You guys are missing the point.

They are looking for kids with an authentic “love of learning”. Lots of ways to display this, one of which is OPs barb/multi-spike strategy though it is not the only one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you tell us for those of you who got in the school/scores? Is it a barb with a 1450 and 3.8? Or are we talking tip top?

3.85 private
test optional.

Hard to believe if unhooked. So far, I never see anyone getting into HYPSM without 4.0. But I only see less than 10 students, all in public school.

Most top privates don't graduate a single kid with a 4.0.

Anecdotally, DC and classmates admitted to HYPSM in the early round from our public had 1 or 2 Bs.

A bunch with 4.0s apply, obviously, and some get in and many are rejected.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you tell us for those of you who got in the school/scores? Is it a barb with a 1450 and 3.8? Or are we talking tip top?

3.85 private
test optional.

Hard to believe if unhooked. So far, I never see anyone getting into HYPSM without 4.0. But I only see less than 10 students, all in public school.

Most top privates don't graduate a single kid with a 4.0.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a professor and the idea of strategic position is so nauseating to me that I feel like writing a letter to our admissions office to let them know about what I read in this forum and others.

To be clear, I am not attacking the OP. She did what she felt she had to do to benefit her child. However, favoring students with unusual niche interests is clearly not the best way to find the most authentic students. Maybe this approach was more authentic 10 years ago before college admissions officers and parents pushed it en masse, but clearly this is no longer the way.

I always wonder how professors view their admissions offices and admission priorities.

Our child was told that activism was the essential key to admission to selective colleges. He followed a different path and somehow ended up at HYSPM.

He has met many classmates who were primarily involved in activism and impact-oriented activities. Sadly, he has seen those classmates struggle with the material to the confusion of their professors. I wonder if professors understand what the admissions offices are doing.

They do. I posted before that Princeton professors gave such feedback to the admissions office. Of course some kids can still slip in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you tell us for those of you who got in the school/scores? Is it a barb with a 1450 and 3.8? Or are we talking tip top?

3.85 private
test optional.

Hard to believe if unhooked. So far, I never see anyone getting into HYPSM without 4.0. But I only see less than 10 students, all in public school.

I’ve seen much much lower GPA at private for Cornell…private and public are soooo different.

Is this strategy more effective in RD when spots are scarcer and AO have to defend applicants?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you tell us for those of you who got in the school/scores? Is it a barb with a 1450 and 3.8? Or are we talking tip top?

3.85 private
test optional.

Hard to believe if unhooked. So far, I never see anyone getting into HYPSM without 4.0. But I only see less than 10 students, all in public school.

Anonymous wrote:OP is lying. It is all made up.

Why would she lie - but it is just someone's opinion. The truth is no one really knows? Can only speculate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are all the kids with “barbs” like socially and academically? Are they more likely to be super competitive and less collaborative in college because they are laser focused on the next goal - internship, medical school, etc. It all sounds exhausting.

IMO very social, gregarious and well adjusted.

Usually not STEM at all.

About 30% of all freshmen intend to pursue a stem major.
About 20% graduate with a stem degree.

A true CS/Engineering kid often has a transcript/resume that’s hard to run or hide from.

IMO these barb “tricks” work better for economics or math.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are all the kids with “barbs” like socially and academically? Are they more likely to be super competitive and less collaborative in college because they are laser focused on the next goal - internship, medical school, etc. It all sounds exhausting.

IMO very social, gregarious and well adjusted.

Usually not STEM at all.

About 30% of all freshmen intend to pursue a stem major.
About 20% graduate with a stem degree.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a professor and the idea of strategic position is so nauseating to me that I feel like writing a letter to our admissions office to let them know about what I read in this forum and others.

To be clear, I am not attacking the OP. She did what she felt she had to do to benefit her child. However, favoring students with unusual niche interests is clearly not the best way to find the most authentic students. Maybe this approach was more authentic 10 years ago before college admissions officers and parents pushed it en masse, but clearly this is no longer the way.

I always wonder how professors view their admissions offices and admission priorities.

Our child was told that activism was the essential key to admission to selective colleges. He followed a different path and somehow ended up at HYSPM.

He has met many classmates who were primarily involved in activism and impact-oriented activities. Sadly, he has seen those classmates struggle with the material to the confusion of their professors. I wonder if professors understand what the admissions offices are doing.

Professors admit graduate students, and since we work directly with the students we admit, we get obvious feedback on our selection methods. We see some students succeed, and others falter. Admissions officers don't have this benefit, because they will never teach the students they select.

Anonymous wrote:What are all the kids with “barbs” like socially and academically? Are they more likely to be super competitive and less collaborative in college because they are laser focused on the next goal - internship, medical school, etc. It all sounds exhausting.

IMO very social, gregarious and well adjusted.

Usually not STEM at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you have to acknowledge that if a reader is going to remember you, you have to be memorable.

standard strong is not memorable in T20 pools. sorry. tell a story. make it easier on the reader to remember you, like you, want to admit you.

if you think that's a game, then just submit your 1540 and your AP scores and your essays about the big loss as a team that taught you more than the big win as an individual.

You have a point about being memorable but it may apply more to large publics than privates. Many feeder privates have a whopping 60-120 kids per class, among them only 20-30 kids max are considered top 10% and encouraged by CC to apply to T10 unhooked. When you do the math, that means on average T10 will only get 2-4 apps max from that high school. It won't be that hard for the regional rep assigned to the HS to remember the physics girl vs. the history boy.

My kid is at a top feeder in nyc. 150 in his class. College apps are limited. Still going to be 15-20 apps to every H Y P, Penn, Dartmouth Stanford, Duke, MIT, Northwestern, etc. These kids are all going to be top 15% of class (which Naviance shows is going to be good enough), all with an SAT 1540 plus, all great ECs. Some with be donor, legacy, questbridge, or athletes - mostly legacy or QB - or some other real bump. Harvard etc will take up to 4-5 so there's usually just 1 spot for the unhooked kid.

You better believe that one unhooked kid needs a narrative that is memorable

15%? That clearly isn’t a top feeder in NYC. There are at least ten nyc schools that send 40% to Ivy League

No there's not. I think only Brearley is 40%. We send about 30% and that's normal for top tier. (There aren't even 10 top tier HS in nyc)

You can be top 30% and get into Cornell, Columbia, or UChicago. top 25% and get into Brown or Penn A&S. But counselors will only recommend you to HYP if you're top 15% unless very hooked. What you hope is all the billionaires get in during ED and they do.

Riverdale and Spence have had very good results the past few years.

Anonymous wrote:I am a professor and the idea of strategic position is so nauseating to me that I feel like writing a letter to our admissions office to let them know about what I read in this forum and others.

To be clear, I am not attacking the OP. She did what she felt she had to do to benefit her child. However, favoring students with unusual niche interests is clearly not the best way to find the most authentic students. Maybe this approach was more authentic 10 years ago before college admissions officers and parents pushed it en masse, but clearly this is no longer the way.

Holistic college admissions has always been a game of cat and mouse.
Sure, you have the really clear indicators of merit beyond grades like math and science olympiads or westinghouse awards but there aren't enough of those to fill a class, so you look for other indicators of exceptionalism and originality...
It used to be non-profits or pay-to-play research or overseas publications.
Right now it's being really good ay something that nobody else is really good at even if that thing is virtually pointless.
You're the world's greatest vavuzela player in america? WoW!!
You're a cited expert on hummingbird migration patterns through suburban neighborhoods!!! Fantastic!
You raise bees to produce local honey for underprivileged kids with seasonal allergies? Incredible!

What are all the kids with “barbs” like socially and academically? Are they more likely to be super competitive and less collaborative in college because they are laser focused on the next goal - internship, medical school, etc. It all sounds exhausting.