Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Similar problem here. My introverted son is academically-minded but suffers from inattentive ADHD and very low processing speed (he has an IEP at school), so he spends all his time getting good grades in AP classes, and doesn't want to do anything outside of school.

We are foreigners and anywhere else in the world, colleges would only look at academics. But here, it works against him. I've never understood why US colleges have such murky and patently subjective ways to cherry-pick students, when all other universities want academically-strong students and understand that other activities are much harder to rank.

Because university is more than just classes and grades. They have programs in the arts, music, sciences, school clubs, theater programs etc. and they want applicants who are passionate about those areas IN ADDITION to being outstanding students. If all of the students are just study grinds with nothing else in their lives, they aren't leading a fulfilling path.

PP you responded to. I dispute the importance of those things as hobbies. I know colleges increase tuition by offering state of the art athletic and artistic facilities, but in the end, those are not the most important things students learn at uni. I think there's a fundamental difference of opinion between what Americans view as the goal of a university education, and what the rest of the world thinks. For most people on this earth, university is exclusively an academic institution - music, theater, and other arts are included in those, of course, but as professional degrees, not hobbies.

A compelling reason not to factor in extra-curricular activities in admission is a question of equity. Only middle class families can afford to shuttle their kids to interesting after-school hobbies. Working-class families do not have the same opportunities. Therefore it's not fair for admissions officers to add weight to unusual, impressive activities outside of school.

All in all, I am not in favor of the lack of transparency of US university admissions. Everything is constructed to work in favor of the universities, not the students, whereas around the world, the goal is to educate students who are academically qualified to walk in the door, whoever they are. Here in the US, because of the subjective nature of admissions, there is a significant potential for racial and other types of discrimination. My kids are looking at Canadian and British unis in addition to US ones, and we'll see where they end up.

This! It is not like they do not have clubs and some majors do interviews of applicants, but in general they do not care about your EC or nowhere near the level they do in the US.

And that type of system has deep flaws. It clearly disadvantages those lower on the socioeconomic ladder, many of whom must work to help their family get by. There are many, many extremely capable students who are overlooked because they don't have as much time as others to get the perfect grades or study for exams 6 hours a day. Because it disadvantages the poor, those who are lucky enough to be admitted are assured of a less diverse experience in the classroom and will thus have a narrower understanding of how the world works than they would in a system that took other factors into consideration.

The US system seems to do very well at graduating critical, creative thinkers. People just don't realize that the ability to provide an excellent education goes much deeper than the 20-30 universities that everyone thinks they need to go to in order to succeed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My junior DS in magnet/IB has been super involved in EC's in school. He is a math/ CS kid, participating in math competitions such as HMMT, PUMAC, etc as well as USAMO and similarly in CS and cyber security competitions. He does not have much in terms of sport or music. His service activities are in math related field. He has won national/ international awards in math and CS. He is also involved in some science competitions. He also has leadership positions in clubs.
GPA is high, SAT perfect, taken 5 AP's with 4 and 5, will be taking a few more this year. His dream school is MIT, anything he can do enhance his profile for MIT admission?

Start a new thread.

Are there other kids applying to MIT from his high school? Are they stronger applicants? Keep UW GPA as high as possible, he will be competing with a lot of 4.0 kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Similar problem here. My introverted son is academically-minded but suffers from inattentive ADHD and very low processing speed (he has an IEP at school), so he spends all his time getting good grades in AP classes, and doesn't want to do anything outside of school.

We are foreigners and anywhere else in the world, colleges would only look at academics. But here, it works against him. I've never understood why US colleges have such murky and patently subjective ways to cherry-pick students, when all other universities want academically-strong students and understand that other activities are much harder to rank.

Because university is more than just classes and grades. They have programs in the arts, music, sciences, school clubs, theater programs etc. and they want applicants who are passionate about those areas IN ADDITION to being outstanding students. If all of the students are just study grinds with nothing else in their lives, they aren't leading a fulfilling path.

PP you responded to. I dispute the importance of those things as hobbies. I know colleges increase tuition by offering state of the art athletic and artistic facilities, but in the end, those are not the most important things students learn at uni. I think there's a fundamental difference of opinion between what Americans view as the goal of a university education, and what the rest of the world thinks. For most people on this earth, university is exclusively an academic institution - music, theater, and other arts are included in those, of course, but as professional degrees, not hobbies.

A compelling reason not to factor in extra-curricular activities in admission is a question of equity. Only middle class families can afford to shuttle their kids to interesting after-school hobbies. Working-class families do not have the same opportunities. Therefore it's not fair for admissions officers to add weight to unusual, impressive activities outside of school.

All in all, I am not in favor of the lack of transparency of US university admissions. Everything is constructed to work in favor of the universities, not the students, whereas around the world, the goal is to educate students who are academically qualified to walk in the door, whoever they are. Here in the US, because of the subjective nature of admissions, there is a significant potential for racial and other types of discrimination. My kids are looking at Canadian and British unis in addition to US ones, and we'll see where they end up.

This! It is not like they do not have clubs and some majors do interviews of applicants, but in general they do not care about your EC or nowhere near the level they do in the US.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Similar problem here. My introverted son is academically-minded but suffers from inattentive ADHD and very low processing speed (he has an IEP at school), so he spends all his time getting good grades in AP classes, and doesn't want to do anything outside of school.

We are foreigners and anywhere else in the world, colleges would only look at academics. But here, it works against him. I've never understood why US colleges have such murky and patently subjective ways to cherry-pick students, when all other universities want academically-strong students and understand that other activities are much harder to rank.

Because university is more than just classes and grades. They have programs in the arts, music, sciences, school clubs, theater programs etc. and they want applicants who are passionate about those areas IN ADDITION to being outstanding students. If all of the students are just study grinds with nothing else in their lives, they aren't leading a fulfilling path.

PP you responded to. I dispute the importance of those things as hobbies. I know colleges increase tuition by offering state of the art athletic and artistic facilities, but in the end, those are not the most important things students learn at uni. I think there's a fundamental difference of opinion between what Americans view as the goal of a university education, and what the rest of the world thinks. For most people on this earth, university is exclusively an academic institution - music, theater, and other arts are included in those, of course, but as professional degrees, not hobbies.

A compelling reason not to factor in extra-curricular activities in admission is a question of equity. Only middle class families can afford to shuttle their kids to interesting after-school hobbies. Working-class families do not have the same opportunities. Therefore it's not fair for admissions officers to add weight to unusual, impressive activities outside of school.

All in all, I am not in favor of the lack of transparency of US university admissions. Everything is constructed to work in favor of the universities, not the students, whereas around the world, the goal is to educate students who are academically qualified to walk in the door, whoever they are. Here in the US, because of the subjective nature of admissions, there is a significant potential for racial and other types of discrimination. My kids are looking at Canadian and British unis in addition to US ones, and we'll see where they end up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My junior DS in magnet/IB has been super involved in EC's in school. He is a math/ CS kid, participating in math competitions such as HMMT, PUMAC, etc as well as USAMO and similarly in CS and cyber security competitions. He does not have much in terms of sport or music. His service activities are in math related field. He has won national/ international awards in math and CS. He is also involved in some science competitions. He also has leadership positions in clubs.
GPA is high, SAT perfect, taken 5 AP's with 4 and 5, will be taking a few more this year. His dream school is MIT, anything he can do enhance his profile for MIT admission?

Start a new thread.

Anonymous wrote:My junior DS in magnet/IB has been super involved in EC's in school. He is a math/ CS kid, participating in math competitions such as HMMT, PUMAC, etc as well as USAMO and similarly in CS and cyber security competitions. He does not have much in terms of sport or music. His service activities are in math related field. He has won national/ international awards in math and CS. He is also involved in some science competitions. He also has leadership positions in clubs.
GPA is high, SAT perfect, taken 5 AP's with 4 and 5, will be taking a few more this year. His dream school is MIT, anything he can do enhance his profile for MIT admission?

Anonymous wrote:My junior DS in magnet/IB has been super involved in EC's in school. He is a math/ CS kid, participating in math competitions such as HMMT, PUMAC, etc as well as USAMO and similarly in CS and cyber security competitions. He does not have much in terms of sport or music. His service activities are in math related field. He has won national/ international awards in math and CS. He is also involved in some science competitions. He also has leadership positions in clubs.
GPA is high, SAT perfect, taken 5 AP's with 4 and 5, will be taking a few more this year. His dream school is MIT, anything he can do enhance his profile for MIT admission?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid had very very few activities (and I mean that genuinely). He got into to a top SLAC ED this year.

Can you expound on that a little more? Which SLAC? What were his scores? What do you think made him stand out against all the other top students who applied with top scores and had ECs? What do you mean by very few ECs?

Anonymous wrote:Is getting Eagle Scout a decent EC? It’s done over many years w leadership positions etc. DC is doing this and wants to drop out but he is so close and we think it would be a better EC than most. It s a big time commitment over several years.

Anonymous wrote:Is getting Eagle Scout a decent EC? It’s done over many years w leadership positions etc. DC is doing this and wants to drop out but he is so close and we think it would be a better EC than most. It s a big time commitment over several years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Similar problem here. My introverted son is academically-minded but suffers from inattentive ADHD and very low processing speed (he has an IEP at school), so he spends all his time getting good grades in AP classes, and doesn't want to do anything outside of school.

We are foreigners and anywhere else in the world, colleges would only look at academics. But here, it works against him. I've never understood why US colleges have such murky and patently subjective ways to cherry-pick students, when all other universities want academically-strong students and understand that other activities are much harder to rank.

Because university is more than just classes and grades. They have programs in the arts, music, sciences, school clubs, theater programs etc. and they want applicants who are passionate about those areas IN ADDITION to being outstanding students. If all of the students are just study grinds with nothing else in their lives, they aren't leading a fulfilling path.

PP you responded to. I dispute the importance of those things as hobbies. I know colleges increase tuition by offering state of the art athletic and artistic facilities, but in the end, those are not the most important things students learn at uni. I think there's a fundamental difference of opinion between what Americans view as the goal of a university education, and what the rest of the world thinks. For most people on this earth, university is exclusively an academic institution - music, theater, and other arts are included in those, of course, but as professional degrees, not hobbies.

A compelling reason not to factor in extra-curricular activities in admission is a question of equity. Only middle class families can afford to shuttle their kids to interesting after-school hobbies. Working-class families do not have the same opportunities. Therefore it's not fair for admissions officers to add weight to unusual, impressive activities outside of school.

All in all, I am not in favor of the lack of transparency of US university admissions. Everything is constructed to work in favor of the universities, not the students, whereas around the world, the goal is to educate students who are academically qualified to walk in the door, whoever they are. Here in the US, because of the subjective nature of admissions, there is a significant potential for racial and other types of discrimination. My kids are looking at Canadian and British unis in addition to US ones, and we'll see where they end up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Similar problem here. My introverted son is academically-minded but suffers from inattentive ADHD and very low processing speed (he has an IEP at school), so he spends all his time getting good grades in AP classes, and doesn't want to do anything outside of school.

We are foreigners and anywhere else in the world, colleges would only look at academics. But here, it works against him. I've never understood why US colleges have such murky and patently subjective ways to cherry-pick students, when all other universities want academically-strong students and understand that other activities are much harder to rank.

Because university is more than just classes and grades. They have programs in the arts, music, sciences, school clubs, theater programs etc. and they want applicants who are passionate about those areas IN ADDITION to being outstanding students. If all of the students are just study grinds with nothing else in their lives, they aren't leading a fulfilling path.

PP you responded to. I dispute the importance of those things as hobbies. I know colleges increase tuition by offering state of the art athletic and artistic facilities, but in the end, those are not the most important things students learn at uni. I think there's a fundamental difference of opinion between what Americans view as the goal of a university education, and what the rest of the world thinks. For most people on this earth, university is exclusively an academic institution - music, theater, and other arts are included in those, of course, but as professional degrees, not hobbies.

A compelling reason not to factor in extra-curricular activities in admission is a question of equity. Only middle class families can afford to shuttle their kids to interesting after-school hobbies. Working-class families do not have the same opportunities. Therefore it's not fair for admissions officers to add weight to unusual, impressive activities outside of school.

All in all, I am not in favor of the lack of transparency of US university admissions. Everything is constructed to work in favor of the universities, not the students, whereas around the world, the goal is to educate students who are academically qualified to walk in the door, whoever they are. Here in the US, because of the subjective nature of admissions, there is a significant potential for racial and other types of discrimination. My kids are looking at Canadian and British unis in addition to US ones, and we'll see where they end up.

What makes your concern about the US system moot is that we have enough slots for all American applicants AND international applicants to get an excellent education. So if your kid doesn't get into some school you think should have taken them, they'll be admitted somewhere else that's just as capable of providing them an education that will lead them to a successful career. No harm will be done, and they'll get to enjoy watching strong sports teams, listening to wonderful orchestras, etc.

No, we don't. Not by my standards. We are not interested in a consolation price.