Anonymous wrote:The problem is that the “well-rounded” student is going to major in Econ or CS if a boy or biosciences if a girl. That’s not really well-rounded from the school’s perspective, because it makes for the opposite of a well-rounded school.

Not true at all.

The problem is that the “well-rounded” student is going to major in Econ or CS if a boy or biosciences if a girl. That’s not really well-rounded from the school’s perspective, because it makes for the opposite of a well-rounded school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The well-rounded kid is such a middle-class invention. Colleges want wealthy, highly-successful kids and alumni.

They want billionaire’s offspring and don’t care how successful the kid is. They also want students who thrived in terrible conditions. The perseverance., drive, tenacity and self discipline it takes to have top grades and outside talents while all around the kid is chaos, drugs, poverty shows a student who deserves a place at a top college.

Why would such a person “deserve” a place at a top college? Wrong word choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Society will eventually have to confront what’s authentic.

Truly exceptional, spiky kids will be our hope in the age of the coming AI generation.

It won't be because of where they attend colleges.

Why do you conclude that ?

Because specializing is what the world needs. Deep dive into a lot of liberal arts topics - already seeing the demand for my English undergrad DC at traditional tech and finance companies. The world is changing. Skills evolve.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think spiky kids would fall out of favor in the next five years like non-profits did a while back. As PP said, well-rounded kids are a dime a dozen, and AOs need reasons to differentiate them, however manufactured the spikiness seem to be. I also think research experience, be it pay-to-play or fake ones, will continue to be viewed favorably because AOs can be easily fooled (heck, even professors who don't work in the same research area can be easily fooled). Essays are one component that might be deemphasized in the next few years due to the omnipresence of ChatGPT.

research is already out. uncommon interests that appear to have come about on their own at a younger age will remain.

Anonymous wrote:I am seeing schools in favor of high test scores again. Spiky without a good test score will not make it in the next few years. A very high score without a spike would probably make it more often than not.

Agreed. Test scores will be increasingly used, as well as video interviews or in-person writing exercises to cut through the muck of AI.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indulge me in your admission trend predictions for the next 5 years or so. Will we ever see the well-rounded kid make a comeback over the “spiky” kid? I know that people, including AOs, have come around to how manufactured these spiky narratives can be, and yet, it still seems to be the best way to gain admission. Why does this persist and will we ever see the end of it? Or has the common app put an end to giving an edge to the well rounded applicant forever?

I am hoping they will eliminate or at least reduce institutional priorities.
MC kids constitute the vast majority of the applicants, but only getting the smallest number of acceptances. If this does not change, spiky or well roundedness doesn't matter because it's still MC kids fighting for that very small number of seats.

Unintentionally funniest post of the day lol

Very funny! We hope your institution will not prioritize the institution.

A few years back, at a large college presentation, a parent asked about well rounded students. The Ivy AO on the stage gave a side eye, and said very seriously, “I never said I was looking for well rounded kids. I’m looking to create a well rounded class.”

Stanford AO was nodding. And Georgetown or Rice (forget which) smiled.

They all understood the assignment. It is their job.

I think the confusion comes from successful spiky kids who also have a well rounded foundation. It’s the spike that did the actual heavy lifting.

The exception: If your kid is exceptionally (truly!) kind AND deeply charismatic, and this is the theme of the application, it can carry the well rounded day. That kid is hard to resist.

I think my DC’s application may be one of those that is resonating with AOs. DC is unexpectedly getting in everywhere over classmates with higher GPAs. The school college counselor said the teacher recommendations were amazing. This is a funny, kind, popular sort of kid. Very normal ECs (job, sport, club) and high stats. DC’s essays were really heartwarming and obviously written by a 17 year old.

Anonymous wrote:Society will eventually have to confront what’s authentic.

Truly exceptional, spiky kids will be our hope in the age of the coming AI generation.

It won't be because of where they attend colleges.

Why do you conclude that ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indulge me in your admission trend predictions for the next 5 years or so. Will we ever see the well-rounded kid make a comeback over the “spiky” kid? I know that people, including AOs, have come around to how manufactured these spiky narratives can be, and yet, it still seems to be the best way to gain admission. Why does this persist and will we ever see the end of it? Or has the common app put an end to giving an edge to the well rounded applicant forever?

I am hoping they will eliminate or at least reduce institutional priorities.
MC kids constitute the vast majority of the applicants, but only getting the smallest number of acceptances. If this does not change, spiky or well roundedness doesn't matter because it's still MC kids fighting for that very small number of seats.

How would you even know this?

Anonymous wrote:The well-rounded kid is such a middle-class invention. Colleges want wealthy, highly-successful kids and alumni.

They want billionaire’s offspring and don’t care how successful the kid is. They also want students who thrived in terrible conditions. The perseverance., drive, tenacity and self discipline it takes to have top grades and outside talents while all around the kid is chaos, drugs, poverty shows a student who deserves a place at a top college.

Seeing the above posts about parents wishing schools to prefer more spiky kids or more well-rounded kids -- presumably that's what their kids are -- I want to add that spiky kids don't grow on trees, just like 7 footers who could shoot threes or defensive linemen who could run a 4.5. The NBA and NFL love these players, but there are only so many of them. After getting all the spiky kids they could get, schools still need well-rounded ones to fill up their classes. So there will be places for both types, albeit with the well-rounded ones facing significantly higher competition.

Society will eventually have to confront what’s authentic.

Truly exceptional, spiky kids will be our hope in the age of the coming AI generation.

It won't be because of where they attend colleges.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indulge me in your admission trend predictions for the next 5 years or so. Will we ever see the well-rounded kid make a comeback over the “spiky” kid? I know that people, including AOs, have come around to how manufactured these spiky narratives can be, and yet, it still seems to be the best way to gain admission. Why does this persist and will we ever see the end of it? Or has the common app put an end to giving an edge to the well rounded applicant forever?

I am hoping they will eliminate or at least reduce institutional priorities.
MC kids constitute the vast majority of the applicants, but only getting the smallest number of acceptances. If this does not change, spiky or well roundedness doesn't matter because it's still MC kids fighting for that very small number of seats.

Unintentionally funniest post of the day lol

Very funny! We hope your institution will not prioritize the institution.

A few years back, at a large college presentation, a parent asked about well rounded students. The Ivy AO on the stage gave a side eye, and said very seriously, “I never said I was looking for well rounded kids. I’m looking to create a well rounded class.”

Stanford AO was nodding. And Georgetown or Rice (forget which) smiled.

They all understood the assignment. It is their job.

I think the confusion comes from successful spiky kids who also have a well rounded foundation. It’s the spike that did the actual heavy lifting.

The exception: If your kid is exceptionally (truly!) kind AND deeply charismatic, and this is the theme of the application, it can carry the well rounded day. That kid is hard to resist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indulge me in your admission trend predictions for the next 5 years or so. Will we ever see the well-rounded kid make a comeback over the “spiky” kid? I know that people, including AOs, have come around to how manufactured these spiky narratives can be, and yet, it still seems to be the best way to gain admission. Why does this persist and will we ever see the end of it? Or has the common app put an end to giving an edge to the well rounded applicant forever?

I am hoping they will eliminate or at least reduce institutional priorities.
MC kids constitute the vast majority of the applicants, but only getting the smallest number of acceptances. If this does not change, spiky or well roundedness doesn't matter because it's still MC kids fighting for that very small number of seats.

Sad but true. The system is designed to keep MC kids out while MC kids are rat racing on spikes or wellroundedness.

Well.... If colleges are moving away from supporting MC kids, so be it. More and more talented high schoolers are starting their journeys earlier. College isn’t a barrier to success especially for the smarter ones.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Indulge me in your admission trend predictions for the next 5 years or so. Will we ever see the well-rounded kid make a comeback over the “spiky” kid? I know that people, including AOs, have come around to how manufactured these spiky narratives can be, and yet, it still seems to be the best way to gain admission. Why does this persist and will we ever see the end of it? Or has the common app put an end to giving an edge to the well rounded applicant forever?

I am hoping they will eliminate or at least reduce institutional priorities.
MC kids constitute the vast majority of the applicants, but only getting the smallest number of acceptances. If this does not change, spiky or well roundedness doesn't matter because it's still MC kids fighting for that very small number of seats.

Sad but true. The system is designed to keep MC kids out while MC kids are rat racing on spikes or wellroundedness.