scummy piece of work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2100 is not good enough for top 10 universities. There were plenty of kids from my child's HS with 2300 or better SAT scores, in the top 15% of class with tons of ECs and national recognitions and awards being rejected by top 10 universities unless the applicant happens to be URM.

Absolutely wrong. My own DC got into a Top 5 with a score of exactly 2100. Granted, this score was in the 25% percentile for this Top 5 university, but still well within the range.

Maybe there were other factors such as legacy, athlete or other hook or being in the top 1% of the class etc. Applicant with 2100 SAT score with no hooks, not URM and so so GPA/ranking will NOT be admitted to the top 5 university unless the kid is URM.

Nope. DC is a white girl from the DMV suburbs - two anti-hooks, if anything. DC is not a legacy or an athletic recruit, either. DC does happen to excel, at the national level, in a particular passion. Building a class with kids with many talents is the very definition of "holistic admissions," my friend.

WTF is wrong with you? You have already been told similar facts many times.

I'm calling BS on this.

PP is careful not to detail the so-called "passion" that DC excels at. That is either because PP is making it up, or because the "particular passion" is so rare that revealing it would compromise anonymity (e.g., the DC is the daughter of a famous person (unlikely) or a celebrity (e.g., Jody Foster going to Princeton). I think it is probably BS, but in either case unspecified exceptions don't mean much. No one denies that there are exceptional cases. The averages don't lie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2100 is not good enough for top 10 universities. There were plenty of kids from my child's HS with 2300 or better SAT scores, in the top 15% of class with tons of ECs and national recognitions and awards being rejected by top 10 universities unless the applicant happens to be URM.

Absolutely wrong. My own DC got into a Top 5 with a score of exactly 2100. Granted, this score was in the 25% percentile for this Top 5 university, but still well within the range.

Maybe there were other factors such as legacy, athlete or other hook or being in the top 1% of the class etc. Applicant with 2100 SAT score with no hooks, not URM and so so GPA/ranking will NOT be admitted to the top 5 university unless the kid is URM.

Nope. DC is a white girl from the DMV suburbs - two anti-hooks, if anything. DC is not a legacy or an athletic recruit, either. DC does happen to excel, at the national level, in a particular passion. Building a class with kids with many talents is the very definition of "holistic admissions," my friend.

WTF is wrong with you? You have already been told similar facts many times.

For 1 white kid with 2100 score being admitted to the top 5 university without any hooks, there are 1,000 white kids with 2100 score without any hooks but with national recognition being rejected. Thank your lucky star your kid got accepted instead of being nasty.

You deserve nastiness, you racist scumbag.

Maybe she checked African American box and received AA benefits. You sound like an angry black woman.

Yikes. She said her DD is white with no URM preferences (which would apply with even one AA parent). I'm white too. You really are a scummy piece of work.

Schools rely on the applicants to self identify, it's not unheard for people who appear "white" to have identified themselves as something else on an app: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/us/14admissions.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Most of those with ancestors in North Africa are BOTH African American AND Caucasian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm calling BS on this.

PP is careful not to detail the so-called "passion" that DC excels at. That is either because PP is making it up, or because the "particular passion" is so rare that revealing it would compromise anonymity (e.g., the DC is the daughter of a famous person (unlikely) or a celebrity (e.g., Jody Foster going to Princeton). I think it is probably BS, but in either case unspecified exceptions don't mean much. No one denies that there are exceptional cases. The averages don't lie.

You're absolutely right. There's no way I'm going to out my DD to a troll such as yourself. Many national-level awards are quite specific.

I really don't give a flying you-know-what whether some troll on DCUM believes me or not. You can educate yourself with actual facts like the one I just provided re 2100 SATs, or you can ignore it because it doesn't fit your bigoted worldview. I certainly won't be worrying about what you think.

Buh bye, troll!

[Anonymous]

Just to clarify, the PP

Caucasian is a broad category that covers most of the populations of North Africa, the Horn of Africa, Western Asia, Central Asia and South Asia.

African American does not mean Americans with ancestors from Africa. Instead, the term refers to citizens or residents of the United States who have total or partial antebellum ancestry from any of the native populations of Sub-Saharan Africa. That is why, for example, our current president is not, technically speaking , "African American," but his wife is.

Obviously colleges do not adhere to the strict definition, so I see no harm in using a geographic definition and self-identifying as an African American based on Caucasian -African ancestry. Certainly someone that background adds to diversity in comparison to someone with Anglo Saxon ancestry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm calling BS on this.

PP is careful not to detail the so-called "passion" that DC excels at. That is either because PP is making it up, or because the "particular passion" is so rare that revealing it would compromise anonymity (e.g., the DC is the daughter of a famous person (unlikely) or a celebrity (e.g., Jody Foster going to Princeton). I think it is probably BS, but in either case unspecified exceptions don't mean much. No one denies that there are exceptional cases. The averages don't lie.

You're absolutely right. There's no way I'm going to out my DD to a troll such as yourself. Many national-level awards are quite specific.

I really don't give a flying you-know-what whether some troll on DCUM believes me or not. You can educate yourself with actual facts like the one I just provided re 2100 SATs, or you can ignore it because it doesn't fit your bigoted worldview. I certainly won't be worrying about what you think.

Buh bye, troll!

Curious. Bigotry is a state of mind. How does one glean the state of mind of others known only from an anonymous message board post? Someone who disagrees with you on affirmative action has a "bigoted worldview?" Whoa! Quite a leap there.

A lot of people (two-thirds of Americans according to one source) believe college applicants should be admitted solely based on merit - are they all bigoted?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/163655/reject-considering-race-college-admissions.aspx

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holistic is an excuse for arbitrary and subjective masking of hidden intentions and initiatives

By claiming to use a Holistic approach, a school insulates itself from any objective evaluation of admission policies.

There are three main hooks that will get you in with less than perfect credentials: Athlete; Underrepresented Minority; Legacy. For specific example, look at the scatter grams on Naviance or similar system and you'll see plenty of less than perfect credentials that resulted in admission.

Sigh. No, these hooks are not the only reasons you will see admits on Naviance who have less than perfect scores.

DC recently got into a USNWR top 5 school without any of these hooks, and SATs of only 2100 (but GPA of 3.9 unweighted and lots of AP scores of 5). DC got in due to stellar accomplishments in a certain field, which I'm not going to describe here to protect DC's privacy. Also killed the essays. In other words, it's tough for all kids, but if you hit all the notes, and you're also really, really good at something (state or national competition or award), you don't necessarily need one of the hooks mentioned above.

I’m very skeptical if the “Top 5” school mentioned is the traditional HYP, Columbia or Stanford, but I could see a U of Chicago parent claiming that U of Chicago is also “Top 5” based on the most recent US NEWS rankings. Among those six schools, only a person associated with U of Chicago would use the rather odd “Top 5” qualifier. So, if we are talking about U of Chicago, an unhooked 2100 is imaginable since the school is neither as selective, nor as desirable as the other five schools (though it is a selective and desirable school, to be sure). Chicago also has a quirky essay and application and is known to deemphasize test scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holistic is an excuse for arbitrary and subjective masking of hidden intentions and initiatives

By claiming to use a Holistic approach, a school insulates itself from any objective evaluation of admission policies.

There are three main hooks that will get you in with less than perfect credentials: Athlete; Underrepresented Minority; Legacy. For specific example, look at the scatter grams on Naviance or similar system and you'll see plenty of less than perfect credentials that resulted in admission.

Sigh. No, these hooks are not the only reasons you will see admits on Naviance who have less than perfect scores.

DC recently got into a USNWR top 5 school without any of these hooks, and SATs of only 2100 (but GPA of 3.9 unweighted and lots of AP scores of 5). DC got in due to stellar accomplishments in a certain field, which I'm not going to describe here to protect DC's privacy. Also killed the essays. In other words, it's tough for all kids, but if you hit all the notes, and you're also really, really good at something (state or national competition or award), you don't necessarily need one of the hooks mentioned above.

I’m very skeptical if the “Top 5” school mentioned is the traditional HYP, Columbia or Stanford, but I could see a U of Chicago parent claiming that U of Chicago is also “Top 5” based on the most recent US NEWS rankings. Among those six schools, only a person associated with U of Chicago would use the rather odd “Top 5” qualifier. So, if we are talking about U of Chicago, an unhooked 2100 is imaginable since the school is neither as selective, nor as desirable as the other five schools (though it is a selective and desirable school, to be sure). Chicago also has a quirky essay and application and is known to deemphasize test scores.

Obsess much? You forgot two other schools that are arguably more likely to appear on a Top 5 list than U Chicago.

PS. It wasn't U Chicago. But be as skeptical as you like, dear troll! It's fun to watch you get in a twist over this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holistic is an excuse for arbitrary and subjective masking of hidden intentions and initiatives

By claiming to use a Holistic approach, a school insulates itself from any objective evaluation of admission policies.

There are three main hooks that will get you in with less than perfect credentials: Athlete; Underrepresented Minority; Legacy. For specific example, look at the scatter grams on Naviance or similar system and you'll see plenty of less than perfect credentials that resulted in admission.

Sigh. No, these hooks are not the only reasons you will see admits on Naviance who have less than perfect scores.

DC recently got into a USNWR top 5 school without any of these hooks, and SATs of only 2100 (but GPA of 3.9 unweighted and lots of AP scores of 5). DC got in due to stellar accomplishments in a certain field, which I'm not going to describe here to protect DC's privacy. Also killed the essays. In other words, it's tough for all kids, but if you hit all the notes, and you're also really, really good at something (state or national competition or award), you don't necessarily need one of the hooks mentioned above.

I’m very skeptical if the “Top 5” school mentioned is the traditional HYP, Columbia or Stanford, but I could see a U of Chicago parent claiming that U of Chicago is also “Top 5” based on the most recent US NEWS rankings. Among those six schools, only a person associated with U of Chicago would use the rather odd “Top 5” qualifier. So, if we are talking about U of Chicago, an unhooked 2100 is imaginable since the school is neither as selective, nor as desirable as the other five schools (though it is a selective and desirable school, to be sure). Chicago also has a quirky essay and application and is known to deemphasize test scores.

Obsess much? You forgot two other schools that are arguably more likely to appear on a Top 5 list than U Chicago.

PS. It wasn't U Chicago. But be as skeptical as you like, dear troll! It's fun to watch you get in a twist over this.

PPS. Just to be clear, I'm not going to participate in a guessing game until you figure out DC's school. Just to say, not U Chicago.

Good night, dear troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2100 is not good enough for top 10 universities. There were plenty of kids from my child's HS with 2300 or better SAT scores, in the top 15% of class with tons of ECs and national recognitions and awards being rejected by top 10 universities unless the applicant happens to be URM.

Absolutely wrong. My own DC got into a Top 5 with a score of exactly 2100. Granted, this score was in the 25% percentile for this Top 5 university, but still well within the range.

But you're not telling the whole story, right? legacy, double legacy, athlete, minority, extraordinary feats of strength?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2100 is not good enough for top 10 universities. There were plenty of kids from my child's HS with 2300 or better SAT scores, in the top 15% of class with tons of ECs and national recognitions and awards being rejected by top 10 universities unless the applicant happens to be URM.

Absolutely wrong. My own DC got into a Top 5 with a score of exactly 2100. Granted, this score was in the 25% percentile for this Top 5 university, but still well within the range.

Maybe there were other factors such as legacy, athlete or other hook or being in the top 1% of the class etc. Applicant with 2100 SAT score with no hooks, not URM and so so GPA/ranking will NOT be admitted to the top 5 university unless the kid is URM.

Nope. DC is a white girl from the DMV suburbs - two anti-hooks, if anything. DC is not a legacy or an athletic recruit, either. DC does happen to excel, at the national level, in a particular passion. Building a class with kids with many talents is the very definition of "holistic admissions," my friend.

WTF is wrong with you? You have already been told similar facts many times.

All, so I was right - "extraordinary feats of strength".

[Anonymous]

Ignore this troll. She has been on DCUm for years talking about how her "unhooked" daughter got into Columbia from Montgomery County PUBLIC schools. She used to troll the private independent school forum, now she trolls the college forum. she also brags that she went to an Ivy and her husband went to a "public Ivy." Very tedious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm calling BS on this.

PP is careful not to detail the so-called "passion" that DC excels at. That is either because PP is making it up, or because the "particular passion" is so rare that revealing it would compromise anonymity (e.g., the DC is the daughter of a famous person (unlikely) or a celebrity (e.g., Jody Foster going to Princeton). I think it is probably BS, but in either case unspecified exceptions don't mean much. No one denies that there are exceptional cases. The averages don't lie.

You're absolutely right. There's no way I'm going to out my DD to a troll such as yourself. Many national-level awards are quite specific.

I really don't give a flying you-know-what whether some troll on DCUM believes me or not. You can educate yourself with actual facts like the one I just provided re 2100 SATs, or you can ignore it because it doesn't fit your bigoted worldview. I certainly won't be worrying about what you think.

Buh bye, troll!

You certainly like using the term "troll' for someone pretending and posting false information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ignore this troll. She has been on DCUm for years talking about how her "unhooked" daug got into Columbia from Montgomery County PUBLIC schools. She used to troll the private independent school forum, now she trolls the college forum. she also brags that she went to an Ivy and her husband went to a "public Ivy." Very tedious.

Wow, you have issues! You've got me confused with about 10 other posters. Since DD is a frosh, I don't see how I could have been bragging about this "for years." You're also wrong about several other of those supposed points in my and DD's backgrounds.

For the rest of you: this sad bigot has been trying to "prove" that the only URMs can get into top colleges with SATs of 2100, because only affirmative action can explain such "low" SAT scores winning admissions to top colleges. She has a bee in her bonnet about affirmative action letting under-qualified minorities into top schools, to the detriment of more deserving whites (I know, ugh). I was merely pointing out that my own unhooked, white DD got into a very top school with SATs of *gasp* 2100. Because this awful bigot simply cannot comprehend that such a thing might be true--because it doesn't fit her bigoted worldview--she has spent the last 3 pages obsessively trying out various arguments as to why my DD's experience is simply impossible. Now that all her other arguments have failed, she's going to call me a troll.

Uncreative, and wrong. And this bigoted idiot certainly won't be on my family's mind when our 2100 SAT DD collects her diploma from her top 5 school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignore this troll. She has been on DCUm for years talking about how her "unhooked" daug got into Columbia from Montgomery County PUBLIC schools. She used to troll the private independent school forum, now she trolls the college forum. she also brags that she went to an Ivy and her husband went to a "public Ivy." Very tedious.

Wow, you have issues! You've got me confused with about 10 other posters. Since DD is a frosh, I don't see how I could have been bragging about this "for years." You're also wrong about several other of those supposed points in my and DD's backgrounds.

For the rest of you: this sad bigot has been trying to "prove" that the only URMs can get into top colleges with SATs of 2100, because only affirmative action can explain such "low" SAT scores winning admissions to top colleges. She has a bee in her bonnet about affirmative action letting under-qualified minorities into top schools, to the detriment of more deserving whites (I know, ugh). I was merely pointing out that my own unhooked, white DD got into a very top school with SATs of *gasp* 2100. Because this awful bigot simply cannot comprehend that such a thing might be true--because it doesn't fit her bigoted worldview--she has spent the last 3 pages obsessively trying out various arguments as to why my DD's experience is simply impossible. Now that all her other arguments have failed, she's going to call me a troll.

Uncreative, and wrong. And this bigoted idiot certainly won't be on my family's mind when our 2100 SAT DD collects her diploma from her top 5 school.

Looks like you moved on to "bigot" as your preferred term from "troll" after you were accused of being a troll yourself. Why don't you name the supposed top 5 school and describe in general terms what the national recognition was and the readers can see if your posts are reasonable. Just insisting 2100 with no hooks can get you accepted to top 5 school seems unreasonable without more explanation.