Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:52
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I can remember as a non-DMVer and current college student in 1988, hearing my then-boyfriend's mom bemoaning that her eldest kid was told by B-CC counselors that he didn't have much chance of getting into Brandeis because he was a cookie-cutter applicant from the region. Eldest kid indeed ended up somewhere else and was doing great.
The message I got then and is still true today, is that it's unwise to be a generic applicant.
Following that, through observation, I've learned that even seemingly "unhooked" kids can develop legitimate hooks. Even without spending a lot of money. But it does require more of parents (acting like a college counselor, acting like a career coach, strategizing) and of the applicant (who may have to work even harder if their family or school system cannot provide such mentoring).
When I read through this board, one thing that comes across is that parents of generic candidates (no offense, I just mean kids with similar records that apply in huge quantities) seem to have difficulty iumderstanding that situation and how to react to it.
In my specific circumstances, I had two fallbacks prepped. One was for my child to go to the equivalent of UMD-BC and transfer to main campus. And the other was to go to my undergrad U which has a 50% acceptance rate. I have done quite well with my education from there.
It’s absurd and causes people to lie, manufacture, and manipulate in order to seem special (because most of us are not).
The silver lining for “just” smart and hardworking kids is that they can get a very good education for free at a lot of state schools.
I am PP. I agree that the situation causes people to lie, manufacture, and manipulate...but humanity is always like that about scarce resources anyway. And my point is that good parenting and thoughtful preparation by the candidate can work to make applicants more successful. It is possible to develop a portfolio and rationale for attending that is more believably specific to a school than most candidates end up submitting. That's why honest college counselors can make a lot of money...they know how to put an applicant on that path. I do think educated parents can get a lot of the same insights for free by reading and learning.
In sum, even if others behave sleazily due to current incentives, there are still benefits to an intelligent, honest, and higher-effort targeted approach to getting admitted. It sounds like the "spray and pray" 10+ app pattern talked about on this board is not working well for the admissions ecosystem.
Basically college students have to treat applying for college more like an application for a job. More prep, less certainty, better-qualified candidates have big advantages. And the focus should be on being unique (because we all are) and telling a logical, interesting story vs. being special.
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:47
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Class of 2022 had no ECs, had their junior year online before everyone even knew how to do it, and was TO. It was a train wreck.
That is class if 2021.
Class of 2021 had their SENIOR year during the worst growing pains of online classes. They missed the last 9 weeks of their junior year to online. No one was even trying for those 9 weeks- it was just kind of written off as a short school year.
Class of 2022’s entire junior year was online.
Everyone got As doing nothing that year and there was rampant cheating. It benefited a lot of prior mediocre students—also not having to submit scores. The kids we know that got in some top schools never would have last year or this year.
Especially with junior year grades mattering the most—
It’s much tougher 3 years later. 30% more applicants. Our SCOIR data shows that. Easier admits 3 years ago
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:46
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Class of 2022 had no ECs, had their junior year online before everyone even knew how to do it, and was TO. It was a train wreck.
That is class if 2021.
Class of 2021 had their SENIOR year during the worst growing pains of online classes. They missed the last 9 weeks of their junior year to online. No one was even trying for those 9 weeks- it was just kind of written off as a short school year.
Class of 2022’s entire junior year was online.
Everyone got As doing nothing that year and there was rampant cheating. It benefited a lot of prior mediocre students—also not having to submit scores. The kids we know that got in some top schools never would have last year or this year.
Especially with junior year grades mattering the most—
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:45
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Class of 2022 had no ECs, had their junior year online before everyone even knew how to do it, and was TO. It was a train wreck.
That is class if 2021.
Class of 2021 had their SENIOR year during the worst growing pains of online classes. They missed the last 9 weeks of their junior year to online. No one was even trying for those 9 weeks- it was just kind of written off as a short school year.
Class of 2022’s entire junior year was online.
Everyone got As doing nothing that year and there was rampant cheating. It benefited a lot of prior mediocre students—also not having to submit scores. The kids we know that got in some top schools never would have last year or this year.
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:41
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Class of 2022 had no ECs, had their junior year online before everyone even knew how to do it, and was TO. It was a train wreck.
That is class if 2021.
Class of 2021 had their SENIOR year during the worst growing pains of online classes. They missed the last 9 weeks of their junior year to online. No one was even trying for those 9 weeks- it was just kind of written off as a short school year.
Class of 2022’s entire junior year was online.
My ‘21 grad had half of their senior year online but was also able to do their sport. Things were a lot better in 2021 than 2020. 2020 was my kids junior year and his spring sport was cancelled, his prom was cancelled, his ACT test date in March and then May was cancelled. By the time they got back to school in fall 2020, things were much better. Yes class of 2022 had big impacts but 2021 had the biggest.
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:38
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Class of 2022 had no ECs, had their junior year online before everyone even knew how to do it, and was TO. It was a train wreck.
That is class if 2021.
Class of 2021 had their SENIOR year during the worst growing pains of online classes. They missed the last 9 weeks of their junior year to online. No one was even trying for those 9 weeks- it was just kind of written off as a short school year.
Class of 2022’s entire junior year was online.
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:33
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Only Class of 2027. And for URM students: all previous years are irrelevant.
Not so. URMs just need to discuss the minority status in essays. It’s then just as relevant in the past.
Perhaps even easier, URMs receiving one of the College Board Recognition Program awards can simply list that in the app to indicate their URM status. That's only around the top 10% for the minority group, but URMs should be prepping for PSAT for this purpose.
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:30
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Only Class of 2027. And for URM students: all previous years are irrelevant.
Not so. URMs just need to discuss the minority status in essays. It’s then just as relevant in the past.
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:20
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Only Class of 2027. And for URM students: all previous years are irrelevant.
Every single year someone posts how much worse this year was compared to last. It’s not different it’s just still a crapshoot and that’s not new. 2022, 2023, 2024 all working with the same TO situation and everyone had some online HS. It’s interesting that next year will be the first cycle with kids who did not have their HS classes online due to Covid.
What year did your kid or kids go through the process?
You’re not special, this is posted every single year here.
So you feel that massive increases in the number of applicants, the disruptive effects of technologies like application platforms and AI, the overturning of decades of standardized testing policies, and a landmark Supreme Court decision that specifies exactly which applicants colleges can admit have all had no impact on the process?!?
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:18
Subject: Re:When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
This board is for entertainment purposes only.
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:17
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Only Class of 2027. And for URM students: all previous years are irrelevant.
Every single year someone posts how much worse this year was compared to last. It’s not different it’s just still a crapshoot and that’s not new. 2022, 2023, 2024 all working with the same TO situation and everyone had some online HS. It’s interesting that next year will be the first cycle with kids who did not have their HS classes online due to Covid.
What year did your kid or kids go through the process?
You’re not special, this is posted every single year here.
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:16
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Class of 2022 had no ECs, had their junior year online before everyone even knew how to do it, and was TO. It was a train wreck.
That is class if 2021.
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:12
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Class of 2022 had no ECs, had their junior year online before everyone even knew how to do it, and was TO. It was a train wreck.
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:11
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Only Class of 2027. And for URM students: all previous years are irrelevant.
Every single year someone posts how much worse this year was compared to last. It’s not different it’s just still a crapshoot and that’s not new. 2022, 2023, 2024 all working with the same TO situation and everyone had some online HS. It’s interesting that next year will be the first cycle with kids who did not have their HS classes online due to Covid.
What year did your kid or kids go through the process?
Anonymous
02/03/2024 12:10
Subject: When posters relay their experiences in admissions, how far back is relevant/relatable to the 2024+ scene?
not relevant at all.