Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That 3-2 engineering programs offered by SLAC are ever anything but idiotic. Don't do it.
Agree with this. Mine is planning to get a physics degree at a SLAC and then attend a grad school for Engineering. 3/2 takes away the SLAC experience.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That your kid's top stats (grades, rigor, and scores) will be reconsidered by the committee as part of the AO committee's holistic review; and that those top-tier stats will add a bump to your kid's application.
[reality - the grades/rigor/scores get you to the room, then are never looked at again. It's about everything else]
My understanding has always been that your stats can get you put in a different stack for consideration with different standards. For example, stats above 75% may put you in a pile where 2/3 of those in the stack get offers, while stats below 25% may mean that only 1/20 in that pile get offers (so you'd need some extraordinary factor). Those with hooks end up sorted into different stacks entirely.
Back in the day these were literal stacks. Now they're figurative because everything is virtual.
Nope. Definitely not.
It’s based on a point system. For example, at Harvard to 33 and a 36 get you the same point. So I want you to extrapolate and think how different these stacks really are. The biggest points actually come in the other categories. You would do best to familiarize yourself with how these things are scored in the modern era.
Academics
This section’s rating system is perhaps the most clear cut:
“1. Summa potential. Genuine scholar; near-perfect scores and grades (in most cases) combined with unusual creativity and possible evidence of original scholarship.
2. Magna potential: Excellent student with superb grades and mid-to high-700 scores (33+ ACT). 3. Cum laude potential: Very good student with excellent grades and mid-600 to low-700 scores (29 to 32 ACT).
4. Adequate preparation. Respectable grades and low-to mid-600 scores (26 to 29 ACT).
5. Marginal potential. Modest grades and 500 score
6. Achievement or motivation marginal or worse.”
As we can see, each rating tier has specific test scores correlated with it. Therefore, applicants should note that there is truly little difference between getting a 33 or a 36 on the ACT, as both results would yield a 2 in the academic rating.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That your kid's top stats (grades, rigor, and scores) will be reconsidered by the committee as part of the AO committee's holistic review; and that those top-tier stats will add a bump to your kid's application.
[reality - the grades/rigor/scores get you to the room, then are never looked at again. It's about everything else]
My understanding has always been that your stats can get you put in a different stack for consideration with different standards. For example, stats above 75% may put you in a pile where 2/3 of those in the stack get offers, while stats below 25% may mean that only 1/20 in that pile get offers (so you'd need some extraordinary factor). Those with hooks end up sorted into different stacks entirely.
Back in the day these were literal stacks. Now they're figurative because everything is virtual.
Nope. Definitely not.
It’s based on a point system. For example, at Harvard to 33 and a 36 get you the same point. So I want you to extrapolate and think how different these stacks really are. The biggest points actually come in the other categories. You would do best to familiarize yourself with how these things are scored in the modern era.
Anonymous wrote:Major, county within the state and even school, and being first gen college student matter more in the acceptance decision than people realize.
Also, the CDS for each college has a wealth of information and I’m surprised at how few people read them.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That your kid's top stats (grades, rigor, and scores) will be reconsidered by the committee as part of the AO committee's holistic review; and that those top-tier stats will add a bump to your kid's application.
[reality - the grades/rigor/scores get you to the room, then are never looked at again. It's about everything else]
My understanding has always been that your stats can get you put in a different stack for consideration with different standards. For example, stats above 75% may put you in a pile where 2/3 of those in the stack get offers, while stats below 25% may mean that only 1/20 in that pile get offers (so you'd need some extraordinary factor). Those with hooks end up sorted into different stacks entirely.
Back in the day these were literal stacks. Now they're figurative because everything is virtual.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That your kid's top stats (grades, rigor, and scores) will be reconsidered by the committee as part of the AO committee's holistic review; and that those top-tier stats will add a bump to your kid's application.
[reality - the grades/rigor/scores get you to the room, then are never looked at again. It's about everything else]
My understanding has always been that your stats can get you put in a different stack for consideration with different standards. For example, stats above 75% may put you in a pile where 2/3 of those in the stack get offers, while stats below 25% may mean that only 1/20 in that pile get offers (so you'd need some extraordinary factor). Those with hooks end up sorted into different stacks entirely.
Back in the day these were literal stacks. Now they're figurative because everything is virtual.
Anonymous wrote:That your kid's top stats (grades, rigor, and scores) will be reconsidered by the committee as part of the AO committee's holistic review; and that those top-tier stats will add a bump to your kid's application.
[reality - the grades/rigor/scores get you to the room, then are never looked at again. It's about everything else]
Anonymous wrote:That your kid's top stats (grades, rigor, and scores) will be reconsidered by the committee as part of the AO committee's holistic review; and that those top-tier stats will add a bump to your kid's application.
[reality - the grades/rigor/scores get you to the room, then are never looked at again. It's about everything else]
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What is an outdated stereotype or a false narrative that is prevalent online about a college your kid attends? I personally think this exists a lot, places like A2C are an echo chamber of bad info sometimes that then gets shared like it’s gospel.
Great essays can compensate for weak grades
or
Great grades can compensate for weak ECs or Essays
You need to total package (or be a recruited athlete) for top schools today.
Or that a great test score can compensate for any of that.