Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have four kids who attend or did: Duke, Cornell, and UChicago (our alma mater). We didn't do anything particularly special. Just said we expected them to do well in school with their grades and always had them in a variety of activities.

^ I should have mentioned we pay full freight. Very little merit and no financial aid. That's an important part of it, I'm sure.

I think up until 2 years ago, your outcome was not unexpected for those schools. Cornell's size and various colleges, I think is still doable. UChicago as a smart legacy with a great essays sure but I hear otherwise it's been really tough unless they went early round last few years. Not sure about Duke. Kids with these stats got deferred into regular round last few years. Everyone is so busy packaging the kids, the minimums are raising. These poor kids.

That sums it up for me.

We have one in public high school who will have taken 8 APs by the end of junior year, has straight As, and has standardized test scores in the top 90s (percentile). She likes to study, is very organized, and is a quick and efficient worker who never hesitates to take the hardest classes available. But her extracurriculars are light. Her interests are varied and include such things as hanging out with her friends, spending too much time on her phone, and walking the dog. In other words, she does what many DCUM readers do with their spare time. But because she is 16 instead of 50, she is instead supposed to be spending all of her free time at international golf or chess tournaments and/or starting 3 useless nonprofits. She's very smart but hasn't found her niche. She lacks a specific passion to which she has devoted herself (which in many cases really means a passion to which we parents have devoted ourselves) since age 4.

In the UK and Canada, she'd get into a top school. In the U.S., I think her chances aren't great.

And this matters because ... why?

She sounds bright, accomplished, motivated, engaged. What exactly is the problem here?

See the response from the person just above you. This student hasn't been packaged properly. She has jumped through some hoops, but enough hoops, and not enough of the right KINDS of hoops. The best she can hope for is a state school, alas.

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not, but this mentality is both pathetic and harmful.

Anonymous wrote:To be perfectly honest, if my kid went to Wharton, I'd feel like I had failed in their upbringing. There is more to life than making money and it was my job to teach them that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have four kids who attend or did: Duke, Cornell, and UChicago (our alma mater). We didn't do anything particularly special. Just said we expected them to do well in school with their grades and always had them in a variety of activities.

^ I should have mentioned we pay full freight. Very little merit and no financial aid. That's an important part of it, I'm sure.

I think up until 2 years ago, your outcome was not unexpected for those schools. Cornell's size and various colleges, I think is still doable. UChicago as a smart legacy with a great essays sure but I hear otherwise it's been really tough unless they went early round last few years. Not sure about Duke. Kids with these stats got deferred into regular round last few years. Everyone is so busy packaging the kids, the minimums are raising. These poor kids.

That sums it up for me.

We have one in public high school who will have taken 8 APs by the end of junior year, has straight As, and has standardized test scores in the top 90s (percentile). She likes to study, is very organized, and is a quick and efficient worker who never hesitates to take the hardest classes available. But her extracurriculars are light. Her interests are varied and include such things as hanging out with her friends, spending too much time on her phone, and walking the dog. In other words, she does what many DCUM readers do with their spare time. But because she is 16 instead of 50, she is instead supposed to be spending all of her free time at international golf or chess tournaments and/or starting 3 useless nonprofits. She's very smart but hasn't found her niche. She lacks a specific passion to which she has devoted herself (which in many cases really means a passion to which we parents have devoted ourselves) since age 4.

In the UK and Canada, she'd get into a top school. In the U.S., I think her chances aren't great.

And this matters because ... why?

She sounds bright, accomplished, motivated, engaged. What exactly is the problem here?

See the response from the person just above you. This student hasn't been packaged properly. She has jumped through some hoops, but enough hoops, and not enough of the right KINDS of hoops. The best she can hope for is a state school, alas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have four kids who attend or did: Duke, Cornell, and UChicago (our alma mater). We didn't do anything particularly special. Just said we expected them to do well in school with their grades and always had them in a variety of activities.

^ I should have mentioned we pay full freight. Very little merit and no financial aid. That's an important part of it, I'm sure.

I think up until 2 years ago, your outcome was not unexpected for those schools. Cornell's size and various colleges, I think is still doable. UChicago as a smart legacy with a great essays sure but I hear otherwise it's been really tough unless they went early round last few years. Not sure about Duke. Kids with these stats got deferred into regular round last few years. Everyone is so busy packaging the kids, the minimums are raising. These poor kids.

That sums it up for me.

We have one in public high school who will have taken 8 APs by the end of junior year, has straight As, and has standardized test scores in the top 90s (percentile). She likes to study, is very organized, and is a quick and efficient worker who never hesitates to take the hardest classes available. But her extracurriculars are light. Her interests are varied and include such things as hanging out with her friends, spending too much time on her phone, and walking the dog. In other words, she does what many DCUM readers do with their spare time. But because she is 16 instead of 50, she is instead supposed to be spending all of her free time at international golf or chess tournaments and/or starting 3 useless nonprofits. She's very smart but hasn't found her niche. She lacks a specific passion to which she has devoted herself (which in many cases really means a passion to which we parents have devoted ourselves) since age 4.

In the UK and Canada, she'd get into a top school. In the U.S., I think her chances aren't great.

And this matters because ... why?

She sounds bright, accomplished, motivated, engaged. What exactly is the problem here?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have four kids who attend or did: Duke, Cornell, and UChicago (our alma mater). We didn't do anything particularly special. Just said we expected them to do well in school with their grades and always had them in a variety of activities.

^ I should have mentioned we pay full freight. Very little merit and no financial aid. That's an important part of it, I'm sure.

I think up until 2 years ago, your outcome was not unexpected for those schools. Cornell's size and various colleges, I think is still doable. UChicago as a smart legacy with a great essays sure but I hear otherwise it's been really tough unless they went early round last few years. Not sure about Duke. Kids with these stats got deferred into regular round last few years. Everyone is so busy packaging the kids, the minimums are raising. These poor kids.

That sums it up for me.

We have one in public high school who will have taken 8 APs by the end of junior year, has straight As, and has standardized test scores in the top 90s (percentile). She likes to study, is very organized, and is a quick and efficient worker who never hesitates to take the hardest classes available. But her extracurriculars are light. Her interests are varied and include such things as hanging out with her friends, spending too much time on her phone, and walking the dog. In other words, she does what many DCUM readers do with their spare time. But because she is 16 instead of 50, she is instead supposed to be spending all of her free time at international golf or chess tournaments and/or starting 3 useless nonprofits. She's very smart but hasn't found her niche. She lacks a specific passion to which she has devoted herself (which in many cases really means a passion to which we parents have devoted ourselves) since age 4.

In the UK and Canada, she'd get into a top school. In the U.S., I think her chances aren't great.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have four kids who attend or did: Duke, Cornell, and UChicago (our alma mater). We didn't do anything particularly special. Just said we expected them to do well in school with their grades and always had them in a variety of activities.

^ I should have mentioned we pay full freight. Very little merit and no financial aid. That's an important part of it, I'm sure.

I think up until 2 years ago, your outcome was not unexpected for those schools. Cornell's size and various colleges, I think is still doable. UChicago as a smart legacy with a great essays sure but I hear otherwise it's been really tough unless they went early round last few years. Not sure about Duke. Kids with these stats got deferred into regular round last few years. Everyone is so busy packaging the kids, the minimums are raising. These poor kids.

That sums it up for me.

We have one in public high school who will have taken 8 APs by the end of junior year, has straight As, and has standardized test scores in the top 90s (percentile). She likes to study, is very organized, and is a quick and efficient worker who never hesitates to take the hardest classes available. But her extracurriculars are light. Her interests are varied and include such things as hanging out with her friends, spending too much time on her phone, and walking the dog. In other words, she does what many DCUM readers do with their spare time. But because she is 16 instead of 50, she is instead supposed to be spending all of her free time at international golf or chess tournaments and/or starting 3 useless nonprofits. She's very smart but hasn't found her niche. She lacks a specific passion to which she has devoted herself (which in many cases really means a passion to which we parents have devoted ourselves) since age 4.

In the UK and Canada, she'd get into a top school. In the U.S., I think her chances aren't great.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have four kids who attend or did: Duke, Cornell, and UChicago (our alma mater). We didn't do anything particularly special. Just said we expected them to do well in school with their grades and always had them in a variety of activities.

^ I should have mentioned we pay full freight. Very little merit and no financial aid. That's an important part of it, I'm sure.

I think up until 2 years ago, your outcome was not unexpected for those schools. Cornell's size and various colleges, I think is still doable. UChicago as a smart legacy with a great essays sure but I hear otherwise it's been really tough unless they went early round last few years. Not sure about Duke. Kids with these stats got deferred into regular round last few years. Everyone is so busy packaging the kids, the minimums are raising. These poor kids.

That sums it up for me.

We have one in public high school who will have taken 8 APs by the end of junior year, has straight As, and has standardized test scores in the top 90s (percentile). She likes to study, is very organized, and is a quick and efficient worker who never hesitates to take the hardest classes available. But her extracurriculars are light. Her interests are varied and include such things as hanging out with her friends, spending too much time on her phone, and walking the dog. In other words, she does what many DCUM readers do with their spare time. But because she is 16 instead of 50, she is instead supposed to be spending all of her free time at international golf or chess tournaments and/or starting 3 useless nonprofits. She's very smart but hasn't found her niche. She lacks a specific passion to which she has devoted herself (which in many cases really means a passion to which we parents have devoted ourselves) since age 4.

In the UK and Canada, she'd get into a top school. In the U.S., I think her chances aren't great.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have four kids who attend or did: Duke, Cornell, and UChicago (our alma mater). We didn't do anything particularly special. Just said we expected them to do well in school with their grades and always had them in a variety of activities.

^ I should have mentioned we pay full freight. Very little merit and no financial aid. That's an important part of it, I'm sure.

I think up until 2 years ago, your outcome was not unexpected for those schools. Cornell's size and various colleges, I think is still doable. UChicago as a smart legacy with a great essays sure but I hear otherwise it's been really tough unless they went early round last few years. Not sure about Duke. Kids with these stats got deferred into regular round last few years. Everyone is so busy packaging the kids, the minimums are raising. These poor kids.

That sums it up for me.

We have one in public high school who will have taken 8 APs by the end of junior year, has straight As, and has standardized test scores in the top 90s (percentile). She likes to study, is very organized, and is a quick and efficient worker who never hesitates to take the hardest classes available. But her extracurriculars are light. Her interests are varied and include such things as hanging out with her friends, spending too much time on her phone, and walking the dog. In other words, she does what many DCUM readers do with their spare time. But because she is 16 instead of 50, she is instead supposed to be spending all of her free time at international golf or chess tournaments and/or starting 3 useless nonprofits. She's very smart but hasn't found her niche. She lacks a specific passion to which she has devoted herself (which in many cases really means a passion to which we parents have devoted ourselves) since age 4.

In the UK and Canada, she'd get into a top school. In the U.S., I think her chances aren't great.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have four kids who attend or did: Duke, Cornell, and UChicago (our alma mater). We didn't do anything particularly special. Just said we expected them to do well in school with their grades and always had them in a variety of activities.

^ I should have mentioned we pay full freight. Very little merit and no financial aid. That's an important part of it, I'm sure.

I think up until 2 years ago, your outcome was not unexpected for those schools. Cornell's size and various colleges, I think is still doable. UChicago as a smart legacy with a great essays sure but I hear otherwise it's been really tough unless they went early round last few years. Not sure about Duke. Kids with these stats got deferred into regular round last few years. Everyone is so busy packaging the kids, the minimums are raising. These poor kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just the world you're in OP. In my world the kids were all professors kids and went to top schools, so it's normal. I don't know what else to tell you. The fact is that it's not that hard to get into Duke Law if you have great LSATs, great undergrad record, and something in your background indicating you actually want to be a lawyer. Those schools are filled with "lily white" kids who are very smart and very hard working, contrary to the fever dreams of people obsessed with how "URMs" and "hooked" kids are ruining their kids chances. Ultimately if you are very smart (ie top 95-99% standardized test scores), and work hard (ie good grades) you are going to get into good schools and grad schools.

Then why do I know so many middle class kids with top grades, super high SAT scores, and good extracurriculars that have been rejected by the likes of UVA? What pray tell are these professor families doing that other middle class families of similar incomes, aren't?

In a word, they're smarter. There's a difference between 90% and 99%.

But anyway, actual research shows that the vast majority of kids with elite credentials get into at least 1 elite schools. And those great kids who didn't get into UVA still went to very good colleges I'm sure.

Please give an example of what kind of other "very good college" kids who didn't get into UVA went to? Most middle class families can't afford to send their kids to private colleges, so if their high achieving students don't get into the state flagship, they are either going to a lesser state school or a private school that offers generous merit aid and thus would be considerably lower ranking.

UMD honors, etc.

Is UMD honors easier for a Virginia resident to get into than UVA? I would assume UMD has tougher admission standards for out of state students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have four kids who attend or did: Duke, Cornell, and UChicago (our alma mater). We didn't do anything particularly special. Just said we expected them to do well in school with their grades and always had them in a variety of activities.

^ I should have mentioned we pay full freight. Very little merit and no financial aid. That's an important part of it, I'm sure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just the world you're in OP. In my world the kids were all professors kids and went to top schools, so it's normal. I don't know what else to tell you. The fact is that it's not that hard to get into Duke Law if you have great LSATs, great undergrad record, and something in your background indicating you actually want to be a lawyer. Those schools are filled with "lily white" kids who are very smart and very hard working, contrary to the fever dreams of people obsessed with how "URMs" and "hooked" kids are ruining their kids chances. Ultimately if you are very smart (ie top 95-99% standardized test scores), and work hard (ie good grades) you are going to get into good schools and grad schools.

Then why do I know so many middle class kids with top grades, super high SAT scores, and good extracurriculars that have been rejected by the likes of UVA? What pray tell are these professor families doing that other middle class families of similar incomes, aren't?

In a word, they're smarter. There's a difference between 90% and 99%.

But anyway, actual research shows that the vast majority of kids with elite credentials get into at least 1 elite schools. And those great kids who didn't get into UVA still went to very good colleges I'm sure.

Please give an example of what kind of other "very good college" kids who didn't get into UVA went to? Most middle class families can't afford to send their kids to private colleges, so if their high achieving students don't get into the state flagship, they are either going to a lesser state school or a private school that offers generous merit aid and thus would be considerably lower ranking.

UMD honors, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just the world you're in OP. In my world the kids were all professors kids and went to top schools, so it's normal. I don't know what else to tell you. The fact is that it's not that hard to get into Duke Law if you have great LSATs, great undergrad record, and something in your background indicating you actually want to be a lawyer. Those schools are filled with "lily white" kids who are very smart and very hard working, contrary to the fever dreams of people obsessed with how "URMs" and "hooked" kids are ruining their kids chances. Ultimately if you are very smart (ie top 95-99% standardized test scores), and work hard (ie good grades) you are going to get into good schools and grad schools.

Then why do I know so many middle class kids with top grades, super high SAT scores, and good extracurriculars that have been rejected by the likes of UVA? What pray tell are these professor families doing that other middle class families of similar incomes, aren't?

In a word, they're smarter. There's a difference between 90% and 99%.

But anyway, actual research shows that the vast majority of kids with elite credentials get into at least 1 elite schools. And those great kids who didn't get into UVA still went to very good colleges I'm sure.

How can colleges tell that one valedictorian is smarter than another?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just the world you're in OP. In my world the kids were all professors kids and went to top schools, so it's normal. I don't know what else to tell you. The fact is that it's not that hard to get into Duke Law if you have great LSATs, great undergrad record, and something in your background indicating you actually want to be a lawyer. Those schools are filled with "lily white" kids who are very smart and very hard working, contrary to the fever dreams of people obsessed with how "URMs" and "hooked" kids are ruining their kids chances. Ultimately if you are very smart (ie top 95-99% standardized test scores), and work hard (ie good grades) you are going to get into good schools and grad schools.

Then why do I know so many middle class kids with top grades, super high SAT scores, and good extracurriculars that have been rejected by the likes of UVA? What pray tell are these professor families doing that other middle class families of similar incomes, aren't?

In a word, they're smarter. There's a difference between 90% and 99%.

But anyway, actual research shows that the vast majority of kids with elite credentials get into at least 1 elite schools. And those great kids who didn't get into UVA still went to very good colleges I'm sure.

How can colleges tell that one valedictorian is smarter than another?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's just the world you're in OP. In my world the kids were all professors kids and went to top schools, so it's normal. I don't know what else to tell you. The fact is that it's not that hard to get into Duke Law if you have great LSATs, great undergrad record, and something in your background indicating you actually want to be a lawyer. Those schools are filled with "lily white" kids who are very smart and very hard working, contrary to the fever dreams of people obsessed with how "URMs" and "hooked" kids are ruining their kids chances. Ultimately if you are very smart (ie top 95-99% standardized test scores), and work hard (ie good grades) you are going to get into good schools and grad schools.

Then why do I know so many middle class kids with top grades, super high SAT scores, and good extracurriculars that have been rejected by the likes of UVA? What pray tell are these professor families doing that other middle class families of similar incomes, aren't?

In a word, they're smarter. There's a difference between 90% and 99%.

But anyway, actual research shows that the vast majority of kids with elite credentials get into at least 1 elite schools. And those great kids who didn't get into UVA still went to very good colleges I'm sure.

Please give an example of what kind of other "very good college" kids who didn't get into UVA went to? Most middle class families can't afford to send their kids to private colleges, so if their high achieving students don't get into the state flagship, they are either going to a lesser state school or a private school that offers generous merit aid and thus would be considerably lower ranking.