Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On a personal note, I think your name calling of PP was unwarranted and you should apologize. We're just trying to have a helpful discussion, even if opinions differ, and that does not help. In fact it hurts your otherwise insightful post.
For the second time, that poster was annoying because they repeated the same thing like it was new. It is rude to tell someone they are wrong and say the same thing. The post said nothing and was only made so the poster could pretend to be smart. It reminded me of being in a work meeting with someone saying the obvious, counselor know where kids apply because they do recommendations and they encourage kids to inform about decisions. So they have the data??? What about that makes any sense. I encourage people to give me a million dollars so I have a million dollars?? I do not think the statement added any value to the conversation except for the poster to have an ego boost. I thought the poster was an idiot and I am not insecure or heartless. If you want to treat Naviance like it's the bible please do. Just remember when admission decisions come out and do not be surprised if it's not accurate for your kid. This happens every year. Why? because the data set may not be as accurate as you think.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On a personal note, I think your name calling of PP was unwarranted and you should apologize. We're just trying to have a helpful discussion, even if opinions differ, and that does not help. In fact it hurts your otherwise insightful post.
For the second time, that poster was annoying because they repeated the same thing like it was new. It is rude to tell someone they are wrong and say the same thing. The post said nothing and was only made so the poster could pretend to be smart. It reminded me of being in a work meeting with someone saying the obvious, counselor know where kids apply because they do recommendations and they encourage kids to inform about decisions. So they have the data??? What about that makes any sense. I encourage people to give me a million dollars so I have a million dollars?? I do not think the statement added any value to the conversation except for the poster to have an ego boost. I thought the poster was an idiot and I am not insecure or heartless. If you want to treat Naviance like it's the bible please do. Just remember when admission decisions come out and do not be surprised if it's not accurate for your kid. This happens every year. Why? because the data set may not be as accurate as you think.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.
That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.
But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.
You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.
How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.
I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.
High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.
The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)
I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.
You may feel insecure to turn down the survey, most students are honest enough and willing to help future students. It may surprise your tiny heart that Naviance is quite accurate and is the best of all the available data concerning college acceptance distribution. If parchment does get a hold of some of the data as someone suggested, their comparison charts then are highly useful.
ok white people. In a school that has few URMs, or anything else that is atypical responding is self-identifying. (Every kid knows who went to Standford for a good 5 years. Then you know the metrics and can figure out every other school the kid applied too. That is very personal. if you are applying to state school maybe you are not personally identifying but for top schools you are) Why would you out your kid. Naviance is not a useful tool for any kids that is not average for the school they attend. If they are an athlete, URM, musician, poet...its not predictive anyway. Why should I feel insecure all my kids went top 10? and had multiple offers? I just don't feel I have to submit personal identifying data. When I went top10 we did not have Naviance and guess what we still went to college.
Why would you "out" your kid? Why would I "out" my kid who got into Stanford? I would out them from the mountaintop! How insulting for you to think they should be embarrassed of their accomplishments in any way!
Naviance scattergrams show a dot, with no personal identifying information. So you are not "outing" anyone. Anybody who can figure out it is your kid already knows the deal about your kid, don't they?
The main reason to do it -- and this is important -- because it helps other students, whether you think it does or not. That's how data works. When you have all of the data, the outliers self-identify. It's easy, actually, the more data you have. When people like you leave out the data because of your personal issues, that hurts everyone. But I guess you don't care about that.
It's certainly your choice, and you are certainly entitled to make a selfish one, if that is your concern.
Anonymous wrote:On a personal note, I think your name calling of PP was unwarranted and you should apologize. We're just trying to have a helpful discussion, even if opinions differ, and that does not help. In fact it hurts your otherwise insightful post.
For the second time, that poster was annoying because they repeated the same thing like it was new. It is rude to tell someone they are wrong and say the same thing. The post said nothing and was only made so the poster could pretend to be smart. It reminded me of being in a work meeting with someone saying the obvious, counselor know where kids apply because they do recommendations and they encourage kids to inform about decisions. So they have the data??? What about that makes any sense. I encourage people to give me a million dollars so I have a million dollars?? I do not think the statement added any value to the conversation except for the poster to have an ego boost. I thought the poster was an idiot and I am not insecure or heartless. If you want to treat Naviance like it's the bible please do. Just remember when admission decisions come out and do not be surprised if it's not accurate for your kid. This happens every year. Why? because the data set may not be as accurate as you think.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.
That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.
But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.
You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.
How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.
I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.
High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.
The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)
I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.
You may feel insecure to turn down the survey, most students are honest enough and willing to help future students. It may surprise your tiny heart that Naviance is quite accurate and is the best of all the available data concerning college acceptance distribution. If parchment does get a hold of some of the data as someone suggested, their comparison charts then are highly useful.
ok white people. In a school that has few URMs, or anything else that is atypical responding is self-identifying. (Every kid knows who went to Standford for a good 5 years. Then you know the metrics and can figure out every other school the kid applied too. That is very personal. if you are applying to state school maybe you are not personally identifying but for top schools you are) Why would you out your kid. Naviance is not a useful tool for any kids that is not average for the school they attend. If they are an athlete, URM, musician, poet...its not predictive anyway. Why should I feel insecure all my kids went top 10? and had multiple offers? I just don't feel I have to submit personal identifying data. When I went top10 we did not have Naviance and guess what we still went to college.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.
That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.
But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.
You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.
How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.
I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.
High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.
The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)
I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.
DP here. Many schools require a Naviance exit survey. Yes people can lie. But why would they? Most people want to be helpful and understand the value since they used the data themselves. For many high performing schools there is also a relationship between guidance and admissions for fact checking where it matters.
So yes it depends on the school. But Naviance is the best data you get, even if not perfect.
On a personal note, I think your name calling of PP was unwarranted and you should apologize. We're just trying to have a helpful discussion, even if opinions differ, and that does not help. In fact it hurts your otherwise insightful post.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.
That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.
But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.
You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.
How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.
I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.
High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.
The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)
I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.
You may feel insecure to turn down the survey, most students are honest enough and willing to help future students. It may surprise your tiny heart that Naviance is quite accurate and is the best of all the available data concerning college acceptance distribution. If parchment does get a hold of some of the data as someone suggested, their comparison charts then are highly useful.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.
That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.
But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.
You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.
How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.
I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.
High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.
The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)
I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.
You may feel insecure to turn down the survey, most students are honest enough and willing to help future students. It may surprise your tiny heart that Naviance is quite accurate and is the best of all the available data concerning college acceptance distribution. If parchment does get a hold of some of the data as someone suggested, their comparison charts then are highly useful.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.
That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.
But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.
You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.
How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.
I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.
High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.
The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)
I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.
That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.
But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.
You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.
How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.
I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.
High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.
The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)
I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.
That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.
But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.
You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.
How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.
I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.
High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.
The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)
I wish you had common sense. The high school knows where people applied but not where they got in fool. By the way that is exactly what I said. Many kids may not be "encouraged" (notice that does not mean required) to give over info on their acceptances. In addition, they may lie about their acceptance to save face. (I got in but we did. not have the money-- how many people get into Harvard or whatever school that don't have the money each year????). I specifically told my URM kids NOT to give any info and know a lot of other parents of every socio-economic rage that do not participate. As I said schools know where kids apply, if you ask for help with a waitlist they know that too and finally they know where they send transcripts. Beyond that it is highly suspect.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.
That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.
But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.
You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.
How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.
I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.
High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.
The high school knows all colleges a student applied to because the school is asked to send counselor's recommendation letter to all of them.
I think students are also encouraged to provide feedback on which colleges they got in for the Naviance database to benefit later students.
So high schools have the data if they are willing to provide the metadata to parchment (not sure about this)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.
That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.
But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.
You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.
How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.
I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.
High schools do not always know where kids are admitted unless the students tells their guidance counselor. They only know where you are going when you ask for the transcript to be sent.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Read the post again. Yale and Princeton are "quite a bit further down" from Stanford/MIT for tech specifically.
That is definitely true. The holy grail in tech is Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon and Berkeley, and these universities are considered quite a bit better than the next tier of universities for tech.
But I was responding to your post answering my question! If those stats are not relevant to tech (and I agree they are not relevant to tech, or anything else WRT prestige) then don't post them in reply.
You just discounted your entire yield-statistical response.
How many kids voluntarily submit to parchment and is the data verified? I would need accurate and robust data to make such strong statements.
I think most Parchment data comes from participating high schools.