Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents and students here aren’t blaming “others”. They are blaming a broken system

Amen. It's more than just a flood of applicants and even the flood of applicants has its origin, which is part of the broken system.

Aren't we get vocal and drive change when things are broken? And if you don't think things are broken when 1600 SAT scores and 4.5 GPAs don't get you into good schools, we have different expectations for Higher EDUCATION in America.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents and students here aren’t blaming “others”. They are blaming a broken system

Amen. It's more than just a flood of applicants and even the flood of applicants has its origin, which is part of the broken system.

Aren't we get vocal and drive change when things are broken? And if you don't think things are broken when 1600 SAT scores and 4.5 GPAs don't get you into good schools, we have different expectations for Higher EDUCATION in America.

We have barely any “bad” universities in this country though. There were students from 4,000 miles away happy to be at the rural state school I went to.

Anonymous wrote:Parents and students here aren’t blaming “others”. They are blaming a broken system

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think grade and SAT inflation is also really hurting parent and student expectations. Back in the 90s only 1-2 kids at my high school had a 4.0 GPA. There were no weighted classes so no GPAs above a 4.0 at all. I got into Carnegie Mellon with a 3.75 GPA, which was very near the top of the class for my high school; the top student ended up at Harvard.

Now students who would have been B students in the 90s have 4.3 GPA, leading both them and their parents not to realize that a top GPA is now a 4.9 or some other nonsense. It's the same with SAT scores. A 1400 used to be really good. Now it seems anything under a 1550 is mediocre. All of the good students are bunched at the top, leading to a lack of separation amongst top students and more of a lotto feeling as to who gets in. The grading scale is fundamentally broken.

It's not broken, it's intentional. And it should be considered fraud. The school brass and teachers keep gullible parents dumb and happy (and quiet) with fake As and the College Board gets suckers hooked to their fake inflated tests.

I see so many parents bragging about their kid's "all A's" and you can just tell by the course list and the kid's orbit they are an average layabout. The parents who brag about the A's never brag about official AP scores or SAT score.

Because those tests are not as predictive as grades are.

And we know you hate public schools.

My kids went to Fairfax County public schools for 12 years, and I think those tests are much more predictive and objective.
Grades fluctuate even with the luck with teachers. Some teachers are laid back and give more generous grades. Some teachers are harsh graders.
Imagine the fluctuation by different schools, counties, states, and parts of countries.

I agree that GPA is the least reliable indicator of academic ability and actual knowledge acquisition, though it may be a good indicator of knowing how to figure out teachers and give them what they want, plus some short term memory ability if you have a shcool that actually gives tests (many don't even bother with that anymore). These are skills too, and both require a lot of faking it sometimes. Not everyone is good at that. Getting good grades is often a big measure of EQ and how charming you are, as teachers do have a lot of subjective input into the final letter that goes on the report card.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process may be broken, but we also must understand that capacity at the best schools has not kept pace with the increase in applications. Moreover, there are just more qualified kids. In the past, not everyone was aware of how to play the game at elite schools, but now more people test prep, develop hooks, and are aware of needs-blind admissions. Also, there are so many more opportunities for poor and/or minority kids to attend elite colleges, like Questbridge. Is sum, I don’t know if the system is broken as much as people don’t realize there is a supply constraint even as demand increases. That means the “price” - in this case, the acceptance hurdle - must go higher, which means a lower acceptance rate.

Right. Which means that checking all the boxes for Harvard are necessary, but not sufficient, for admission.

I know someone who was accepted to Harvard. Yes, she got good grades and scores.But so did thousands of others She is also a professional ballerina. Really - who can compete with something like this? 😂

Yeah, that’s the kind of hook an UMC white kid needs. Or ROTC. I get why schools want URM, I’m not bashing that and I support it. But if you’re white and neither first gen nor a legacy, you need to be extra unique - like pro ballerina unique - or a recruitable athlete.

This is a funny post. You're upset that if you're white and not first gen, a recruited athlete or a legacy you need to have something else? You do realize that most legacies are white, as are most recruited athletes? You've listed multiple ways that white kids have an advantage but still imply that somehow URMs are the major issue. Thanks for the laugh.

I’m not upset. My kid didn’t even apply to those kinds of schools. It’s just the way admissions are now - and I said I support the URM policies. Why do you think all white kids should be judged the same though? Are all white people the same? Thanks for the laugh.

All white people are not the same but neither are all URMs. And even those who "support" URM admissions paint them as the major problem when all the benefits for white people outweigh any benefits to URM.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think grade and SAT inflation is also really hurting parent and student expectations. Back in the 90s only 1-2 kids at my high school had a 4.0 GPA. There were no weighted classes so no GPAs above a 4.0 at all. I got into Carnegie Mellon with a 3.75 GPA, which was very near the top of the class for my high school; the top student ended up at Harvard.

Now students who would have been B students in the 90s have 4.3 GPA, leading both them and their parents not to realize that a top GPA is now a 4.9 or some other nonsense. It's the same with SAT scores. A 1400 used to be really good. Now it seems anything under a 1550 is mediocre. All of the good students are bunched at the top, leading to a lack of separation amongst top students and more of a lotto feeling as to who gets in. The grading scale is fundamentally broken.

It's not broken, it's intentional. And it should be considered fraud. The school brass and teachers keep gullible parents dumb and happy (and quiet) with fake As and the College Board gets suckers hooked to their fake inflated tests.

I see so many parents bragging about their kid's "all A's" and you can just tell by the course list and the kid's orbit they are an average layabout. The parents who brag about the A's never brag about official AP scores or SAT score.

Because those tests are not as predictive as grades are.

And we know you hate public schools.

My kids went to Fairfax County public schools for 12 years, and I think those tests are much more predictive and objective.
Grades fluctuate even with the luck with teachers. Some teachers are laid back and give more generous grades. Some teachers are harsh graders.
Imagine the fluctuation by different schools, counties, states, and parts of countries.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents and students here aren’t blaming “others”. They are blaming a broken system

Amen. It's more than just a flood of applicants and even the flood of applicants has its origin, which is part of the broken system.

Aren't we get vocal and drive change when things are broken? And if you don't think things are broken when 1600 SAT scores and 4.5 GPAs don't get you into good schools, we have different expectations for Higher EDUCATION in America.

Anonymous wrote:Parents and students here aren’t blaming “others”. They are blaming a broken system

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process may be broken, but we also must understand that capacity at the best schools has not kept pace with the increase in applications. Moreover, there are just more qualified kids. In the past, not everyone was aware of how to play the game at elite schools, but now more people test prep, develop hooks, and are aware of needs-blind admissions. Also, there are so many more opportunities for poor and/or minority kids to attend elite colleges, like Questbridge. Is sum, I don’t know if the system is broken as much as people don’t realize there is a supply constraint even as demand increases. That means the “price” - in this case, the acceptance hurdle - must go higher, which means a lower acceptance rate.

Right. Which means that checking all the boxes for Harvard are necessary, but not sufficient, for admission.

I know someone who was accepted to Harvard. Yes, she got good grades and scores.But so did thousands of others She is also a professional ballerina. Really - who can compete with something like this? 😂

Yeah, that’s the kind of hook an UMC white kid needs. Or ROTC. I get why schools want URM, I’m not bashing that and I support it. But if you’re white and neither first gen nor a legacy, you need to be extra unique - like pro ballerina unique - or a recruitable athlete.

This is a funny post. You're upset that if you're white and not first gen, a recruited athlete or a legacy you need to have something else? You do realize that most legacies are white, as are most recruited athletes? You've listed multiple ways that white kids have an advantage but still imply that somehow URMs are the major issue. Thanks for the laugh.

I’m not upset. My kid didn’t even apply to those kinds of schools. It’s just the way admissions are now - and I said I support the URM policies. Why do you think all white kids should be judged the same though? Are all white people the same? Thanks for the laugh.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process may be broken, but we also must understand that capacity at the best schools has not kept pace with the increase in applications. Moreover, there are just more qualified kids. In the past, not everyone was aware of how to play the game at elite schools, but now more people test prep, develop hooks, and are aware of needs-blind admissions. Also, there are so many more opportunities for poor and/or minority kids to attend elite colleges, like Questbridge. Is sum, I don’t know if the system is broken as much as people don’t realize there is a supply constraint even as demand increases. That means the “price” - in this case, the acceptance hurdle - must go higher, which means a lower acceptance rate.

Right. Which means that checking all the boxes for Harvard are necessary, but not sufficient, for admission.

I know someone who was accepted to Harvard. Yes, she got good grades and scores.But so did thousands of others She is also a professional ballerina. Really - who can compete with something like this? 😂

What is wrong with student at that level of talent going to an elite college? Imagine the talent drive and work that went into developing ballet to the point where you can work professionally in the field at the age of 17. That seems like the type of person that would be a good fit for an elite university.

Also lucky genetics and an enormous amount of money. Same as an athlete. But yes, it takes a lot of hard work and discipline.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process may be broken, but we also must understand that capacity at the best schools has not kept pace with the increase in applications. Moreover, there are just more qualified kids. In the past, not everyone was aware of how to play the game at elite schools, but now more people test prep, develop hooks, and are aware of needs-blind admissions. Also, there are so many more opportunities for poor and/or minority kids to attend elite colleges, like Questbridge. Is sum, I don’t know if the system is broken as much as people don’t realize there is a supply constraint even as demand increases. That means the “price” - in this case, the acceptance hurdle - must go higher, which means a lower acceptance rate.

Right. Which means that checking all the boxes for Harvard are necessary, but not sufficient, for admission.

I know someone who was accepted to Harvard. Yes, she got good grades and scores.But so did thousands of others She is also a professional ballerina. Really - who can compete with something like this? 😂

Yeah, that’s the kind of hook an UMC white kid needs. Or ROTC. I get why schools want URM, I’m not bashing that and I support it. But if you’re white and neither first gen nor a legacy, you need to be extra unique - like pro ballerina unique - or a recruitable athlete.

This is a funny post. You're upset that if you're white and not first gen, a recruited athlete or a legacy you need to have something else? You do realize that most legacies are white, as are most recruited athletes? You've listed multiple ways that white kids have an advantage but still imply that somehow URMs are the major issue. Thanks for the laugh.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process may be broken, but we also must understand that capacity at the best schools has not kept pace with the increase in applications. Moreover, there are just more qualified kids. In the past, not everyone was aware of how to play the game at elite schools, but now more people test prep, develop hooks, and are aware of needs-blind admissions. Also, there are so many more opportunities for poor and/or minority kids to attend elite colleges, like Questbridge. Is sum, I don’t know if the system is broken as much as people don’t realize there is a supply constraint even as demand increases. That means the “price” - in this case, the acceptance hurdle - must go higher, which means a lower acceptance rate.

Right. Which means that checking all the boxes for Harvard are necessary, but not sufficient, for admission.

I know someone who was accepted to Harvard. Yes, she got good grades and scores.But so did thousands of others She is also a professional ballerina. Really - who can compete with something like this? 😂

What is wrong with student at that level of talent going to an elite college? Imagine the talent drive and work that went into developing ballet to the point where you can work professionally in the field at the age of 17. That seems like the type of person that would be a good fit for an elite university.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process may be broken, but we also must understand that capacity at the best schools has not kept pace with the increase in applications. Moreover, there are just more qualified kids. In the past, not everyone was aware of how to play the game at elite schools, but now more people test prep, develop hooks, and are aware of needs-blind admissions. Also, there are so many more opportunities for poor and/or minority kids to attend elite colleges, like Questbridge. Is sum, I don’t know if the system is broken as much as people don’t realize there is a supply constraint even as demand increases. That means the “price” - in this case, the acceptance hurdle - must go higher, which means a lower acceptance rate.

Right. Which means that checking all the boxes for Harvard are necessary, but not sufficient, for admission.

I know someone who was accepted to Harvard. Yes, she got good grades and scores.But so did thousands of others She is also a professional ballerina. Really - who can compete with something like this? 😂

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think grade and SAT inflation is also really hurting parent and student expectations. Back in the 90s only 1-2 kids at my high school had a 4.0 GPA. There were no weighted classes so no GPAs above a 4.0 at all. I got into Carnegie Mellon with a 3.75 GPA, which was very near the top of the class for my high school; the top student ended up at Harvard.

Now students who would have been B students in the 90s have 4.3 GPA, leading both them and their parents not to realize that a top GPA is now a 4.9 or some other nonsense. It's the same with SAT scores. A 1400 used to be really good. Now it seems anything under a 1550 is mediocre. All of the good students are bunched at the top, leading to a lack of separation amongst top students and more of a lotto feeling as to who gets in. The grading scale is fundamentally broken.

It's not broken, it's intentional. And it should be considered fraud. The school brass and teachers keep gullible parents dumb and happy (and quiet) with fake As and the College Board gets suckers hooked to their fake inflated tests.

I see so many parents bragging about their kid's "all A's" and you can just tell by the course list and the kid's orbit they are an average layabout. The parents who brag about the A's never brag about official AP scores or SAT score.

Because those tests are not as predictive as grades are.

And we know you hate public schools.