Anonymous wrote:I don’t think the PP was calling Pomona “less selective”. She named a few selective schools DC got into, and then added that DC got into a few other unnamed schools that were less selective.

Anonymous wrote:Accepted- Barnard, Tufts, USC, UVA. Miami- WL Columbia and Brown. Rejected- UPenn. Selected Barnard.

Anonymous wrote:Huh? I thought the Ivies don't have ED I/ED II. HYP are SCEA while the rest are simply ED, no I or II.

Anonymous wrote:Huh? I thought the Ivies don't have ED I/ED II. HYP are SCEA while the rest are simply ED, no I or II.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:anyone have any actual answers for the OP?

Carleton, Bates, Grinnell, W&M, Pomona and a few other less selective LACs. Rejected from Williams and Swarthmore.

Interesting you would put Pomona less selective. My kid at a top area private has similar stats with tough courses and very good ECs and thinks she won't get in at Pomona unless she ED2s. ED1 was to an ivy so is already working on RDs and possible ED2.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:anyone have any actual answers for the OP?

Carleton, Bates, Grinnell, W&M, Pomona and a few other less selective LACs. Rejected from Williams and Swarthmore.

Anonymous wrote:anyone have any actual answers for the OP?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:my kid attends a top local private and I can tell you that the kids I know who are hooked and are applying early to the place where they have a leg up (ie legacy) also are the full package. They have top grades and scores etc. Don't assume that their only advantage is the legacy.

Wow. Your snowflake really deserved it then!!! Silly poster. Do you not realize that their full package was statistically slightly less of a full package??? Their were thousands more that were as good or better without the hook.

I didn't say it was my kid or whether they were admitted. I said that the kids I'm referencing would be competitive under any circumstances. Legacy just makes them harder to beat. I'm not saying that's fair, or that they won't edge out someone equally qualified, just challenging the assumption that legacy applicants are less qualified than other applicants.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the colleges, including Harvard, don't give a shit about the true purpose of affirmative action and their ethical and moral role in making it a success for the greater good of the society. They all want easy way out to check the box and tout the number admitted. They don't care if the student and the family are wealthy and recent immigrants from Africa or the student is from a wealthy, well educated, wellconnected black family. In fact, the colleges prefer it that way so that they don't need to provide academic support services, if needed by the true affirmative action admits. If the colleges really care about it, with their filthy rich tax-exempt endowments they would adopt some school districts in poor neighborhoods and promote Pre-K to 12 schooling and after-school enrichment and use those school districts as pipelines into their Freshman admissions and to show case them as models for success.

The law should be changed for affirmative action to be available to children born only in the U.S. and parental income less than median income of U.S. households ($60K to $75K). There should be birth place and income verification before affirmative action admission is awarded.

Again: Its. Not. Affirmative. Action.

And, for the record, Harvard and other elite colleges do consider family income when admitting, and the Harvard lawsuit showed being poor was an ADVANTAGE in admissions, particularly when coming off the waitlist (where the opposite is true at most colleges which have far smaller endowments).

I said the law should be changed as to how Affirmative Action is defined. It should be restricted to a child born in the U.S. only (of the same races currently recognized as URM) and the household income should be no more than the U.S. median (currently between $65K and $75K).

What does Harvard and other elite colleges considering family income when admitting have to do with what I am proposing. Harvard and other elite colleges will be ashamed if they ever publish and reveal the true picture of their affirmative action admits in terms of family income and wealth, parental education and occupation, and student's birthplace. There colleges will not be able to ignore the wrath of true Social Justice Warriors (hopefully SJWs are not from privileged families).

"Harvard and other elite colleges will be ashamed if they ever publish and reveal the true picture of their affirmative action admits in terms of family income and wealth,"

No they wouldn't because they do not have any "affirmative action admits".