Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And last year, lots of kids with 4.0s were not invited to interview. So don’t count on a high gpa as getting you through the first hurdle
This. GPA had very little to do with who was interviewed.
Let’s not be too dramatic - GPA had a lot to do with it, but not everything. Teacher recommendations mattered too. My kid personally knows smart kids who were jerks to teachers who didn’t get in.
We don’t need to rehash all the imperfections of the admissions when demand is greater than supply, but saying GPA didn’t matter much isn’t accurate.
Apparently we do need to rehash the imperfections of the admissions when demand is greater than supply, because you obviously haven’t accepted the fundamental lesson of Walls admissions today, which is: because the number of intelligent and otherwise deserving kids outstrips the number of seats available, the fact that a kid is not accepted to Walls doesn’t mean anything at all about that kid. They might be very smart and otherwise very wonderful. Because admissions are highly random.
That doesn’t mean admissions is random. It means there are more very smart and otherwise wonderful kids in the applicant pool than spots available at the school. There is nothing you can do about that except open another application school. But when they do that (Bard, Coolidge early HS, etc.) it doesn’t get the same interest level.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And last year, lots of kids with 4.0s were not invited to interview. So don’t count on a high gpa as getting you through the first hurdle
This. GPA had very little to do with who was interviewed.
Let’s not be too dramatic - GPA had a lot to do with it, but not everything. Teacher recommendations mattered too. My kid personally knows smart kids who were jerks to teachers who didn’t get in.
We don’t need to rehash all the imperfections of the admissions when demand is greater than supply, but saying GPA didn’t matter much isn’t accurate.
Apparently we do need to rehash the imperfections of the admissions when demand is greater than supply, because you obviously haven’t accepted the fundamental lesson of Walls admissions today, which is: because the number of intelligent and otherwise deserving kids outstrips the number of seats available, the fact that a kid is not accepted to Walls doesn’t mean anything at all about that kid. They might be very smart and otherwise very wonderful. Because admissions are highly random.
That doesn’t mean admissions is random. It means there are more very smart and otherwise wonderful kids in the applicant pool than spots available at the school. There is nothing you can do about that except open another application school. But when they do that (Bard, Coolidge early HS, etc.) it doesn’t get the same interest level.
It’s not about having enough seats. All the kids I know left out of Walls landed on their feet and are doing well in high school.
All I am asking you to concede is that when “there are more very smart and otherwise wonderful kids in the applicant pool than spots available at the school,” that means that some of the kids who did not get into the school are still “very smart and otherwise wonderful.”
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And last year, lots of kids with 4.0s were not invited to interview. So don’t count on a high gpa as getting you through the first hurdle
This. GPA had very little to do with who was interviewed.
Let’s not be too dramatic - GPA had a lot to do with it, but not everything. Teacher recommendations mattered too. My kid personally knows smart kids who were jerks to teachers who didn’t get in.
We don’t need to rehash all the imperfections of the admissions when demand is greater than supply, but saying GPA didn’t matter much isn’t accurate.
Apparently we do need to rehash the imperfections of the admissions when demand is greater than supply, because you obviously haven’t accepted the fundamental lesson of Walls admissions today, which is: because the number of intelligent and otherwise deserving kids outstrips the number of seats available, the fact that a kid is not accepted to Walls doesn’t mean anything at all about that kid. They might be very smart and otherwise very wonderful. Because admissions are highly random.
That doesn’t mean admissions is random. It means there are more very smart and otherwise wonderful kids in the applicant pool than spots available at the school. There is nothing you can do about that except open another application school. But when they do that (Bard, Coolidge early HS, etc.) it doesn’t get the same interest level.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And last year, lots of kids with 4.0s were not invited to interview. So don’t count on a high gpa as getting you through the first hurdle
This. GPA had very little to do with who was interviewed.
Let’s not be too dramatic - GPA had a lot to do with it, but not everything. Teacher recommendations mattered too. My kid personally knows smart kids who were jerks to teachers who didn’t get in.
We don’t need to rehash all the imperfections of the admissions when demand is greater than supply, but saying GPA didn’t matter much isn’t accurate.
Apparently we do need to rehash the imperfections of the admissions when demand is greater than supply, because you obviously haven’t accepted the fundamental lesson of Walls admissions today, which is: because the number of intelligent and otherwise deserving kids outstrips the number of seats available, the fact that a kid is not accepted to Walls doesn’t mean anything at all about that kid. They might be very smart and otherwise very wonderful. Because admissions are highly random.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And last year, lots of kids with 4.0s were not invited to interview. So don’t count on a high gpa as getting you through the first hurdle
This. GPA had very little to do with who was interviewed.
Let’s not be too dramatic - GPA had a lot to do with it, but not everything. Teacher recommendations mattered too. My kid personally knows smart kids who were jerks to teachers who didn’t get in.
We don’t need to rehash all the imperfections of the admissions when demand is greater than supply, but saying GPA didn’t matter much isn’t accurate.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And last year, lots of kids with 4.0s were not invited to interview. So don’t count on a high gpa as getting you through the first hurdle
This. GPA had very little to do with who was interviewed.
Let’s not be too dramatic - GPA had a lot to do with it, but not everything. Teacher recommendations mattered too. My kid personally knows smart kids who were jerks to teachers who didn’t get in.
We don’t need to rehash all the imperfections of the admissions when demand is greater than supply, but saying GPA didn’t matter much isn’t accurate.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And last year, lots of kids with 4.0s were not invited to interview. So don’t count on a high gpa as getting you through the first hurdle
This. GPA had very little to do with who was interviewed.
Anonymous wrote:And last year, lots of kids with 4.0s were not invited to interview. So don’t count on a high gpa as getting you through the first hurdle