Match stats, great character, ROTC female at a a school where very few kids go ROTC

Anonymous wrote:Son got into his reach last year. His grades were average, his SAT slightly above average. BUT...

• he took very difficult classes; 7 AP classes, a mix of STEM and humanities
• he took the same language for five years (including middle school); did a summer Governor's school for the same language
• played the same instrument for 6 years
• played a varsity sport for 4 years
• had a very personal, unique and insightful essay

He is not an URM. I'm not sure what it was that put him over the edge, but he's at the school now and we are all still sort of in awe.

My guess would be the essay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD at top 3 SLAC. Perfect grades, high test scores, one outstanding recommendation ("best student I ever had..."), interesting ECs, ED2, full pay, not from the DC area.

Again that was not a reach situation

The top 3 LACs (and a bit beyond beyond) are a reach for everyone and reject plenty of kids with stats like that. They are also need blind so full pay has no effect.

It's the OP that references full pay as a "help."

The enrollment managers and admin staff know who is full pay. Don't be naive.

You're a conspiracy theorist? Can you provide some evidence for your entirely unsubstantiated claim?

The FACT is that need blind colleges are ABSOLUTELY NEED BLIND IN ADMISSIONS, and they can be because the vast majority of top applicants are affluent. The don't consider FA and they don't have to. So being full pay is absolutely no benefit over the other candidates.

There has never been one iota of evidence otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD at top 3 SLAC. Perfect grades, high test scores, one outstanding recommendation ("best student I ever had..."), interesting ECs, ED2, full pay, not from the DC area.

Again that was not a reach situation

The top 3 LACs (and a bit beyond beyond) are a reach for everyone and reject plenty of kids with stats like that. They are also need blind so full pay has no effect.

It's the OP that references full pay as a "help."

The enrollment managers and admin staff know who is full pay. Don't be naive.

Was agreeing with the statement that the top 3 LAC's etc are a reach for everyone.

My kid got a letter from AO at school with < 3.5% acceptance rate. Apparently it was their character, achievements and potential. That’s all I “know.”

My best guess — character was from a service project, LOR and essays; achievements was national/international awards in competitions. Potential was probably LOR and essays.

FWIW, my kid cannot write essays that read like novels, but they wrote about how they see themselves contributing at the intersection of their interests — something that will be important to all of us in the years to come. And their story was certainly unique.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD at top 3 SLAC. Perfect grades, high test scores, one outstanding recommendation ("best student I ever had..."), interesting ECs, ED2, full pay, not from the DC area.

Again that was not a reach situation

The top 3 LACs (and a bit beyond beyond) are a reach for everyone and reject plenty of kids with stats like that. They are also need blind so full pay has no effect.

It's the OP that references full pay as a "help."

The enrollment managers and admin staff know who is full pay. Don't be naive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD at top 3 SLAC. Perfect grades, high test scores, one outstanding recommendation ("best student I ever had..."), interesting ECs, ED2, full pay, not from the DC area.

Again that was not a reach situation

The top 3 LACs (and a bit beyond beyond) are a reach for everyone and reject plenty of kids with stats like that. They are also need blind so full pay has no effect.

+1000

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD at top 3 SLAC. Perfect grades, high test scores, one outstanding recommendation ("best student I ever had..."), interesting ECs, ED2, full pay, not from the DC area.

Again that was not a reach situation

The top 3 LACs (and a bit beyond beyond) are a reach for everyone and reject plenty of kids with stats like that. They are also need blind so full pay has no effect.

Anonymous wrote:DD at top 3 SLAC. Perfect grades, high test scores, one outstanding recommendation ("best student I ever had..."), interesting ECs, ED2, full pay, not from the DC area.

Again that was not a reach situation

full pay!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And money + URM is the golden ticket.

This was the golden ticket, now it's high stat First Gen or white male.

Are you being sarcastic?

I have noticed the disparities in male vs. female applicants in the common data sets. Is being a male really consider an advantage at this point?

Yes. The advantage for males is slight, but real.

But not in top 10-top 20 schools. It's been documented at the top schools they have no problem balancing gender because large numbers of qualified males and females apply in equal numbers.

When you start going down in rankings below #30 it slowly starts giving a very tiny advantage.

At the SLACs the disparity is huge, even at the top

There’s a disparity in number of applicants at some, but a disparity in quality of enrolled students based on gender is very unlikely and would be news to me. Diminishing returns after a point.

Explain this to me. If you have 8000 more female applicants than male applicants and the schools aim to have evenly split classes, how is it not an advantage to be a male applicant when the percentage of acceptances is necessarily higher?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paid $150 K for private high school with well-connected college counselors who could pick up the phone, chat with the college AO, and make all the difference in the world.

BS as top private school parent that is a myth

This. It is a total lie. Sure, any counselor can call the someone in the office who is assigned to their region, but in no way do they make the decisions. This is Bs.

There is a big difference between making the decisions, and an adcom saying "I trust this guy, he says this is the kid we want". Recommendations from trusted sources are the most powerful thing in employment decisions, why would it be any different in admissions?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re fairly certain it was the sustained investment in voodoo magic. The sessions with Madame Laveau were expensive, but so worth it. Wife fainted a few times, but, really, who doesn’t during the application process?

Sadly, I feel I need to come clean: that was an attempt at satirical levity folks.

Too late. I already ordered my lucky troll dolls. Welp, there's always bingo night.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re fairly certain it was the sustained investment in voodoo magic. The sessions with Madame Laveau were expensive, but so worth it. Wife fainted a few times, but, really, who doesn’t during the application process?

Sadly, I feel I need to come clean: that was an attempt at satirical levity folks.

Too late. I already ordered my lucky troll dolls. Welp, there's always bingo night.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And money + URM is the golden ticket.

This was the golden ticket, now it's high stat First Gen or white male.

Are you being sarcastic?

I have noticed the disparities in male vs. female applicants in the common data sets. Is being a male really consider an advantage at this point?

Yes. The advantage for males is slight, but real.

But not in top 10-top 20 schools. It's been documented at the top schools they have no problem balancing gender because large numbers of qualified males and females apply in equal numbers.

When you start going down in rankings below #30 it slowly starts giving a very tiny advantage.

At the SLACs the disparity is huge, even at the top

There’s a disparity in number of applicants at some, but a disparity in quality of enrolled students based on gender is very unlikely and would be news to me. Diminishing returns after a point.