Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say that a hook is not an advantage. I said that a hook is not *just* an advantage; it is more. The rest of your post addresses arguments that someone else made upthread, not I.

This is actually interesting. If I read you correctly, an "advantage" gives your application a little more weight against other applications in the general pile. Example: the kid with an advantage gets in over another kid despite slightly lower SATs.

Whereas a "hook" gets you taken out of the general pile and considered separately. Example: athletic recruit or legacy.

Interesting to learn something new. Are you one of the college admissions people who frequents DCUM?

I interview for my college (an Ivy, but I cannot say which), and this is the admissions office's definition of "hook." This definition is common among the Ivies.

You're alumni. So the admissions office shares its process with interviewers?

There must be something to the ethnicity hook as two schools had too many interviewers contacting my DD during the busier months. She submitted her app on the last day (deadline). Several of her classmates, who had applied much earlier were left wondering when they would be contacted for an interview by this particular ivy. There was another ivy she applied at but decided that she wouldn't attend if offered admission so she began waffling when contacted for an interview. The interviewer rescheduled her twice and was really selling her on the school.

Yes, we alumni interviewers have to understand the process. Ethnicity is not a hook for most admissions committees. Selling an applicant heavily on a school does not mean the applicant has a hook. That's just not what a hook is.

The celebrity who interviewed DD lavished a lot of attention on her (met with her for over two hours) and was also a member of the school's governing board. His personal assistant made it clear that he was willing to accomodate DD's schedule after she cancelled both times. Certainly didn't strike us as standard treatment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say that a hook is not an advantage. I said that a hook is not *just* an advantage; it is more. The rest of your post addresses arguments that someone else made upthread, not I.

This is actually interesting. If I read you correctly, an "advantage" gives your application a little more weight against other applications in the general pile. Example: the kid with an advantage gets in over another kid despite slightly lower SATs.

Whereas a "hook" gets you taken out of the general pile and considered separately. Example: athletic recruit or legacy.

Interesting to learn something new. Are you one of the college admissions people who frequents DCUM?

I interview for my college (an Ivy, but I cannot say which), and this is the admissions office's definition of "hook." This definition is common among the Ivies.

You're alumni. So the admissions office shares its process with interviewers?

There must be something to the ethnicity hook as two schools had too many interviewers contacting my DD during the busier months. She submitted her app on the last day (deadline). Several of her classmates, who had applied much earlier were left wondering when they would be contacted for an interview by this particular ivy. There was another ivy she applied at but decided that she wouldn't attend if offered admission so she began waffling when contacted for an interview. The interviewer rescheduled her twice and was really selling her on the school.

Yes, we alumni interviewers have to understand the process. Ethnicity is not a hook for most admissions committees. Selling an applicant heavily on a school does not mean the applicant has a hook. That's just not what a hook is.

I disagree with you to the extent you are making a sweeping statement. I've heard college admissions people include under represented minority groups (African-American, Latino, Native American) among the groups with "hooks." If you are saying it might not be worth as much as being a legacy or a recruited athlete in certain sports, I would not argue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say that a hook is not an advantage. I said that a hook is not *just* an advantage; it is more. The rest of your post addresses arguments that someone else made upthread, not I.

This is actually interesting. If I read you correctly, an "advantage" gives your application a little more weight against other applications in the general pile. Example: the kid with an advantage gets in over another kid despite slightly lower SATs.

Whereas a "hook" gets you taken out of the general pile and considered separately. Example: athletic recruit or legacy.

Interesting to learn something new. Are you one of the college admissions people who frequents DCUM?

I interview for my college (an Ivy, but I cannot say which), and this is the admissions office's definition of "hook." This definition is common among the Ivies.

You're alumni. So the admissions office shares its process with interviewers?

There must be something to the ethnicity hook as two schools had too many interviewers contacting my DD during the busier months. She submitted her app on the last day (deadline). Several of her classmates, who had applied much earlier were left wondering when they would be contacted for an interview by this particular ivy. There was another ivy she applied at but decided that she wouldn't attend if offered admission so she began waffling when contacted for an interview. The interviewer rescheduled her twice and was really selling her on the school.

Yes, we alumni interviewers have to understand the process. Ethnicity is not a hook for most admissions committees. Selling an applicant heavily on a school does not mean the applicant has a hook. That's just not what a hook is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say that a hook is not an advantage. I said that a hook is not *just* an advantage; it is more. The rest of your post addresses arguments that someone else made upthread, not I.

This is actually interesting. If I read you correctly, an "advantage" gives your application a little more weight against other applications in the general pile. Example: the kid with an advantage gets in over another kid despite slightly lower SATs.

Whereas a "hook" gets you taken out of the general pile and considered separately. Example: athletic recruit or legacy.

Interesting to learn something new. Are you one of the college admissions people who frequents DCUM?

I interview for my college (an Ivy, but I cannot say which), and this is the admissions office's definition of "hook." This definition is common among the Ivies.

You're alumni. So the admissions office shares its process with interviewers?

There must be something to the ethnicity hook as two schools had too many interviewers contacting my DD during the busier months. She submitted her app on the last day (deadline). Several of her classmates, who had applied much earlier were left wondering when they would be contacted for an interview by this particular ivy. There was another ivy she applied at but decided that she wouldn't attend if offered admission so she began waffling when contacted for an interview. The interviewer rescheduled her twice and was really selling her on the school.

Anonymous wrote:. . . .

So, even though a student has a "hook", could there be a disadvantage to being considered in a separate pool? Could it be that there are so many legacy applicants one year that it would have been better NOT to be a legacy (or lacrosse player)?

It is ALWAYS better to have a hook. In any year, the odds of getting in as a legacy are 30 to 45% (odds vary depending on the school). Aren't those much better odds than the 5% odds that the rest of the applicant pool faces applying to Harvard?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say that a hook is not an advantage. I said that a hook is not *just* an advantage; it is more. The rest of your post addresses arguments that someone else made upthread, not I.

This is actually interesting. If I read you correctly, an "advantage" gives your application a little more weight against other applications in the general pile. Example: the kid with an advantage gets in over another kid despite slightly lower SATs.

Whereas a "hook" gets you taken out of the general pile and considered separately. Example: athletic recruit or legacy.

Interesting to learn something new. Are you one of the college admissions people who frequents DCUM?

I interview for my college (an Ivy, but I cannot say which), and this is the admissions office's definition of "hook." This definition is common among the Ivies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are a recruited athlete to an IVY league school , you have a major advantage vs other applicants who dream of attending.

Athletic coaches at an IVY League school whether its Princeton, Harvard, Penn, Cornell, are barking at the admissions folks across any sport to get their players accepted. Its a fact of life.

And, that depends upon the sport and the athlete's academic index whether or not a coaches barking will be considered.

I know a player just recruited as a junior to play hockey at one of the ivy leagues. He is nowhere close to being near the academic index. He is an amazing hockey player so I guess that more.

I know of a player recruited as a junior who had his admission offer rescinded senior year because of a low gpa. His highest SAT score was a little over 1600 (out of 2400) after taking it three times.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are a recruited athlete to an IVY league school , you have a major advantage vs other applicants who dream of attending.

Athletic coaches at an IVY League school whether its Princeton, Harvard, Penn, Cornell, are barking at the admissions folks across any sport to get their players accepted. Its a fact of life.

And, that depends upon the sport and the athlete's academic index whether or not a coaches barking will be considered.

I know a player just recruited as a junior to play hockey at one of the ivy leagues. He is nowhere close to being near the academic index. He is an amazing hockey player so I guess that more.

Anonymous wrote:If you are a recruited athlete to an IVY league school , you have a major advantage vs other applicants who dream of attending.

Athletic coaches at an IVY League school whether its Princeton, Harvard, Penn, Cornell, are barking at the admissions folks across any sport to get their players accepted. Its a fact of life.

And, that depends upon the sport and the athlete's academic index whether or not a coaches barking will be considered.

If you are a recruited athlete to an IVY league school , you have a major advantage vs other applicants who dream of attending.

Athletic coaches at an IVY League school whether its Princeton, Harvard, Penn, Cornell, are barking at the admissions folks across any sport to get their players accepted. Its a fact of life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say that a hook is not an advantage. I said that a hook is not *just* an advantage; it is more. The rest of your post addresses arguments that someone else made upthread, not I.

This is actually interesting. If I read you correctly, an "advantage" gives your application a little more weight against other applications in the general pile. Example: the kid with an advantage gets in over another kid despite slightly lower SATs.

Whereas a "hook" gets you taken out of the general pile and considered separately. Example: athletic recruit or legacy.

Interesting to learn something new. Are you one of the college admissions people who frequents DCUM?

A hook and an advantage is synonymous. If you're referring to an ethnicity hook, it works just like a legacy or athletic recruitment advantage.

Or maybe, to beat this to death: the end result is the same (some kids get a boost worth up to a few hundred SAT points), but the process is different (with athletic recruits there is a side process where the coach is talking to the admissions people, maybe also a separate process for legacies).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say that a hook is not an advantage. I said that a hook is not *just* an advantage; it is more. The rest of your post addresses arguments that someone else made upthread, not I.

This is actually interesting. If I read you correctly, an "advantage" gives your application a little more weight against other applications in the general pile. Example: the kid with an advantage gets in over another kid despite slightly lower SATs.

Whereas a "hook" gets you taken out of the general pile and considered separately. Example: athletic recruit or legacy.

Interesting to learn something new. Are you one of the college admissions people who frequents DCUM?

A hook and an advantage is synonymous. If you're referring to an ethnicity hook, it works just like a legacy or athletic recruitment advantage.

Not to beat this thing to death, but my nephew applied early admission to an Ivy (happened to be where his parents went, too). He was waitlisted and eventually got in. The point is, though, it turned out there was a surge in early admission applications. From that separate pool, they traditionally accepted say 500 persons. In a normal year, that would have provided a slight advantage in admissions, but because so many applied early admissions that year, it ended up being a disadvantage that year. In the end, as I said, when he was thrown back into the general pool for admissions, he got in.

So, even though a student has a "hook", could there be a disadvantage to being considered in a separate pool? Could it be that there are so many legacy applicants one year that it would have been better NOT to be a legacy (or lacrosse player)?

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say that a hook is not an advantage. I said that a hook is not *just* an advantage; it is more. The rest of your post addresses arguments that someone else made upthread, not I.

This is actually interesting. If I read you correctly, an "advantage" gives your application a little more weight against other applications in the general pile. Example: the kid with an advantage gets in over another kid despite slightly lower SATs.

Whereas a "hook" gets you taken out of the general pile and considered separately. Example: athletic recruit or legacy.

Interesting to learn something new. Are you one of the college admissions people who frequents DCUM?

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]splitting hairs, no?[/quote]

No, it's not splitting hairs to explain why something is not the hook that people think it is. People misunderstand the meaning of "hook" in college admissions and therefore misuse the term. [/quote]

This outside source includes race/ethnicity in the list of common "hooks."

http://www.petersons.com/college-search/hooks-influence-college-acceptance.aspx[/quote]


Thanks, PP. In my family's college app experience (non recruited athletes/legacy), being AA isn't much of a hook when applying to the ivies or highly-selective SLACS from STA/NCS without a competitive package (grades-gpa over 3.5, test scores, leadership, etc.).