Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After a week of so many rejections and waitlists, I'm finding it hard to make sense of it all and struggling to know the best way to help my DD. Brutal week.

I'm so sorry. Are there any more to come? Mine was in this place and got the rare gem today. Hoping the same for yours.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to know stats and schools and finances.

My unhooked white ds with 1330/3.8 at a crappy public has gotten in everywhere. Top 30-50. Full pay.

Interesting. My 1470/3.8 kid got in at 2 out of 5 schools he applied to, full pay. He was waitlisted at his safety school. The only difference is he goes to a good public HS, so maybe he wasn't considered "good enough"? No matter, he is happy with the school he selected.

Anonymous wrote:OP, we feel your pain. Our high-stats FCPS DC (4.41w/3.89uw, mid 1500s SAT, full IB diploma, most rigorous classes) was rejected or waitlisted at every single reach/hard target this week (Rice, WashU, NU, Mich, UCLA, Berkley etc.). Looks like the figurative University of Illinois for us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, we feel your pain. Our high-stats FCPS DC (4.41w/3.89uw, mid 1500s SAT, full IB diploma, most rigorous classes) was rejected or waitlisted at every single reach/hard target this week (Rice, WashU, NU, Mich, UCLA, Berkley etc.). Looks like the figurative University of Illinois for us.

These are all reaches. What were her matches/safeties? UVA or WM are at least as good as those schools, and a whole lot cheaper.

Message to parents of future applicants - help your kids have more realistic expectations

Our matches/safeties were Wisconsin, W&M, Pitt and a few others. DC is insisting on OOS--does not want to go to W&M and refused to apply to UVA (we insisted DC apply to one VA school and they grudgingly picked W&M). You make an excellent point about managing expectations. I was thinking that since DC was well within statistical range for every reach one would pan out since we applied to several--DC was rejected at an Ivy ED and UChi ED2. To DCs credit, they are accepting the news better than I am. DC worked really hard and we wanted them to be rewarded for it.

The was a big error in your assumptions that many, many, many parents make. But statistically, applying to 10 schools with very low acceptance rates doesn't give your kid better odds of admission than applying to 1 school with very low acceptance rates.

Also "we" didn't apply; your kid did.

Actually, applying to 10 schools with very low acceptance rates does give a kid a better chance of admissions than applying to one, but not as much as people think.

If a kid applies to a school with a 5 percent acceptance rate, if we know nothing else about that kid (hooks, RD/ED, etc, stats, ECs), our best guess is that they have a 5% chance of getting in.

If a kid applies to 10 schools, each with a 5 percent acceptance rate, their chance of getting in to at least one school is NOT 10 x 5%--that is the error that many people make.

Again, without knowing anything else and assuming college decisions are "independent events"--that is, acceptance to one is not correlated with acceptance to another--their chance of getting in to at least one school is 1-the odds of not getting into any of the ten school = 1-95%^10 = 40 percent.

But here's the thing...and again, this is where people get in trouble--that 5% acceptance rate is the rate we all have to rely on but doesn't really tell us the odds for my kid based on their profile, nor does it tell you the odds for yours. In reality, the odds for my kid getting in during the ED round might be closer to 2%.

Even bright people do not grasp this.

Relatedly, college decisions are really not independent events. As noted, the 5% admission rate is an average-- some applications have closer to 10 or 20% likelihood of admission, while others have closer to 0%. The kid with the 0.1% chance of admission to a top rated school probably has close to zero chance at any top school. The kid with 20% chance probably has a higher likelihood of admission at all the top schools. The "standout" application at Harvard will stand out everywhere.

Anonymous wrote:Brutal week.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I really believe wait lists are going to move like never before given the surge in # of apps per student and you can attend only one school. I think schools will dramatically undershoot yield and need to go to the wait list.

I think schools accepted significant numbers ED, but agree wait lists will move. Unfortunately, we likely won't see movement before 5/1, when deposits are due.

Not true. DS was WL at a school and 1 week later moved to accepted. This was 2019 but it’s not uncommon to hear back well Before May 1.

Please. 2019 may as well have been in another century. This and the last election cycle are markedly different from the ones before.

Sincerely,

Parent with relative in the admissions business

Exactly. Test optional has revolutionized admissions.

I am not going to be PC - how do the truly intelligent and hard working kids stand out? And yes, I think test optional kids are a bit lazy and not intelligent.

They can try, but it doesn’t necessarily matter.

2 kids at our small private just got into Northwestern. They are in all regular classes, with a mix of A’s and Bs. They are not athletes, dancers, musicians. They hold no class office (despite running). They need FA. But they are Hispanic. The (white) all advanced class straight A class rep, musician, etc. is waitlisted. Holistic review is really about advancing demographic priorities. It is what it is.

Armchair analysis. Unless you reviewed their applications you have no real idea how they stood out. You go for the easy thing by noting their ethnicity. Because your sense of entitlement makes you unable to imagine they might have something interesting or unique to offer beyond demographics.

I say this as a mother of an intellectually brilliant white kid who got rejected or wait listed to 5 of their top choices. It is what it is.

Ps it’s kind of creepy you know those kids’ grades.

Everyone knows everything. These kids blab and complain. As you can see from their failure to be elected to any class office, they were not well-liked or respected by classmates or teachers (one was kicked out of dc’s chem class basically). So clearly not great recs. Funny that you insist on thinking they have some hidden charms just bc they are Hispanic though.

LOL on the class election assertion. Grow up. “Popularity” in the high school sense has nothing to do with how much kids are “liked.” And anyone who has moved on from a high school mentality would know that.

Also ther PP says nothing about their ethnicity means they have something interesting to offer a college. However you assume their ethnicity is the only or main reason they got in.

This is an idiotic retort. Class elections reflect leadership capability and how well your classmates respect you, which supposedly colleges prioritize. Except when they prioritize race instead.

Not at all interested in this whole argument about race but the bolded made me lol. High school leadership positions are about popularity or who you’re friends with (if the president has to pick the treasurer, for example). Of ALL the stupid things colleges want to see on resumes, leadership is the most meaningless and absurd.

Right?? What an inane assertion.

The mere fact that the kids ran for office shows some initiative. My exceptionally bright kid is too introverted to try to run for office. Doesn't mean they are not respected or that others don't look to them for their opinions.

"Leadership" may not be decisive, but, for many highly ranked schools, it is a box that needs to be checked. These schools like to claim that every single student admitted had a "leadership" position in HS. One top 20 list I saw listed Student Body President, sports team Captain, Eagle Scout, among a few other things. You can get there different ways, but it is important.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, we feel your pain. Our high-stats FCPS DC (4.41w/3.89uw, mid 1500s SAT, full IB diploma, most rigorous classes) was rejected or waitlisted at every single reach/hard target this week (Rice, WashU, NU, Mich, UCLA, Berkley etc.). Looks like the figurative University of Illinois for us.

These are all reaches. What were her matches/safeties? UVA or WM are at least as good as those schools, and a whole lot cheaper.

Message to parents of future applicants - help your kids have more realistic expectations

Our matches/safeties were Wisconsin, W&M, Pitt and a few others. DC is insisting on OOS--does not want to go to W&M and refused to apply to UVA (we insisted DC apply to one VA school and they grudgingly picked W&M). You make an excellent point about managing expectations. I was thinking that since DC was well within statistical range for every reach one would pan out since we applied to several--DC was rejected at an Ivy ED and UChi ED2. To DCs credit, they are accepting the news better than I am. DC worked really hard and we wanted them to be rewarded for it.

The was a big error in your assumptions that many, many, many parents make. But statistically, applying to 10 schools with very low acceptance rates doesn't give your kid better odds of admission than applying to 1 school with very low acceptance rates.

Also "we" didn't apply; your kid did.

Actually, applying to 10 schools with very low acceptance rates does give a kid a better chance of admissions than applying to one, but not as much as people think.

If a kid applies to a school with a 5 percent acceptance rate, if we know nothing else about that kid (hooks, RD/ED, etc, stats, ECs), our best guess is that they have a 5% chance of getting in.

If a kid applies to 10 schools, each with a 5 percent acceptance rate, their chance of getting in to at least one school is NOT 10 x 5%--that is the error that many people make.

Again, without knowing anything else and assuming college decisions are "independent events"--that is, acceptance to one is not correlated with acceptance to another--their chance of getting in to at least one school is 1-the odds of not getting into any of the ten school = 1-95%^10 = 40 percent.

But here's the thing...and again, this is where people get in trouble--that 5% acceptance rate is the rate we all have to rely on but doesn't really tell us the odds for my kid based on their profile, nor does it tell you the odds for yours. In reality, the odds for my kid getting in during the ED round might be closer to 2%.

Even bright people do not grasp this.

Relatedly, college decisions are really not independent events. As noted, the 5% admission rate is an average-- some applications have closer to 10 or 20% likelihood of admission, while others have closer to 0%. The kid with the 0.1% chance of admission to a top rated school probably has close to zero chance at any top school. The kid with 20% chance probably has a higher likelihood of admission at all the top schools. The "standout" application at Harvard will stand out everywhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I really believe wait lists are going to move like never before given the surge in # of apps per student and you can attend only one school. I think schools will dramatically undershoot yield and need to go to the wait list.

I think schools accepted significant numbers ED, but agree wait lists will move. Unfortunately, we likely won't see movement before 5/1, when deposits are due.

Not true. DS was WL at a school and 1 week later moved to accepted. This was 2019 but it’s not uncommon to hear back well Before May 1.

Please. 2019 may as well have been in another century. This and the last election cycle are markedly different from the ones before.

Sincerely,

Parent with relative in the admissions business

Exactly. Test optional has revolutionized admissions.

I am not going to be PC - how do the truly intelligent and hard working kids stand out? And yes, I think test optional kids are a bit lazy and not intelligent.

They can try, but it doesn’t necessarily matter.

2 kids at our small private just got into Northwestern. They are in all regular classes, with a mix of A’s and Bs. They are not athletes, dancers, musicians. They hold no class office (despite running). They need FA. But they are Hispanic. The (white) all advanced class straight A class rep, musician, etc. is waitlisted. Holistic review is really about advancing demographic priorities. It is what it is.

Armchair analysis. Unless you reviewed their applications you have no real idea how they stood out. You go for the easy thing by noting their ethnicity. Because your sense of entitlement makes you unable to imagine they might have something interesting or unique to offer beyond demographics.

I say this as a mother of an intellectually brilliant white kid who got rejected or wait listed to 5 of their top choices. It is what it is.

Ps it’s kind of creepy you know those kids’ grades.

Everyone knows everything. These kids blab and complain. As you can see from their failure to be elected to any class office, they were not well-liked or respected by classmates or teachers (one was kicked out of dc’s chem class basically). So clearly not great recs. Funny that you insist on thinking they have some hidden charms just bc they are Hispanic though.

LOL on the class election assertion. Grow up. “Popularity” in the high school sense has nothing to do with how much kids are “liked.” And anyone who has moved on from a high school mentality would know that.

Also ther PP says nothing about their ethnicity means they have something interesting to offer a college. However you assume their ethnicity is the only or main reason they got in.

This is an idiotic retort. Class elections reflect leadership capability and how well your classmates respect you, which supposedly colleges prioritize. Except when they prioritize race instead.

Not at all interested in this whole argument about race but the bolded made me lol. High school leadership positions are about popularity or who you’re friends with (if the president has to pick the treasurer, for example). Of ALL the stupid things colleges want to see on resumes, leadership is the most meaningless and absurd.

Right?? What an inane assertion.

The mere fact that the kids ran for office shows some initiative. My exceptionally bright kid is too introverted to try to run for office. Doesn't mean they are not respected or that others don't look to them for their opinions.

Anonymous wrote:This makes sense, but it seems hard to gauge if your kid has a .01 % shot or a 20% shot with the black box of holistic admissions. Many people are sharing that their kid had stats above average for a school and were rejected. and it is happening again and again as the rejections roll in.

Anonymous wrote:This makes sense, but it seems hard to gauge if your kid has a .01 % shot or a 20% shot with the black box of holistic admissions. Many people are sharing that their kid had stats above average for a school and were rejected. and it is happening again and again as the rejections roll in.

Anonymous wrote:This makes sense, but it seems hard to gauge if your kid has a .01 % shot or a 20% shot with the black box of holistic admissions. Many people are sharing that their kid had stats above average for a school and were rejected. and it is happening again and again as the rejections roll in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, we feel your pain. Our high-stats FCPS DC (4.41w/3.89uw, mid 1500s SAT, full IB diploma, most rigorous classes) was rejected or waitlisted at every single reach/hard target this week (Rice, WashU, NU, Mich, UCLA, Berkley etc.). Looks like the figurative University of Illinois for us.

These are all reaches. What were her matches/safeties? UVA or WM are at least as good as those schools, and a whole lot cheaper.

Message to parents of future applicants - help your kids have more realistic expectations

Our matches/safeties were Wisconsin, W&M, Pitt and a few others. DC is insisting on OOS--does not want to go to W&M and refused to apply to UVA (we insisted DC apply to one VA school and they grudgingly picked W&M). You make an excellent point about managing expectations. I was thinking that since DC was well within statistical range for every reach one would pan out since we applied to several--DC was rejected at an Ivy ED and UChi ED2. To DCs credit, they are accepting the news better than I am. DC worked really hard and we wanted them to be rewarded for it.

The was a big error in your assumptions that many, many, many parents make. But statistically, applying to 10 schools with very low acceptance rates doesn't give your kid better odds of admission than applying to 1 school with very low acceptance rates.

Also "we" didn't apply; your kid did.

Actually, applying to 10 schools with very low acceptance rates does give a kid a better chance of admissions than applying to one, but not as much as people think.

If a kid applies to a school with a 5 percent acceptance rate, if we know nothing else about that kid (hooks, RD/ED, etc, stats, ECs), our best guess is that they have a 5% chance of getting in.

If a kid applies to 10 schools, each with a 5 percent acceptance rate, their chance of getting in to at least one school is NOT 10 x 5%--that is the error that many people make.

Again, without knowing anything else and assuming college decisions are "independent events"--that is, acceptance to one is not correlated with acceptance to another--their chance of getting in to at least one school is 1-the odds of not getting into any of the ten school = 1-95%^10 = 40 percent.

But here's the thing...and again, this is where people get in trouble--that 5% acceptance rate is the rate we all have to rely on but doesn't really tell us the odds for my kid based on their profile, nor does it tell you the odds for yours. In reality, the odds for my kid getting in during the ED round might be closer to 2%.

Even bright people do not grasp this.