Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree. The way colleges conduct admissions adversely affects mental health and diminishes high school learning.

Their practices may or may not be legal. Their practices if revealed may hurt their brand. I don’t think these are good reasons to allow them to hide their practices from the public they serve.

Colleges are non profit not profit businesses. Colleges receive substantial state and or federal funding which comes from tax payers. They aren’t even self sustaining non profits. Colleges also market widely and collect sizable application fees.

You pick where you apply. You can opt out of all the Ivies, cut throat admissions and focus on schools which are good schools but easy to get in for your child. There are so many of them!

As someone who works in a high school, trust me, it’s not just the Ivies. It’s the state flagships. It’s the SLACs. It’s the T30s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What students (and parents) want to know - before they apply - is what factors are considered and how they are weighted. Nobody feels like they have a complete and accurate picture of this. The term "holistic" seems like a fudge factor that is used to conceal actual admissions priorities that (in many cases) the public would find objectionable. The public wants to know, and deserves to know, the full truth about how the sausage is made.

I will make it simple for you. When 56,000 people apply for 1600 spots you will never know, you cannot know. All you can know is that you are not likely to get in. If 600 spots are taken up by ALDC it doesn't matter; you still aren't getting in because the numbers are the driving factor. If they want 25% of the class to be FGLI and you are it doesn't matter. You still aren't getting in because of the numbers. There is nothing that they can tell you that offsets the sheer numbers.

You have no idea why AOs don't find your kid's application compelling, compared to thousands of others in affluent, high-achieving areas. You can always move to South Dakota, if you want your kid to have far better odds of admission to an elite school. And take into consideration the fact that colleges need diversity of academic interests. Many of those complaining are parents of kids applying to oversaturated majors like comp sci and engineering. Do you propose Harvard not serve any other majors?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What students (and parents) want to know - before they apply - is what factors are considered and how they are weighted. Nobody feels like they have a complete and accurate picture of this. The term "holistic" seems like a fudge factor that is used to conceal actual admissions priorities that (in many cases) the public would find objectionable. The public wants to know, and deserves to know, the full truth about how the sausage is made.

I will make it simple for you. When 56,000 people apply for 1600 spots you will never know, you cannot know. All you can know is that you are not likely to get in. If 600 spots are taken up by ALDC it doesn't matter; you still aren't getting in because the numbers are the driving factor. If they want 25% of the class to be FGLI and you are it doesn't matter. You still aren't getting in because of the numbers. There is nothing that they can tell you that offsets the sheer numbers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree. The way colleges conduct admissions adversely affects mental health and diminishes high school learning.

Their practices may or may not be legal. Their practices if revealed may hurt their brand. I don’t think these are good reasons to allow them to hide their practices from the public they serve.

Colleges are non profit not profit businesses. Colleges receive substantial state and or federal funding which comes from tax payers. They aren’t even self sustaining non profits. Colleges also market widely and collect sizable application fees.

You pick where you apply. You can opt out of all the Ivies, cut throat admissions and focus on schools which are good schools but easy to get in for your child. There are so many of them!

As someone who works in a high school, trust me, it’s not just the Ivies. It’s the state flagships. It’s the SLACs. It’s the T30s.

But that is fine. Rule all of the schools that you mentioned out; rule out the T100 and there are still hundreds of schools where your child can receive an excellent education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First of all this kids parents are loaded, and he had personal tutoring from a world renowned programmer. And no doubt many other tutors. He was given 2 million dollars to use AI to create his app and it had some initial success. And now he just suddenly wants to go to college. Why? Why the tutoring and all the effort keeping his grades up over the years if he had no intention of going to college? Statement AI generated also.

So the million dollars he made wasn’t on his own?! I mean talk about zero self-awareness and reflection.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree. The way colleges conduct admissions adversely affects mental health and diminishes high school learning.

Their practices may or may not be legal. Their practices if revealed may hurt their brand. I don’t think these are good reasons to allow them to hide their practices from the public they serve.

Colleges are non profit not profit businesses. Colleges receive substantial state and or federal funding which comes from tax payers. They aren’t even self sustaining non profits. Colleges also market widely and collect sizable application fees.

You pick where you apply. You can opt out of all the Ivies, cut throat admissions and focus on schools which are good schools but easy to get in for your child. There are so many of them!

As someone who works in a high school, trust me, it’s not just the Ivies. It’s the state flagships. It’s the SLACs. It’s the T30s.

Anonymous wrote:college admissions is SUBJECTIVE.

next.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree. The way colleges conduct admissions adversely affects mental health and diminishes high school learning.

Their practices may or may not be legal. Their practices if revealed may hurt their brand. I don’t think these are good reasons to allow them to hide their practices from the public they serve.

Colleges are non profit not profit businesses. Colleges receive substantial state and or federal funding which comes from tax payers. They aren’t even self sustaining non profits. Colleges also market widely and collect sizable application fees.

You pick where you apply. You can opt out of all the Ivies, cut throat admissions and focus on schools which are good schools but easy to get in for your child. There are so many of them!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree. The way colleges conduct admissions adversely affects mental health and diminishes high school learning.

Their practices may or may not be legal. Their practices if revealed may hurt their brand. I don’t think these are good reasons to allow them to hide their practices from the public they serve.

Colleges are non profit not profit businesses. Colleges receive substantial state and or federal funding which comes from tax payers. They aren’t even self sustaining non profits. Colleges also market widely and collect sizable application fees.

May I recommend moving to China? College admissions there are dependent on the Gaokao exam, which is an objective alternative to holistic admissions. But you'll have to deal the extreme stress of a single make-or-break examination and a pedagogy that focuses solely on test preparation.

There a hundreds of excellent universities and colleges in America accessible to all students. Nobody has any right to admission to the 50 or so most selective ones. I happen to work for public R-1 university that has straight-forward admissions--if you graduate with a certain GPA, you're in. We're ranked in the top 200 and provide a great education for a good value. There are several other universities just like us. But the issue isn't simply getting a good education, it's that people feel entitled to go to the most selective schools. The crux of the problem is that they complain about the the very selectivity that they simultaneously crave.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree. The way colleges conduct admissions adversely affects mental health and diminishes high school learning.

Their practices may or may not be legal. Their practices if revealed may hurt their brand. I don’t think these are good reasons to allow them to hide their practices from the public they serve.

Colleges are non profit not profit businesses. Colleges receive substantial state and or federal funding which comes from tax payers. They aren’t even self sustaining non profits. Colleges also market widely and collect sizable application fees.

May I recommend moving to China? College admissions there are dependent on the Gaokao exam, which is an objective alternative to holistic admissions. But you'll have to deal the extreme stress of a single make-or-break examination and a pedagogy that focuses solely on test preparation.

There a hundreds of excellent universities and colleges in America accessible to all students. Nobody has any right to admission to the 50 or so most selective ones. I happen to work for public R-1 university that has straight-forward admissions--if you graduate with a certain GPA, you're in. We're ranked in the top 200 and provide a great education for a good value. There are several other universities just like us. But the issue isn't simply getting a good education, it's that people feel entitled to go to the most selective schools. The crux of the problem is that they complain about the the very selectivity that they simultaneously crave.

You are on DCUM. Please, stop making sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a question for the OP. I can tell why this kid didn't get into the schools he/she wanted. Can you?

https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/comments/1jks4bh/the_college_admission_process_is_so_unfair/

How about this kid? This is the AI start up kid who was in the news for all his rejections. I too was surprised until I read his personal statement and then it totally made sense.

https://x.com/zach_yadegari/status/1906888487292559531?s=46&t=z1v7bHHAEs1ipTUHXBOyQA

Honest question what is wrong with his statement? He’s 17. He’s writing about why he changed his mind about wanting to go to college. He’s talking about self reflection, self learning and interacting with different types of people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a question for the OP. I can tell why this kid didn't get into the schools he/she wanted. Can you?

https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/comments/1jks4bh/the_college_admission_process_is_so_unfair/

How about this kid? This is the AI start up kid who was in the news for all his rejections. I too was surprised until I read his personal statement and then it totally made sense.

https://x.com/zach_yadegari/status/1906888487292559531?s=46&t=z1v7bHHAEs1ipTUHXBOyQA

Anonymous wrote:I disagree. The way colleges conduct admissions adversely affects mental health and diminishes high school learning.

Their practices may or may not be legal. Their practices if revealed may hurt their brand. I don’t think these are good reasons to allow them to hide their practices from the public they serve.

Colleges are non profit not profit businesses. Colleges receive substantial state and or federal funding which comes from tax payers. They aren’t even self sustaining non profits. Colleges also market widely and collect sizable application fees.

Anonymous wrote:First of all this kids parents are loaded, and he had personal tutoring from a world renowned programmer. And no doubt many other tutors. He was given 2 million dollars to use AI to create his app and it had some initial success. And now he just suddenly wants to go to college. Why? Why the tutoring and all the effort keeping his grades up over the years if he had no intention of going to college? Statement AI generated also.