Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is fascinating. I was that completely unhooked and unhelped kid in a regular suburb where everyone went to state schools, but that was in 1997. I have my 8th grade journal and it has a list of everything I needed to do that summer and in 9th and 10th grade called “What I Need To Get Into A Good School”, down to which activity I would do which semester and how I could get into certain science classes early without jeopardizing my electives schedule and an SAT studying schedule. I don’t know where I got these ideas but I did read a lot of New Yorkers and the New York Times at the school library so I think I subconsciously absorbed the concept of elite schools and how to get into them.

My parents had gone to state schools but were ordinary, barely UMC and sometimes MC due to job loss and instability. They had no idea how things worked but did give me their checkbook so I would write out application fee checks. My mom also let me go to her office so I could access an old typewriter they had there to use for applications.

I think there is so much transparency to the application process now and so much conversation around applications that it would be really tough now to find a MC or UMC kid who didn’t have parents more involved than mine. The stakes are too high.

I am curious. What school did you attend? What city/town are you from? Were you the valedictorian?

Generic nice Midwestern suburb of a big Midwestern city, but not a feeder or a top suburb or a fancy private school where these kinds of applications were common. My guidance counselor refused to sign off on my applications because I wasn’t applying to our state flagship and I had to go in multiple times to tell her that wasn’t happening. I don’t remember why she caved but I think the vice principal or someone heard about it from a teacher who wrote my recs and intervened.

I went to an HYP and also got into Stanford, Duke, and a few SLACs. I think the last kid to go one of those kinds of schools before me had been years before and for a sport, so it wasn’t totally unheard of in my town but definitely rare. I wasn’t the valedictorian and I wasn’t a kid who got national merit scholar finalist (just commended or whatever they call the consolation version). People probably didn’t notice me. I think I was just the only person to think to do it.

Anonymous wrote:Not sure, but I think this is the kid that ivies want. They want Barrack Obama at 16-years-old, not a lot of SAT tutoring or curating, with an organically developed passion for community activism. Only they would've wanted him with a 4.0. Not sure what his actual GPA was at the time but pretty sure it wasn't a 4.0.

Obama went to THE most elite private high in Hawaii. They don’t give out As easily, I am pretty sure he didn’t have 4.0. Most likely no one at his school had 4.0.

I don’t think he was a community activist back in high school. He was raised by his white grandparents.

And college admissions were much much easier at his time. Just different times.

Anonymous wrote:What percent of students do you think get into Ivy leagues who are both:

- completely unhooked and by that I mean, including Rural, first GEN, low income, minority, athletes, feeder schools, come from states that produce few applicants, etc.

AND

- have zero pushing from parents (to join/start/continue activities, college admissions counselors, essay help, etc) OR anything that results in a curated college app.

Not many.

I knew one - kinda - because depending on how you define first generation, he was possibly first generation (both grandparent sets had degrees, but parents didn’t). He was just a super smart, self-motivated kid with good stats and probably a phenomenal interviewer.

^ but private (not a big 3 or 5) helped. Doubt he’d get in from our public. No private counselors or essay coaches, just test prep.

No curating or looking for exclusive summer programs. Just worked, played sports, one club.

My kid was 1 of the 2 truly unhooked out of 7 at his private. The others were athletes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percent of students do you think get into Ivy leagues who are both:

- completely unhooked and by that I mean, including Rural, first GEN, low income, minority, athletes, feeder schools, come from states that produce few applicants, etc.

AND

- have zero pushing from parents (to join/start/continue activities, college admissions counselors, essay help, etc) OR anything that results in a curated college app.

The ivies have always been hard to get into if you are unhooked. If you are going to count geographic diversity and low income as hooks, I'd bet there are very few completely unhooked kids getting into ivies ever.

Put another way...what UMC parent these days just doesn't give a shit about their kid's activities (or call it their lack of involvement in any) or their class schedule (that matters too) or their college prospects?

Most don't even care about the Ivy league, but they aren't doing nothing.

It's hard to understand who qualifies under OP's guidelines.

The pushiest, curating, extra $ for consultant parents all did it to try to get wake or W&L or uva in state. Got none, headed to UGA, auburn, smu.

If curating wasn’t a part of it, then all the organizations helping and funding fgli’s for years before apps are written wouldn’t be helpful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percent of students do you think get into Ivy leagues who are both:

- completely unhooked and by that I mean, including Rural, first GEN, low income, minority, athletes, feeder schools, come from states that produce few applicants, etc.

AND

- have zero pushing from parents (to join/start/continue activities, college admissions counselors, essay help, etc) OR anything that results in a curated college app.

with two unhooked kids at two different ivies, one premed/bio one engineering, in their classes about 75% are unhooked noting that feeder school factor is unknown. less than 25% recruited athletes, they do not personally know any legacies, and the rest of the 25% are FGLI/urm. In the broader non-stem curriculum courses such as seminar or writing, the percent of unhooked is lower as they have noted many more recruited athletes who on average are not as impressive in the classroom.
The feeder school thing is difficult to parse: many privates send less than 10% of unhookeds to ivies/T15 which is more than typical suburban publics but these schools have smarter kids than the average public. Other NE privates send 30% to elite. The Big Name magnet public sends 20%. Where does one draw the line?
Parent involvement is also sticky: we paid for private school, mostly because at a young age it was clear they were each highly gifted and we knew they would need to be challenged. The local top public does not have a good track record on AP passing rates. The private schools have more reading and writing, 8-10 page papers beginning in 8th grade, 30% of the class gets to at least BC calc by 12th. Multivariable calc in high school is a standard "track" among the top 3 privates in the area but not possible at publics other than the STEM magnet which does not have the writing curriculum. No tutors or paid college counselors though that is not needed at a private school. Pushy parents were rampant in the private but the kids usually burnt out. None of the unhooked pushed kids made it to ivy/t15 from our private, they could not keep up with their smarter peers in the hard classes.
On the EC pushing: for those of us who have kids at ivy/elite, these schools are chock full of driven, self-disciplined young people who know how to lead and are goal-oriented. Most seem like mine: they have been like this forever, and the best things their parents could do is move out of their way at a young age and let them excel in whatever area captures their interest. Most grow and thrive from the challenge of being around a majority of similar minds and ambition, and support each other along the way. Even premed is relatively collaborative at the ivy based on what they have heard from high school friends at large publics.
There are students who seem burnt out or not able to deal with the driven peers. These are few and far between and it is true they tend not to do well. Posts on the parent FB page and anecdotes from our own make it clear that some students are not independent or resilient enough for the environment. It would be a huge parenting fail to try to push a kid to an ivy/elite.

This is an impossible thing to know. Maybe a troll?

This. What ivies? Bc we can look up the demographics. How would a parent or other student know

-about 75% are unhooked

Even so, this poster admits “less than 25% recruited athletes” and 25% are FGLI/urm

My guess is when you add in underrepresented students + legacy + rural/desirable geographic location of applicants - you’re at 75%+ are HOOKED.

Using your list of unhooked, I’d guess close to zero. I do think there are a good amount of kids who are high achievers without any parental pushing. L

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is fascinating. I was that completely unhooked and unhelped kid in a regular suburb where everyone went to state schools, but that was in 1997. I have my 8th grade journal and it has a list of everything I needed to do that summer and in 9th and 10th grade called “What I Need To Get Into A Good School”, down to which activity I would do which semester and how I could get into certain science classes early without jeopardizing my electives schedule and an SAT studying schedule. I don’t know where I got these ideas but I did read a lot of New Yorkers and the New York Times at the school library so I think I subconsciously absorbed the concept of elite schools and how to get into them.

My parents had gone to state schools but were ordinary, barely UMC and sometimes MC due to job loss and instability. They had no idea how things worked but did give me their checkbook so I would write out application fee checks. My mom also let me go to her office so I could access an old typewriter they had there to use for applications.

I think there is so much transparency to the application process now and so much conversation around applications that it would be really tough now to find a MC or UMC kid who didn’t have parents more involved than mine. The stakes are too high.

The gold old time…

Penn had an acceptance rate of 40% around then.

This. Harvard used to be a 19% admit rate. Times are different now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percent of students do you think get into Ivy leagues who are both:

- completely unhooked and by that I mean, including Rural, first GEN, low income, minority, athletes, feeder schools, come from states that produce few applicants, etc.

AND

- have zero pushing from parents (to join/start/continue activities, college admissions counselors, essay help, etc) OR anything that results in a curated college app.

with two unhooked kids at two different ivies, one premed/bio one engineering, in their classes about 75% are unhooked noting that feeder school factor is unknown. less than 25% recruited athletes, they do not personally know any legacies, and the rest of the 25% are FGLI/urm. In the broader non-stem curriculum courses such as seminar or writing, the percent of unhooked is lower as they have noted many more recruited athletes who on average are not as impressive in the classroom.
The feeder school thing is difficult to parse: many privates send less than 10% of unhookeds to ivies/T15 which is more than typical suburban publics but these schools have smarter kids than the average public. Other NE privates send 30% to elite. The Big Name magnet public sends 20%. Where does one draw the line?
Parent involvement is also sticky: we paid for private school, mostly because at a young age it was clear they were each highly gifted and we knew they would need to be challenged. The local top public does not have a good track record on AP passing rates. The private schools have more reading and writing, 8-10 page papers beginning in 8th grade, 30% of the class gets to at least BC calc by 12th. Multivariable calc in high school is a standard "track" among the top 3 privates in the area but not possible at publics other than the STEM magnet which does not have the writing curriculum. No tutors or paid college counselors though that is not needed at a private school. Pushy parents were rampant in the private but the kids usually burnt out. None of the unhooked pushed kids made it to ivy/t15 from our private, they could not keep up with their smarter peers in the hard classes.
On the EC pushing: for those of us who have kids at ivy/elite, these schools are chock full of driven, self-disciplined young people who know how to lead and are goal-oriented. Most seem like mine: they have been like this forever, and the best things their parents could do is move out of their way at a young age and let them excel in whatever area captures their interest. Most grow and thrive from the challenge of being around a majority of similar minds and ambition, and support each other along the way. Even premed is relatively collaborative at the ivy based on what they have heard from high school friends at large publics.
There are students who seem burnt out or not able to deal with the driven peers. These are few and far between and it is true they tend not to do well. Posts on the parent FB page and anecdotes from our own make it clear that some students are not independent or resilient enough for the environment. It would be a huge parenting fail to try to push a kid to an ivy/elite.

This is an impossible thing to know. Maybe a troll?

Anonymous wrote:This is fascinating. I was that completely unhooked and unhelped kid in a regular suburb where everyone went to state schools, but that was in 1997. I have my 8th grade journal and it has a list of everything I needed to do that summer and in 9th and 10th grade called “What I Need To Get Into A Good School”, down to which activity I would do which semester and how I could get into certain science classes early without jeopardizing my electives schedule and an SAT studying schedule. I don’t know where I got these ideas but I did read a lot of New Yorkers and the New York Times at the school library so I think I subconsciously absorbed the concept of elite schools and how to get into them.

My parents had gone to state schools but were ordinary, barely UMC and sometimes MC due to job loss and instability. They had no idea how things worked but did give me their checkbook so I would write out application fee checks. My mom also let me go to her office so I could access an old typewriter they had there to use for applications.

I think there is so much transparency to the application process now and so much conversation around applications that it would be really tough now to find a MC or UMC kid who didn’t have parents more involved than mine. The stakes are too high.

I am curious. What school did you attend? What city/town are you from? Were you the valedictorian?

Anonymous wrote:What percent of students do you think get into Ivy leagues who are both:

- completely unhooked and by that I mean, including Rural, first GEN, low income, minority, athletes, feeder schools, come from states that produce few applicants, etc.

AND

- have zero pushing from parents (to join/start/continue activities, college admissions counselors, essay help, etc) OR anything that results in a curated college app.

with two unhooked kids at two different ivies, one premed/bio one engineering, in their classes about 75% are unhooked noting that feeder school factor is unknown. less than 25% recruited athletes, they do not personally know any legacies, and the rest of the 25% are FGLI/urm. In the broader non-stem curriculum courses such as seminar or writing, the percent of unhooked is lower as they have noted many more recruited athletes who on average are not as impressive in the classroom.
The feeder school thing is difficult to parse: many privates send less than 10% of unhookeds to ivies/T15 which is more than typical suburban publics but these schools have smarter kids than the average public. Other NE privates send 30% to elite. The Big Name magnet public sends 20%. Where does one draw the line?
Parent involvement is also sticky: we paid for private school, mostly because at a young age it was clear they were each highly gifted and we knew they would need to be challenged. The local top public does not have a good track record on AP passing rates. The private schools have more reading and writing, 8-10 page papers beginning in 8th grade, 30% of the class gets to at least BC calc by 12th. Multivariable calc in high school is a standard "track" among the top 3 privates in the area but not possible at publics other than the STEM magnet which does not have the writing curriculum. No tutors or paid college counselors though that is not needed at a private school. Pushy parents were rampant in the private but the kids usually burnt out. None of the unhooked pushed kids made it to ivy/t15 from our private, they could not keep up with their smarter peers in the hard classes.
On the EC pushing: for those of us who have kids at ivy/elite, these schools are chock full of driven, self-disciplined young people who know how to lead and are goal-oriented. Most seem like mine: they have been like this forever, and the best things their parents could do is move out of their way at a young age and let them excel in whatever area captures their interest. Most grow and thrive from the challenge of being around a majority of similar minds and ambition, and support each other along the way. Even premed is relatively collaborative at the ivy based on what they have heard from high school friends at large publics.
There are students who seem burnt out or not able to deal with the driven peers. These are few and far between and it is true they tend not to do well. Posts on the parent FB page and anecdotes from our own make it clear that some students are not independent or resilient enough for the environment. It would be a huge parenting fail to try to push a kid to an ivy/elite.

^ good