Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I know, OP! It's infuriating, because as long as admissions are "holistic", there will be cheating and fraud.
It's much harder to cheat on a standardized test than it is to casually invent a bunch of extra-curriculars.
University admissions need to be entirely academic and standardized.
The rich/privileged love 'holistic'. Their messaging is that it helps the poors but in reality it allows them to game it to their benefit. Who do you think the college cartel will listen to?
Utterly false. Who started "holistic" review? The universities did. They don't care squat about what "the rich/privileged" love. The universities love it because they can rely less on GPA and exam stats and more on kumbaya, leading to social engineering of each entering class. Read the Chronicle of Higher Education.
Anonymous wrote:the passion project movement is rooted in this "trust and never verified" system.
you can laugh but the kids who found a "passion" in spring of junior year to cook with grandma (look for our podcast!) while connecting your love for baking with your interest in chemistry were super super successful with top colleges
the fact that you cooked with grandma 4x, did 4 podcasts that were 7 minutes each, than you dropped it all and actually plan on transferring into CS asap all go unmentioned. our high school counselors let people tell their own stories, even when they side eye it all
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I know, OP! It's infuriating, because as long as admissions are "holistic", there will be cheating and fraud.
It's much harder to cheat on a standardized test than it is to casually invent a bunch of extra-curriculars.
University admissions need to be entirely academic and standardized.
The rich/privileged love 'holistic'. Their messaging is that it helps the poors but in reality it allows them to game it to their benefit. Who do you think the college cartel will listen to?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised at so many people dismissing this is minor. Or somehow suggesting that the system created this. This is a case of someone trying to claim a status that isn't theirs. My kid didn't get an office in her club/team. She presented herself as best she good, listing as Sr. + her function on the team. There is no need to invent because you lost a popularity vote. And, making up awards in lieu of earning them just betrays a Trumplike or Santosy justification for whatever it takes to get ahead. Grr.
Let's see.. We have a taxpayer subsidized higher-ed system that holds the keys to the kingdom (in terms of jobs and wealth creation) that has unjust filters that blatantly benefit the rich/privileged. There's absolutely nothing wrong in circumventing those filters doing whatever it takes. Nothing 'Trumplike or Santosy' about it.
Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised at so many people dismissing this is minor. Or somehow suggesting that the system created this. This is a case of someone trying to claim a status that isn't theirs. My kid didn't get an office in her club/team. She presented herself as best she good, listing as Sr. + her function on the team. There is no need to invent because you lost a popularity vote. And, making up awards in lieu of earning them just betrays a Trumplike or Santosy justification for whatever it takes to get ahead. Grr.
Anonymous wrote:
I know, OP! It's infuriating, because as long as admissions are "holistic", there will be cheating and fraud.
It's much harder to cheat on a standardized test than it is to casually invent a bunch of extra-curriculars.
University admissions need to be entirely academic and standardized.
Anonymous wrote:transcripts and recommendations are all largely the same for kids applying to Dartmouth (etc).
did you read Who Gets In and Why? It's the fact that the student was the elephant whisperer that got her in. The fact that that was a one day even during an expensive one-week touristy thing was unmentioned and not picked up on by the adcomm
and yes, that is what moved the needle.
Anonymous wrote:
I know, OP! It's infuriating, because as long as admissions are "holistic", there will be cheating and fraud.
It's much harder to cheat on a standardized test than it is to casually invent a bunch of extra-curriculars.
University admissions need to be entirely academic and standardized.
Anonymous wrote:transcripts and recommendations are all largely the same for kids applying to Dartmouth (etc).
did you read Who Gets In and Why? It's the fact that the student was the elephant whisperer that got her in. The fact that that was a one day even during an expensive one-week touristy thing was unmentioned and not picked up on by the adcomm
and yes, that is what moved the needle.