Reply to Should admissions be more transparent?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Should admissions be more transparent?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]We tell applicants every year why they get rejected. There’s a lot of other applicants, the applicant pool was strong, and your application wasn’t at the top. Learning to take no for an answer is an important skill.[/quote]

That doesn’t help current juniors choose which schools to put on their college list. The “advice” seems to be, “apply to as many schools as humanly possible, because you have no right to get into any, no matter how well you did in high school! And there’s no way to predict in advance which might accept you!”[/quote]
The advice is to apply to 2 or so safety schools, mostly apply to schools your stats align with, and have a couple reach schools. Any "pressure" to get into a top college is self inflicted.[/quote]

“Any pressure to get into a top college is self inflicted” they say, in the same breath that they tell high-stats kids they should “mostly apply to colleges their stats align with.” This idea that high stats kids should go top colleges, where could it possibly be coming from?[/quote]

Anybody advising solely based on stats is an idiot. Stats means nothing in holistic review. High stat kids with average activities and essays are boring, deal with it. [/quote]

We don't even know who really wrote the essays LOL
Now we have ChatGPT, too.

[/quote]

Who is we? AO’s know and are smarter than you. LOL[/quote]

AO's are low paid mediocre workforce dumber than the applicants LOL[/quote]

^^ This right here shows the kind of disrespectful upbringing which explains why this angry poster's kid didn't get in. [/quote]

Agree. A lot of people don't understand that the AO is curating a class. It's actually not about your kid. It's whether or not they need more "prototypes" like your kid inside the larger class. chances are they don't, especially if CS, math, Eng, with no other special talent.....[/quote]

Curation doesn't need to be a secret.  [/quote]

You want to know how many violin players they need, how many water polo players/equestrians, and Chicano studies majors in the fall for the coming year? It will change from year to year.....It's fluid.
It's entirely subjective. And so different for every school.

It's why kids who get into Dartmouth don't always get into a school like Penn....also, what if they fill those spots in REA/ED....then they have to tell you? What if you spent your whole life trying to get your violin player into either Princeton or Dartmouth, but now that D spot is filled in ED (and your kid applied REA to Princeton but was rejected). Are they supposed to tell you that that spot is gone in December and then you pivot in RD (well, too bad, too late for your kid to pivot)? What kind of crappy Asian style robotic system is that?

Weird that you don't understand why this entire framework is unattractive to Americans.[/quote]

Yes, they should indicate how many violin players or water polo players they pick for the year, so that applicats have information before applying and compete for the spots. No reason what so ever applicants should be blinded.  This has nothing to do with Asian style. Most of other advanced Western countries are not different than the Asian countries. 
You are very weird bringing in Asian to this.

Holistic BS was invented to suppress Jews in the first place.
Last year, colleges lost in the Supreme court for discriminating Asians.
These are very un-American.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics