Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Verify the race/ethnicity of the applicant. That should not be hard if the high school can provide that on the transcript. Would make it harder to lie

I bet parents will protest schools disclosing that info, especially those who fear they are already discriminated against in college admissions at some schools.

If they’re just verifying accuracy, they’re not disclosing any new information.

The schools have to define it in order to verify it. They are far too squeamish to actually define race

That’s just unfair then. Kids lie about race. I know kids who have lied about race. How is that okay? And how is it okay to keep using race to admit or deny someone?

Yep, submit that 23andme score along the SAT.
Who is to say,which one is more important to admissions?
Also, what happens if you test optional?
With one?
Or the other?
Or both???

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LoL
OP most state schools get over 30,000 apps per year for freshman if you think they are reading them all and essays I have a great bridge or crappy piece of land to sell you.

Even small Lacs do not read them all there is no way they can be that detailed

Signed admin

We can start a new thread on negligence if you’d like. “It’s too hard to do a good job” is a bad optic.

How much of an application fee would you be willing to pay to ensure that the school was adequately staffed to be able to carefully read, verify and deliberate every application?

Quite a bit more. If it also had the effect of discouraging applications, all the better. Have a waiver for truly low income kids and make the others all think hard about where they might really like to go. The schools won’t do that, of course, because they love their low admission rates. They’d rather encourage more apps and then whine about how they don’t have the resources to actually look at them.

+1

I’d pay $250 an application if it meant we didn’t have to submit 15 and cross our fingers. Probably end up costing me the same in the end but it could be a more thoughtful process for everyone.

Let me summarize - why isn’t your admissions criteria designed to value the exact things my kid has?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched a presentation from a tippy top exclusive school admission officer talking about how students' extracurriculars were judged.

She said in particular they valued leadership positions that were hardest to fake and really meant something, that were elected or appointed positions, especially if it came at the end of several years involvement. Varsity team captain, student body president, and Boy Scout Senior Patrol Leader of a large troop especially if they could write something meaningful about the experience.

As someone who has had to move a kid halfway through high school, this is a sore spot for me. And one I would add to this thread:

Moving in high school should be considered the disadvantage that it is. You don’t get leadership positions and awards when you’re the new kid. Not to mention the adjustment to a whole new environment and culture that might come with it. But it’s not one of the disadvantages that gets any compassion.

While I havent read this whole thread yet, I will say that I agree with this poster. Someone told me recently that college don't want to read "what I overcame" essays from white/middle class + kids. Yet some (many) of those kids HAVE overcome something (for example, a HUGE number of kids at my kids' school had significant, season ending, sports injuries this year, which really sucks, even if not forever). So does moving, having a crappy family life, all kinds of things. It seems to me like the "holistic" admissions process isn't looking to see the whole story for all applicants.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LoL
OP most state schools get over 30,000 apps per year for freshman if you think they are reading them all and essays I have a great bridge or crappy piece of land to sell you.

Even small Lacs do not read them all there is no way they can be that detailed

Signed admin

We can start a new thread on negligence if you’d like. “It’s too hard to do a good job” is a bad optic.

How much of an application fee would you be willing to pay to ensure that the school was adequately staffed to be able to carefully read, verify and deliberate every application?

Quite a bit more. If it also had the effect of discouraging applications, all the better. Have a waiver for truly low income kids and make the others all think hard about where they might really like to go. The schools won’t do that, of course, because they love their low admission rates. They’d rather encourage more apps and then whine about how they don’t have the resources to actually look at them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the long run, this post is barking up the wrong tree. You are correct that admissions is a mess - and where you will see this most clearly is when your kid goes to get a job. All of the big high-paying companies have realized that because of all of the padding, coaching, fake internships etc. employers no longer assume that graduates of top schools equate to top employees. Today's interview process at top firms is personality test and case study oriented and incredibly grueling. It doesn't seem to matter where you go to school nearly as much as what your grades and HR tests and personality scores are. It's eye opening.

So, about those personality tests. My son applied for an internship at a certain company twice - as a sophomore and as a junior, but did not get a call back after that test. He applied for a job with them when he was a senior, and when he took the test again, he gave them answers that he said were worthy of a sociopath. He got an interview and then a job offer. He did not take it, but the whole process was very amusing.

This makes me so sad for our country. Liars and cheaters rewarded with fancy degrees and firms hiring sociopaths. Glad your son had the decency to turn them down.

Anonymous wrote:In the long run, this post is barking up the wrong tree. You are correct that admissions is a mess - and where you will see this most clearly is when your kid goes to get a job. All of the big high-paying companies have realized that because of all of the padding, coaching, fake internships etc. employers no longer assume that graduates of top schools equate to top employees. Today's interview process at top firms is personality test and case study oriented and incredibly grueling. It doesn't seem to matter where you go to school nearly as much as what your grades and HR tests and personality scores are. It's eye opening.

So, about those personality tests. My son applied for an internship at a certain company twice - as a sophomore and as a junior, but did not get a call back after that test. He applied for a job with them when he was a senior, and when he took the test again, he gave them answers that he said were worthy of a sociopath. He got an interview and then a job offer. He did not take it, but the whole process was very amusing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stupid thread.. The whole process - essays, ECs, URM (or whaterver RRM), athletics-based admissions - is nonsense to determine eligibility for an academic pursuit. Who gives a f**k if DD did gymnastics for 15 years and was state champion? This is not an audition for a pole dancer.

Shut down this shit show or at least make them pay Federal taxes like all other hard working businesses do.

amen!

I hope you meant that ironically!

Anonymous wrote:Stupid thread.. The whole process - essays, ECs, URM (or whaterver RRM), athletics-based admissions - is nonsense to determine eligibility for an academic pursuit. Who gives a f**k if DD did gymnastics for 15 years and was state champion? This is not an audition for a pole dancer.

Shut down this shit show or at least make them pay Federal taxes like all other hard working businesses do.

amen!

Anonymous wrote:I’d just settle for randomly checking the truth of resumes like a random audit. There’s just too much incentive and reward for lying. Not the whole resume, not every applicant. Like a random drug test. Just enough to discourage the liars.

So funny that you think you know kids are “lying “ and adcoms do not. They do this for a living you know. What could they possibly lie about that would make a difference?

In the long run, this post is barking up the wrong tree. You are correct that admissions is a mess - and where you will see this most clearly is when your kid goes to get a job. All of the big high-paying companies have realized that because of all of the padding, coaching, fake internships etc. employers no longer assume that graduates of top schools equate to top employees. Today's interview process at top firms is personality test and case study oriented and incredibly grueling. It doesn't seem to matter where you go to school nearly as much as what your grades and HR tests and personality scores are. It's eye opening.

What do kids lie about on college applications? Is it common to lie on applications?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ask if a test prep class was taken. I’d really like that industry to be shut down

I don't have an opinion on the shut down, but yes, have a question where the student signs and attests to:

I used a paid test prep/essay prep/paid consultant and/or class during the last 24 months.
A simple Yes or No.

A misrepresentation could result in pulling offer of admissions.

Lots of kids use Khan Academy and get a quality prep experience for free.
Would prep classes and essay help be considered “paid” if they are offered for no extra charge to all students at a private school? How about those who attend on a scholarship?

The fact is test prep/essay prep/paid consultants are a part of the college process for many. Yes, it gives an unfair advantage to those who can't afford it (or live in a more rural area where this isn't readily available). However, as with life in general not everything is fair. It's not fair to some that we live in one of the best school districts in the state; right there my kid has a leg up compared to 90%+ of the kids applying to colleges and certainly over the kid who goes to one of the worst districts, where the kid worries about walking to school safely, where dinner will come from, or manages school work while having to watch siblings or work 20+ hours per week just to help with food and rent. Some people will always have an advantage. However, I'm not going to not have my kid do test prep or have an essay consultant/college counselor just because others can not afford it. What I will do is include in charities in my charitable donations that do help with reaching kids who aren't as lucky as mine---for example: we donate to a locale charity that helps provide after school structure to kids thru sports (mainly soccer) and along with that they get tutoring/STEM guidance/learn programming/etc. So a well rounded program that helps reach kids who might otherwise not have these advantages. The solution is not to take away from the "haves" just to even stuff out. It's better to help provide better resources for as many as possible.

I do wish colleges didn't put so much emphasis on the SAT/ACT. But even without those, most kids who have access to test prep/college counselors are also attending Better schools since ES. So they have access to 30+ AP tests (where some schools only have a few or none). And those kids are surrounded largely by kids who are driven and headed to a 2 year or 4 year college (my district is over 90%). Versus kids in a district where only 25-30% head to a college. So privileged kids are privileged on many levels. And we can't really focus on taking away all those privileges as a solution.

Anonymous wrote:I’d just settle for randomly checking the truth of resumes like a random audit. There’s just too much incentive and reward for lying. Not the whole resume, not every applicant. Like a random drug test. Just enough to discourage the liars.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Verify the race/ethnicity of the applicant. That should not be hard if the high school can provide that on the transcript. Would make it harder to lie

I bet parents will protest schools disclosing that info, especially those who fear they are already discriminated against in college admissions at some schools.

If they’re just verifying accuracy, they’re not disclosing any new information.

The schools have to define it in order to verify it. They are far too squeamish to actually define race

That’s just unfair then. Kids lie about race. I know kids who have lied about race. How is that okay? And how is it okay to keep using race to admit or deny someone?