Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did you guys score so low on your SATs compared to what kids score today? Didn’t prep?

I had a prep book and studied on my own for a few hours on weekends.

1996
SAT: 1390
3.9 GPA

ED and accepted: W&M

Anonymous wrote:

I did amazing on the ASVAB, which I took to get out of classes one day. Kept getting calls about it.

Anonymous wrote:Why did you guys score so low on your SATs compared to what kids score today? Didn’t prep?

Anonymous wrote:In 2000, accepted by Harvard, Brown, Duke, Colombia, and wait listed by Princeton based on 1580 SAT, 4.0+ weighted gpa (don’t remember the specific number), and 5s on a bunch of APs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is kinda interesting both in terms of what was needed for admittance then vs now, and also how some colleges have changed. (Several posters from 1980s were accepted to uva but denied/WL at William and Mary!) it also shows that the system was pretty random in the past, too.

Things started changing in the 1990s, especially the late 1990s. Population of US is much bigger now but the same number of colleges and universities. The past was much more regionally focused while schools today are much more national. The Ivy Leagues and elite LACs didn't carry the same mystique they currently do; it was a much more self-selective pool of applicants largely drawn from the upper middle classes and especially those whose families had a tradition of going to private colleges. Most of the country, especially outside the east coast, viewed getting into the flagship state university as all was needed for a great education. SAT scores themselves have been reweighted several times. The change to electronic applications rather than hand written essays made it much easier to apply to multiple colleges. It snowballed from there.

+1

The system needs to get away from prep and culled information, but it will never happen. There are simply too many applicants.

This. Your kids are now competing with tens of thousands of wealthy foreign applicants each year. That really didn't start to ramp up until after 2000 or thereabouts. There was so much less competition prior to 2000.

Agreed. My Ivy had a few international students in the late 1990s but today it has far more. Student body is still the same size. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what it means for domestic applicants without major hooks.

Bullshit. It's still only 5% overseas students at Ivies, collectively.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is kinda interesting both in terms of what was needed for admittance then vs now, and also how some colleges have changed. (Several posters from 1980s were accepted to uva but denied/WL at William and Mary!) it also shows that the system was pretty random in the past, too.

Things started changing in the 1990s, especially the late 1990s. Population of US is much bigger now but the same number of colleges and universities. The past was much more regionally focused while schools today are much more national. The Ivy Leagues and elite LACs didn't carry the same mystique they currently do; it was a much more self-selective pool of applicants largely drawn from the upper middle classes and especially those whose families had a tradition of going to private colleges. Most of the country, especially outside the east coast, viewed getting into the flagship state university as all was needed for a great education. SAT scores themselves have been reweighted several times. The change to electronic applications rather than hand written essays made it much easier to apply to multiple colleges. It snowballed from there.

+1

The system needs to get away from prep and culled information, but it will never happen. There are simply too many applicants.

This. Your kids are now competing with tens of thousands of wealthy foreign applicants each year. That really didn't start to ramp up until after 2000 or thereabouts. There was so much less competition prior to 2000.

Agreed. My Ivy had a few international students in the late 1990s but today it has far more. Student body is still the same size. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what it means for domestic applicants without major hooks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is kinda interesting both in terms of what was needed for admittance then vs now, and also how some colleges have changed. (Several posters from 1980s were accepted to uva but denied/WL at William and Mary!) it also shows that the system was pretty random in the past, too.

Things started changing in the 1990s, especially the late 1990s. Population of US is much bigger now but the same number of colleges and universities. The past was much more regionally focused while schools today are much more national. The Ivy Leagues and elite LACs didn't carry the same mystique they currently do; it was a much more self-selective pool of applicants largely drawn from the upper middle classes and especially those whose families had a tradition of going to private colleges. Most of the country, especially outside the east coast, viewed getting into the flagship state university as all was needed for a great education. SAT scores themselves have been reweighted several times. The change to electronic applications rather than hand written essays made it much easier to apply to multiple colleges. It snowballed from there.

+1

The system needs to get away from prep and culled information, but it will never happen. There are simply too many applicants.

This. Your kids are now competing with tens of thousands of wealthy foreign applicants each year. That really didn't start to ramp up until after 2000 or thereabouts. There was so much less competition prior to 2000.

Agreed. My Ivy had a few international students in the late 1990s but today it has far more. Student body is still the same size. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what it means for domestic applicants without major hooks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is kinda interesting both in terms of what was needed for admittance then vs now, and also how some colleges have changed. (Several posters from 1980s were accepted to uva but denied/WL at William and Mary!) it also shows that the system was pretty random in the past, too.

Things started changing in the 1990s, especially the late 1990s. Population of US is much bigger now but the same number of colleges and universities. The past was much more regionally focused while schools today are much more national. The Ivy Leagues and elite LACs didn't carry the same mystique they currently do; it was a much more self-selective pool of applicants largely drawn from the upper middle classes and especially those whose families had a tradition of going to private colleges. Most of the country, especially outside the east coast, viewed getting into the flagship state university as all was needed for a great education. SAT scores themselves have been reweighted several times. The change to electronic applications rather than hand written essays made it much easier to apply to multiple colleges. It snowballed from there.

+1

The system needs to get away from prep and culled information, but it will never happen. There are simply too many applicants.

This. Your kids are now competing with tens of thousands of wealthy foreign applicants each year. That really didn't start to ramp up until after 2000 or thereabouts. There was so much less competition prior to 2000.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2000
4.4 GPA/1350 SAT
Rank: 7/450, public school in California
6 APs: five 5's, one 4
Extra curriculars: Eagle Scout, varsity letters in track & cross-country for two years, sleepaway camp counselor, part-time jobs afterschool and weekends during school year

NYU: accepted with $10K scholarship, attended
Columbia: waitlisted, then rejected
UC Berkeley: waitlisted, then rejected
Boston Univ: accepted
Syracuse: accepted
UC Santa Barbara: accepted
UCLA: accepted
UC Santa Cruz: accepted
UC San Diego: accepted

In hindsight, I should've applied to more Ivies. I was the first in my family to attend college and I didn't know my head from my ass. The guidance counselor at my large HS didn't know much about East Coast universities as probably only 30% of my class would go to a 4-year college right out of high school and pretty much everyone else just stayed in the California public system. I'm pretty sure more kids sat for the ASVAB test than the SAT at my high school.

I did amazing on the ASVAB, which I took to get out of classes one day. Kept getting calls about it. Only about 10% of my school went directly to college.

Anonymous wrote:2000
4.4 GPA/1350 SAT
Rank: 7/450, public school in California
6 APs: five 5's, one 4
Extra curriculars: Eagle Scout, varsity letters in track & cross-country for two years, sleepaway camp counselor, part-time jobs afterschool and weekends during school year

NYU: accepted with $10K scholarship, attended
Columbia: waitlisted, then rejected
UC Berkeley: waitlisted, then rejected
Boston Univ: accepted
Syracuse: accepted
UC Santa Barbara: accepted
UCLA: accepted
UC Santa Cruz: accepted
UC San Diego: accepted

In hindsight, I should've applied to more Ivies. I was the first in my family to attend college and I didn't know my head from my ass. The guidance counselor at my large HS didn't know much about East Coast universities as probably only 30% of my class would go to a 4-year college right out of high school and pretty much everyone else just stayed in the California public system. I'm pretty sure more kids sat for the ASVAB test than the SAT at my high school.