Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's nothing special about getting into a service academy. The kids who are interested are generally able to go unless they have health problems.

Less than 25 percent of American 18 year olds are fit enough to join the military or apply to an academy. So it's starting with a small pool of potential applicants to begin with. And of course the academies value diversity. They want officers that represent America. And you need a Congressional Nomination. That's easier to do when you live in Wyoming, but more challenging when you live in California. There's a lot that goes into a West Point, Annapolis, or Air Force application. It's not like applying to Northeastern and hitting send. It takes about a year to jump through all the hoops.

Anonymous wrote:The kids I know who are at service academies ARE impressive kids who have a very good balance of strong academics/physical fitness/good sense of self and community. It's a little sad seeing people crap on them because it's fashionable to be anti-army.

Anonymous wrote:There's nothing special about getting into a service academy. The kids who are interested are generally able to go unless they have health problems.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The military doesn't want the absolute smartest people. They want people good at following orders, not people who are Big Thinkers.

Yeah, I don't think you see too many Big Thinkers at any universities these days, or outside of them. And you need to separate what academies seek from what enlisted recruiters think. Can you handle that, Big Thinker?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are not top students. Average SAT is relatively low.
Also the physical test is not that hard that most of the average athlete should be able to pass.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The physical tests (plural!) are very challenging. For the Naval Academy last year, even recruits scoring in the top group of the physical tests weren't guaranteed admission.

I know one female who scored in the top 5% overall who was waitlisted and got in over the Summer. She was an excellent student and serious athlete who was in the top group for all the physical tests. The academies are elite.

They are not top students. Average SAT is relatively low.
Also the physical test is not that hard that most of the average athlete should be able to pass.

"Low" relative to what, Ivies?

As someone else said, have to be healthy, and not just currently healthy, as they also look at medical history. Several conditions may take the applicant out of the running if they can't secure a waiver. Also, I don't think you can be taking any prescription meds, either, including for ADHD, psych meds, etc. Standardized tests mandatory and without the accommodation of extra time, if I'm not mistaken.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a small subset of people who are very good athletes, have good grades and want to be in the military.

This. And the ability to get a congressional nomination.

It's just another layer in the process. It's not like the students personally know the congressman.

Anonymous wrote:The military doesn't want the absolute smartest people. They want people good at following orders, not people who are Big Thinkers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am 24 now, so I am too old. But I wish I knew about the service academies when I was young. It blows my mind so many people in them were top students and top athletes in school. Many people can’t even pass tryouts for JV sports teams here let alone be a varsity captain, and many top athletes aren’t great academically. I personally find it more impressive if someone goes to a service academy versus an Ivy League. How do people get into them? Are they just built differently?

Connections. All the kids I know (kids now or kids when I was coming up) had relatives in high military or political places. Every single one. Especially for Naval Academy.

Anonymous wrote:I am 24 now, so I am too old. But I wish I knew about the service academies when I was young. It blows my mind so many people in them were top students and top athletes in school. Many people can’t even pass tryouts for JV sports teams here let alone be a varsity captain, and many top athletes aren’t great academically. I personally find it more impressive if someone goes to a service academy versus an Ivy League. How do people get into them? Are they just built differently?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are not top students. Average SAT is relatively low.
Also the physical test is not that hard that most of the average athlete should be able to pass.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The physical tests (plural!) are very challenging. For the Naval Academy last year, even recruits scoring in the top group of the physical tests weren't guaranteed admission.

I know one female who scored in the top 5% overall who was waitlisted and got in over the Summer. She was an excellent student and serious athlete who was in the top group for all the physical tests. The academies are elite.

They are not top students. Average SAT is relatively low.
Also the physical test is not that hard that most of the average athlete should be able to pass.

"Low" relative to what, Ivies?

As someone else said, have to be healthy, and not just currently healthy, as they also look at medical history. Several conditions may take the applicant out of the running if they can't secure a waiver. Also, I don't think you can be taking any prescription meds, either, including for ADHD, psych meds, etc. Standardized tests mandatory and without the accommodation of extra time, if I'm not mistaken.

OP and others compared to Ivies, but low relative to competitive T50 T60 private colleges.

They are well rounded kids with character, but you can found plenty of them in other colleges as well as the selection criteria is nothing much different.

They're not test optional, and they don't allow extra time on tests, so not really an apples-to-apples comparison.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are not top students. Average SAT is relatively low.
Also the physical test is not that hard that most of the average athlete should be able to pass.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The physical tests (plural!) are very challenging. For the Naval Academy last year, even recruits scoring in the top group of the physical tests weren't guaranteed admission.

I know one female who scored in the top 5% overall who was waitlisted and got in over the Summer. She was an excellent student and serious athlete who was in the top group for all the physical tests. The academies are elite.

They are not top students. Average SAT is relatively low.
Also the physical test is not that hard that most of the average athlete should be able to pass.

"Low" relative to what, Ivies?

As someone else said, have to be healthy, and not just currently healthy, as they also look at medical history. Several conditions may take the applicant out of the running if they can't secure a waiver. Also, I don't think you can be taking any prescription meds, either, including for ADHD, psych meds, etc. Standardized tests mandatory and without the accommodation of extra time, if I'm not mistaken.

OP and others compared to Ivies, but low relative to competitive T50 T60 private colleges.

They are well rounded kids with character, but you can found plenty of them in other colleges as well as the selection criteria is nothing much different.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are not top students. Average SAT is relatively low.
Also the physical test is not that hard that most of the average athlete should be able to pass.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The physical tests (plural!) are very challenging. For the Naval Academy last year, even recruits scoring in the top group of the physical tests weren't guaranteed admission.

I know one female who scored in the top 5% overall who was waitlisted and got in over the Summer. She was an excellent student and serious athlete who was in the top group for all the physical tests. The academies are elite.

They are not top students. Average SAT is relatively low.
Also the physical test is not that hard that most of the average athlete should be able to pass.

It's not a simple pass/fail. Where you rank in the physical tests matters. This isn't like going down to your local enlistment office and just meeting minimum requirements.

But just keep making up stuff to denigrate the academies, loser.

West Point uses a formula to rank candidates. Generally, the breakdown is roughly:

60% Academic: GPA, Class Rank, and SAT/ACT scores.
30% Leadership: Extracurriculars, teacher evaluations, and the Congressional Nomination.
10% Physical: The CFA score.

Nothing really much different from regular colleges.
Their test scores are relatively lower than competitive colleges.

Stop fabricating.

I think the trick is that the test scores are relatively lower than competitive colleges in conjunction with other requirements:

Tests are mandatory, so the bottom of the distribution shows up in the report. E.g. UVA's 25th percentile SAT is ~1410. But almost half of incoming UVA students are test optional! Not implausible that the true "25th percentile" number at UVA is much lower than the Naval Academy's 1200.

No extra time on tests. This knocks the "competitive college" submitted test averages down by 50 points or more.

Prep time for tests & etc. is limited because you need to be on the practice field with your sports team.

Has to be in good health.

Has to be in shape.

Has to be disciplined enough to not have been in too much trouble, while at the same time having enough testosterone to meet the physical requirements.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a small subset of people who are very good athletes, have good grades and want to be in the military.

This. And the ability to get a congressional nomination.