Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of posters complain about how their kids are "bad at taking tests" and therefore have a low SAT/ACT score but decent GPA. Colleges are now allowing test optional applications to address this (thanks to Corona mostly). Great for those parents/kids!
What about kids who didn't do well in 9th and 10th grades academically but got their acts together in 11th/12th? Say they end up with a weighted GPA in the 3.7-4.0 range but end up with a 1550+ in the SATs in junior/senior year. Basically, a good trajectory. Assuming these are male, White or Asian kids that want to do Engineering/CS with no legacy/hooks/sports. Are they pretty much fuc*ed? Will any "top school" touch them?
Would like to hear about schools that really look into the application and select such kids as well as personal experiences. Not interested in "you can get a great education at any school" posts, please.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Top schools have their pick of qualified applicants so why on earth would they chose some late bloomer versus an independently motivated high achiever through all of high school?
This question intrigues me. Some late bloomers go on to far surpass their peers. Is there a way to predict who will do this, and why?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Top schools have their pick of qualified applicants so why on earth would they chose some late bloomer versus an independently motivated high achiever through all of high school?
This question intrigues me. Some late bloomers go on to far surpass their peers. Is there a way to predict who will do this, and why?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just here to say I wish schools only looked at 11th and 12th for gpa. It’s insane to expect consistent perfection, ambition, and long-term planning from kids from 14/15 -17/18 without intense parental control. Wonder why helicopter parents became a thing? I don’t. Colleges reward premature frontal lobe development and controlling parenting (even parents doing some of the kids work)
Top schools have their pick of qualified applicants so why on earth would they chose some late bloomer versus an independently motivated high achiever through all of high school? There’s a school for everyone but try and have some realistic perspective.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Top schools have their pick of qualified applicants so why on earth would they chose some late bloomer versus an independently motivated high achiever through all of high school?
This question intrigues me. Some late bloomers go on to far surpass their peers. Is there a way to predict who will do this, and why?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Top schools have their pick of qualified applicants so why on earth would they chose some late bloomer versus an independently motivated high achiever through all of high school?
This question intrigues me. Some late bloomers go on to far surpass their peers. Is there a way to predict who will do this, and why?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just here to say I wish schools only looked at 11th and 12th for gpa. It’s insane to expect consistent perfection, ambition, and long-term planning from kids from 14/15 -17/18 without intense parental control. Wonder why helicopter parents became a thing? I don’t. Colleges reward premature frontal lobe development and controlling parenting (even parents doing some of the kids work)
Top schools have their pick of qualified applicants so why on earth would they chose some late bloomer versus an independently motivated high achiever through all of high school? There’s a school for everyone but try and have some realistic perspective.
Anonymous wrote:It depends on whether they are coming from private v. public and if this occurred during distance learning. Public schools handed out easy As during DL so there's no excuse for low grades then.
Anonymous wrote:My very bright but unmotivated DS1 needed a lot of hand-holding in grades 6-9. For years, I sat at the homework table with him to keep him on task. Under my guidance, he made checklists and for projects and papers met interim deadlines imposed by me. I read aloud to him and quizzed him before tests. His work was sloppy and often incomplete, but at least he turned it in on time.
By 10th grade he was starting to turn things around, and by the end of 10th I no longer needed to be involved. He got straight As in 11th and 12th grades in a heavily AP/IB schedule (prepandemic). His test scores were excellent. He wanted to go OOS and we knew he would not get enough financial aid to make top schools affordable for us, so he didn't apply to any (so I can't say whether he would have gotten in to them). He ended up at a mid-ranked SLAC with significant merit aid. He flourished there-- made Phi Beta Kappa and graduated summa cum laude. He is now in his second year in a highly ranked PhD program.
So no, kids who fit this profile are not "f*cked." Going to a top college is not required for success in life.
Anonymous wrote:community colleges
Anonymous wrote:community colleges
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Top schools have their pick of qualified applicants so why on earth would they chose some late bloomer versus an independently motivated high achiever through all of high school?
This question intrigues me. Some late bloomers go on to far surpass their peers. Is there a way to predict who will do this, and why?
Anonymous wrote:Top schools have their pick of qualified applicants so why on earth would they chose some late bloomer versus an independently motivated high achiever through all of high school?