Anonymous wrote:I'd like to see a grass root movement of applicants using the additional information section to note that they didn't use a private counselor

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AOs are not “falling for it.” They helped create it and they know what is going on. It’s so much BS. They say they want to hear the student’s authentic voice but they don’t. They admit these heavily “curated” students. They reward and encourage this behavior.

The problem is this strongly favors rich kids. So the AOs are full of it wrt actual diversity on campus.

Exactly. AOs are a crucial part of this, not innocent bystanders. If you look at Crimson website you see that many of their counselors are former AOs.

The best job for an AO after their 5 years in admissions is at a private company like this. The pipeline.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AOs are not “falling for it.” They helped create it and they know what is going on. It’s so much BS. They say they want to hear the student’s authentic voice but they don’t. They admit these heavily “curated” students. They reward and encourage this behavior.

The problem is this strongly favors rich kids. So the AOs are full of it wrt actual diversity on campus.

Exactly. AOs are a crucial part of this, not innocent bystanders. If you look at Crimson website you see that many of their counselors are former AOs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Where do you see comments? I don’t see any..

You need to be a subscriber to see them

Anonymous wrote:

Where do you see comments? I don’t see any..

Anonymous wrote:Well, we didn't spend a dime and kid got in unhooked to an Ivy. What a racket.

Anonymous wrote:Well, we didn't spend a dime and kid got in unhooked to an Ivy. What a racket.

Anonymous wrote:I have a very smart and accomplished kid and all these articles do is prejudice me and my kid against these supposedly "elite" schools. We can afford tuition at top private colleges and could afford to hire consultants like this. We genuinely do not want to. Our DC has always been self-driven, hardworking, and intellectually curious without pushing. Our goal has always been to support and ensure opportunities were there, but not to force anything. We have no appetite for playing this game.

If my kid was dead set in a T10 I'd probably do it just because I know she'd make the most of that education and I wouldn't want to be the thing that stood in her way. But her response to stuff like this is to focus more on state flagships and to focus on lower ranked schools that are especially well respected or have very well respected faculty or research opportunities in her likely major. She doesn't want to have to put in a show to get into college. And her grades and test scores are high enough that she really shouldn't have to -- she's already done the work. She's not going to found a fake non-profit or waste time she could spend on something that really matters to her but won't look good on a college app (like go camping with her friends for the first time alone) to write a mediocre fiction novel just to impress and admissions officer.

I think other kids like this will also start opting out of this rat race for their own mental well being.

Anonymous wrote:Well, we didn't spend a dime and kid got in unhooked to an Ivy. What a racket.

Anonymous wrote:Clearly we need a new checkbox on the Common App: Did you work with a college counselor other than the one at your school on this application?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just posted a few minutes ago in the comments of the article. Probably not legit, but who knows. This article is getting some traction in WSJ comments!

Stephen M
21 minutes ago

Application Mentor here at Crimson. I assure you to the depths of my soul that Crimson is engaged in outright, wholesale application fraud. There are no official editorial guidelines whatsoever, so tutors end up writing parts or most of student essays on their behalf. It is the opposite of pedagogically informed feedback a professional English teacher would provide.

Many Crimson students are absolutely abysmal writers. There is literally no way to get them to construct even halfway decent responses than by providing the language ourselves. Crimson administration turns are completely blind eye to this practice and even tacitly encourages it.

This is a criminal-level consultancy every admissions officer in the US should be aware of.

No way of knowing if this is true, but there is the potential for a perverse incentive structure. That and the cynicism of the owner suggests this is very likely. The consultancy’s (and presumably a consultant’s) success is based on student placement into selective schools. One part of the equation is to screen for students already primed for a measure of success. The other is to put thumbs on the scale where a student may not be strong. If a consultant has a student with a poor essay, they can try to coach them up to produce a better output which may be time consuming and imperfect or write it for them (more or less).

The goal is admission to an ivy, not the best fit/school for the student with authentic representation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting to me how openly cynical the founder of Crimson is. I suppose it’s capitalism at work, but turning a kid into a luxury good to be purchased does feel icky to me, personally. And a bit sad.

This was my takeaway, too. Seven graduate degrees, basically for marketing purposes if we're honest? And look, we even found some Maori applicants, so we can look wordly and altruistic!

So gross. Yet unsurprisingly, the finance bros are eating it up.