Anonymous wrote:Much easier to blame people of another race, gender, socioeconomic status -- whatever than to just recognize that the world is a big, big place; that it can be tough; that it's not always fair; and that - despite all of this - if you work hard, treat others nicely, and keep your perspective, you can probably scratch out a pretty decent life for yourself. In fact, if you do these things, your odds of scratching out a serviceable life for yourself and your family is probably better now (for most people) than it has been at any other time or place. The problem is that you are also more likely to be bombarded with Bad News 24/7/365 than you were in the past.

Great, tell the WSJ that because all their op-eds and most of their regular articles are blaming people of other races or SES

Much easier to blame people of another race, gender, socioeconomic status -- whatever than to just recognize that the world is a big, big place; that it can be tough; that it's not always fair; and that - despite all of this - if you work hard, treat others nicely, and keep your perspective, you can probably scratch out a pretty decent life for yourself. In fact, if you do these things, your odds of scratching out a serviceable life for yourself and your family is probably better now (for most people) than it has been at any other time or place. The problem is that you are also more likely to be bombarded with Bad News 24/7/365 than you were in the past.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

True. Odd that the wall street journal is so unaware.

As PPs noted, the WSJ knew exactly what it was doing. People that understand current college admissions know this kid's story raised several red flags, but it plays right into the political and social narrative the WSJ is pushing.

Well they could have pushed it better if they had found a more compelling story.

The example taps into the ressentiment that exists in many white people, that they and/or their offspring are being eclipsed by folks who are not as qualified w/o any awareness of the
"defiiciencies" in their own qualifications. WSJ doesn't want more compelling; they want an example that stokes these feelings, even if they are largely not based in fact.

If that girl really had a modicum of reading comprehension, she would know from perusing College Confidential, CDS sets, etc that ANY of the top schools on her list were a reach and that a college list in the 2022 cycle needed to include more targets than reaches and more safeties than targets.

But she didn't get and/or heed good feedback and here she is at the end of the cycle.

Where in the article does it state the bolded? There are disappointed students all around. Why can't white students feel that disappointment many students experience?

I'm a PP who wrote that Facebook college groups are filled with comments on how their kid/niece/nephew/next door neighbor kid has all As, didn't get a full ride to X university, and probably because minorities are getting all the money. A 4.0 GPA is now more common than it used to be. There is no mention of test scores or any other activities, but just how the kid is getting screwed. And yes, a kid can get full rides, but they need to apply to schools that dole them out. Most don't. They lash out yet often are ill-informed on how college admissions, financial aid, and merit work in these times. Especially merit - if you do not qualify for FA and want to go to a LAC, then you usually need to apply a rung or two down to pull down the big merit bucks. Not all flagships spread around the money, so maybe the student needs to look out of state or at a regional uni.

There is so much more information available - real time - than when many of us applied to college, but a number of parents/students do not seem to avail themselves of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

True. Odd that the wall street journal is so unaware.

As PPs noted, the WSJ knew exactly what it was doing. People that understand current college admissions know this kid's story raised several red flags, but it plays right into the political and social narrative the WSJ is pushing.

Well they could have pushed it better if they had found a more compelling story.

The example taps into the ressentiment that exists in many white people, that they and/or their offspring are being eclipsed by folks who are not as qualified w/o any awareness of the
"defiiciencies" in their own qualifications. WSJ doesn't want more compelling; they want an example that stokes these feelings, even if they are largely not based in fact.

If that girl really had a modicum of reading comprehension, she would know from perusing College Confidential, CDS sets, etc that ANY of the top schools on her list were a reach and that a college list in the 2022 cycle needed to include more targets than reaches and more safeties than targets.

But she didn't get and/or heed good feedback and here she is at the end of the cycle.

Where in the article does it state the bolded? There are disappointed students all around. Why can't white students feel that disappointment many students experience?

It doesn’t have to be explicitly stated. Go read some other recent WSJ pieces and it’s crystal clear what their agenda is.

Of course white students can feel that disappointment, but an article saying “your child’s…” (As if we’re all white middle class people, so I’m assuming that’s the WSJ’s target audience) implies that somebody “else” is causing this child’s chances to be lower than they would’ve been at some other time.

Sort of off-topic, at some level of high school size it seems like it’s a ding because you can be in the top 3% of your class (!!!) and still rank behind 2 dozen other kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

True. Odd that the wall street journal is so unaware.

As PPs noted, the WSJ knew exactly what it was doing. People that understand current college admissions know this kid's story raised several red flags, but it plays right into the political and social narrative the WSJ is pushing.

Well they could have pushed it better if they had found a more compelling story.

The example taps into the ressentiment that exists in many white people, that they and/or their offspring are being eclipsed by folks who are not as qualified w/o any awareness of the
"defiiciencies" in their own qualifications. WSJ doesn't want more compelling; they want an example that stokes these feelings, even if they are largely not based in fact.

If that girl really had a modicum of reading comprehension, she would know from perusing College Confidential, CDS sets, etc that ANY of the top schools on her list were a reach and that a college list in the 2022 cycle needed to include more targets than reaches and more safeties than targets.

But she didn't get and/or heed good feedback and here she is at the end of the cycle.

Where in the article does it state the bolded? There are disappointed students all around. Why can't white students feel that disappointment many students experience?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article states she was 23 in her class. Curious as to where the kids ranked higher than her are going. Also, that seems like some major grade inflation if two Bs bumps you down to 23rd. (And I am getting the sense a lot of big public schools are that way - very grade inflated).

Also wonder how rigorous her classes were.

She was 23rd in the class and half of the 600 are not even aiming to go to college. So I would look at that as 23rd out of the 300 trying for college. That is a great achievement but she was given poor advice if she she thought she would definitely be admitted to any of the colleges listed.

Colleges should really be more direct if that’s how they define class rank. A lot of kids hear “top x% of your class” and think that means they’re tippy top.

She knew what her class rank was. She received very poor guidance. It’s like she just said I’m going to apply to all the very best schools I’ve heard of and throw in Arizona State as a safety. That’s not a good strategy for anyone no matter how qualified you think you are.

And posters have criticized some of us here when we say a 4.2 and 1500 are a dime a dozen. It’s crazy, but yes, this is just the foundation of a strong application.

I think the way you stated it just now is great -- it's a foundation. I got so annoyed by people calling my kid "a dime a dozen," because they don't know her. She had way higher stats than this plus lots of other bells and whistles. I just had lumping kids into an amorphous blob. But, I do get that it is about standing out, and that great academics just buy you a ticket to enter. So much else is dependent on if the student fills the college's need, how the student distinguishes his or her self, if the college things they will say Yes. I think one thing that was helpful for mine was the ability to contact admissions officers with awards updates -- created a means to stand out in two ways, by connecting to the AO and getting her name in front of them and adding to overall profile.

ASU is 100% free or free tuition? Either way, that's great. Funny how all the tweets and fb posts WSJ has spammed never highlight she got that lavish scholarship to ASU – it's all outrage over getting denied by Ivies. The focus should be generous merit awards – most parents are clueless that overachiever 12th graders can drop down a tier or two, especially out of state public universities, and tap very lavish merit scholarships.

Anonymous wrote:Since when do you have to get into an accounting program as a pre-freshman? And besides, can't you major in anything and take enough accounting courses to still get a master's in accounting to go CPA route? Not all of my CPA friends majored in accounting.

End of the day this is an overachiever who got into a very prestigious state flagship, UT-Austin -- but turned it down, I'd argue she's a fool for turning it down. And that narrative of her going to a dumb party school ASU instead of prestigious UT-Austin helped WSJ hacks whip up this narrative that smart white kids have to go to crummy party schools because of affirmative action.

UVA, VTech,Michigan, UT-Austin, Berkeley, et al. are literally overflowing with kids as smart and smarter than her. There's nothing especially noteworthy about her that would make Ivies clamor for her. Typical UMC smart kid with professional parents. Dime a dozen.

Again, UT probably wasn’t cheap.

Since when do you have to get into an accounting program as a pre-freshman? And besides, can't you major in anything and take enough accounting courses to still get a master's in accounting to go CPA route? Not all of my CPA friends majored in accounting.

End of the day this is an overachiever who got into a very prestigious state flagship, UT-Austin -- but turned it down, I'd argue she's a fool for turning it down. And that narrative of her going to a dumb party school ASU instead of prestigious UT-Austin helped WSJ hacks whip up this narrative that smart white kids have to go to crummy party schools because of affirmative action.

UVA, VTech,Michigan, UT-Austin, Berkeley, et al. are literally overflowing with kids as smart and smarter than her. There's nothing especially noteworthy about her that would make Ivies clamor for her. Typical UMC smart kid with professional parents. Dime a dozen.

Anonymous wrote:Frankly, 23rd in her Texas class of 600 makes her a dime a dozen in a nation of 350 million people. She was just used by the right wing hacks at WSJ. State universities are full of grinds like her. One of my very smart sorority sisters at my state university was an accounting major with the same stats. Her dad was a successful CPA. She finished her bachelor's and master's with a 3.9 GPA.

This WSJ girl should have applied to the honors program at her dad's University of Oklahoma alma mater as well as UT and A&M and gone to whichever gave her the most merit (if any).

I personally think she is a fool for turning down UT-Austin. But ASU is a fine school and if the scholarship is generous, why not.

UT Austin is good but accounting is a better major than Econ (outside of tippy top schools) for job purposes. She did not get into accounting at UT and UT was probably going to be $100,000+ versus free at ASU.

LA-based sports personality Colin Cowherd is a multi-million many times over and his daughter had very similar high school stats as this young lady (he spoke about it constantly on the radio) and she went to Arizona State's honors college, too. She just graduated.

Frankly, 23rd in her Texas class of 600 makes her a dime a dozen in a nation of 350 million people. She was just used by the right wing hacks at WSJ. State universities are full of grinds like her. One of my very smart sorority sisters at my state university was an accounting major with the same stats. Her dad was a successful CPA. She finished her bachelor's and master's with a 3.9 GPA.

This WSJ girl should have applied to the honors program at her dad's University of Oklahoma alma mater as well as UT and A&M and gone to whichever gave her the most merit (if any).

I personally think she is a fool for turning down UT-Austin. But ASU is a fine school and if the scholarship is generous, why not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

True. Odd that the wall street journal is so unaware.

As PPs noted, the WSJ knew exactly what it was doing. People that understand current college admissions know this kid's story raised several red flags, but it plays right into the political and social narrative the WSJ is pushing.

Well they could have pushed it better if they had found a more compelling story.

The example taps into the ressentiment that exists in many white people, that they and/or their offspring are being eclipsed by folks who are not as qualified w/o any awareness of the
"defiiciencies" in their own qualifications. WSJ doesn't want more compelling; they want an example that stokes these feelings, even if they are largely not based in fact.

If that girl really had a modicum of reading comprehension, she would know from perusing College Confidential, CDS sets, etc that ANY of the top schools on her list were a reach and that a college list in the 2022 cycle needed to include more targets than reaches and more safeties than targets.

But she didn't get and/or heed good feedback and here she is at the end of the cycle.

I guess if you are naive enough to be manipulated by the wall street journal, you are naive enough to think this kid is getting into Harvard.

precisely

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article states she was 23 in her class. Curious as to where the kids ranked higher than her are going. Also, that seems like some major grade inflation if two Bs bumps you down to 23rd. (And I am getting the sense a lot of big public schools are that way - very grade inflated).

Also wonder how rigorous her classes were.

She was 23rd in the class and half of the 600 are not even aiming to go to college. So I would look at that as 23rd out of the 300 trying for college. That is a great achievement but she was given poor advice if she she thought she would definitely be admitted to any of the colleges listed.

Colleges should really be more direct if that’s how they define class rank. A lot of kids hear “top x% of your class” and think that means they’re tippy top.

She knew what her class rank was. She received very poor guidance. It’s like she just said I’m going to apply to all the very best schools I’ve heard of and throw in Arizona State as a safety. That’s not a good strategy for anyone no matter how qualified you think you are.

And posters have criticized some of us here when we say a 4.2 and 1500 are a dime a dozen. It’s crazy, but yes, this is just the foundation of a strong application.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

True. Odd that the wall street journal is so unaware.

As PPs noted, the WSJ knew exactly what it was doing. People that understand current college admissions know this kid's story raised several red flags, but it plays right into the political and social narrative the WSJ is pushing.

Well they could have pushed it better if they had found a more compelling story.

The example taps into the ressentiment that exists in many white people, that they and/or their offspring are being eclipsed by folks who are not as qualified w/o any awareness of the
"defiiciencies" in their own qualifications. WSJ doesn't want more compelling; they want an example that stokes these feelings, even if they are largely not based in fact.

If that girl really had a modicum of reading comprehension, she would know from perusing College Confidential, CDS sets, etc that ANY of the top schools on her list were a reach and that a college list in the 2022 cycle needed to include more targets than reaches and more safeties than targets.

But she didn't get and/or heed good feedback and here she is at the end of the cycle.

I guess if you are naive enough to be manipulated by the wall street journal, you are naive enough to think this kid is getting into Harvard.