Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Consultant polished, packaged, fake spikes" are not hooked.

There are tons of fake awards—people call them “spikes.” The forum said private schools like them because they show the family has money and can afford tuition.

You can show you are full pay in many, many other ways.

Asking AI is really a last resort for me. The issue with Naviance is that GPA inflation makes the data unreliable, and there’s no clear way to identify athletic recruits or legacy admits, which—as you mentioned—are likely significant. It’s becoming very hard to find schools with strong academic environments where students genuinely want to learn rather than focus on social life. I feel higher education needs to reflect on its purpose and mission, especially while charging such high tuition. Too many schools function more like adult day care. Students get a paper when they graduate or they simply skip the classes to focus on internships or job hunting, then why go to colleges

Anonymous wrote:WTH is an academically compromised group??

Sounds like a code word. Typical dcum.

Harvard usb~ 50 % donor/ legacy/ sports recruits

~25% academic ( unhooked)
~25% fgli/ low income etc

No wonder remedial classes are so on

WTH is an academically compromised group??

It sounds dubious to me.

(1) I would query whether AI has the necessary T20 data to disaggregate hooked admits from unhooked admits. Do any T20 schools, for example, publish the number/percentage of admits whose parents made donations? And how does one account for applicants with multiple hooks--i.e., the FGLI URM athlete. Does that applicant get counted four times for each separate hook (first gen, low income, URM, and athlete) or as a single, consolidated data point within the 75%?

(2) No one here agrees on what constitutes a "hooked" applicant. Some have extremely expansive definitions, others would limit that term exclusively to FGLI, URM, athletes, and applicants from South Dakota.

(3) Your own definition is ambiguous. I have no idea what "academically compromised groups" means. I doubt AI does either. Similarly, your last category has several ambiguous categories. I don't think many people consider applicants who use consultants to be "hooked." I'm not sure what "packaged" means. And I doubt universities--much less AI apps--know which applicants have "fake spikes." Presumably, if a T20 university knew part of an applicant's application was fake, it wouldn't admit that applicant. And, again, how would AI know what percentage of applicants have fake spikes.

Anonymous wrote:"Consultant polished, packaged, fake spikes" are not hooked.

There are tons of fake awards—people call them “spikes.” The forum said private schools like them because they show the family has money and can afford tuition.

"Consultant polished, packaged, fake spikes" are not hooked.

Anonymous wrote:- who is this? Academically compromised groups
And seriously who is this or who Ethan’s more apt, who is not this that’s left. ‘Consultant polished, packaged, fake spikes ‘

Try being in class while people ask basic questions they should’ve known since middle school.

Anonymous wrote:If I asked AI to calculate the ratio to rule out the hooked admit:
* Athletic recruit
* Legacy or donation
* Academically compromised groups
* Consultant polished, packaged, fake spikes

It leaves 25% of the student body. Does this sound about right? Do we have higher ratio in public universities than private?

That sounds about right for SWAP. 1/3 atheletes, 1/3 FGLI, some legacies and donors, about 1/4 unhooked high stats.

Probably higher at ivies and T20s. Not sure how much.

Anonymous wrote:Troll.

It is not. Some people just want to be around others who think like them and take school seriously.

- who is this? Academically compromised groups


And seriously who is this or who Ethan’s more apt, who is not this that’s left. ‘Consultant polished, packaged, fake spikes ‘

Depends on the size of the school. Smaller schools leave less room for the unhooked.

For an average Ivy-sized T20, 25% seems reasonable. I guess that means a school with a 10% acceptance rate is actually ~2.5% for the unhooked. Again, seems reasonable.

Troll.

If I asked AI to calculate the ratio to rule out the hooked admit:
* Athletic recruit
* Legacy or donation
* Academically compromised groups
* Consultant polished, packaged, fake spikes

It leaves 25% of the student body. Does this sound about right? Do we have higher ratio in public universities than private?