Reply to Schools more difficult to get in than their rankings appear to indicate

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Schools more difficult to get in than their rankings appear to indicate "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Any schools whose institutional priorities require a series of narrow hooks, like FGLI, URM, athletic recruits. Swarthmore, Pomona, and Amherst are two examples. Tiny cohorts, majority URM and/or recruited athletes. There might as well be a sign telling high stats Asian and white kids not to apply.[/quote]

Lots of recruited athletes are white kids.  And, recruited athletes tend to be more socially adept than the population at large.  They are also generally harder working and better at time management.  [/quote]

Oh please [/quote]

Unless the kid is multi-sport, they are not harder working than kid with year-round time-intensive ECs. Whether high-level academic, instrumental etc.[/quote]

No disrespect to kids in year round time-intensive ECs, but this is a profound display of ignorance about the commitment required to participate in a sport at the high school level, especially soccer, basketball and football.  Kids get up at 6am for conditioning alone year round.[/quote]

This comment is in fact a profound display of ignorance about the commitment required for high-level instrumental music.  Serious music students practice at least 2-3 hours/day, year-round.  [/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