Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easier to find a scapegoat (i.e. kids of other races) than believe your kid blew his essay/interview or had made a bad impression on the teachers who wrote his recommendations.

I get it.

+1. White people are so greedy now they want to own racism. As if they don’t enjoy the benefit of being white in every other aspect of society.

Your kid just wasn’t good enough. Every school thought the same thing. It’s not a fluke.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t trust naviance. My son with near perfect SAT score and 4.89 GPA was rejected from every single school except for his safeties.

. What was his unweighted GPA? WHat were the target schools where he was not admitted? The crap shoot schools are crap shoots for nearly everyone.

3.93 target was cmu (rejected)uiuc (waitlisted). Kids with lower stats were accepted. I think he is the wrong color. Sad but true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's an example from DD's Naviance: I'm picking NYU, because it's popular, but my DD doesn't want to go there. In the last 3 years, 33 students have applied and 6 have been accepted. That's an acceptance rate of 18%, which is much lower than the national acceptance rate for NYU. Looking more closely at the Scattergram, 6 out of 7 students who applied with an SAT over 1400 got accepted. (I'm not sure how many years of application cycles the Scattergrams cover). There were many students waitlisted who scored between 1350 and 1400.

My DD is at a school with a high poverty rate. Less than 50% of students go directly to a 4 year university. A small percentage go out of state. I think that in this circumstance, a high SAT counts for a lot, because universities can't trust that an A means a lot (there isn't much competition). We have a very diverse school, and I want to assure the public that URM's are not getting high acceptance rates simply because they are URM.

It's also possible that NYU doesn't bother to admit many students from DD's school because NYU knows that it offers crappy financial aid. The yield is not likely to be high once students see the bottom line. My conclusion is that IF DD wanted to go to NYU, she would have a very good chance with a 1400+ SAT, but nothing is guaranteed. Thoughts?

If your kid is full-pay, I would say, chances are better.

Anonymous wrote:1. Weighted GPAs are worthless

2. High unweighted GPAs are not going to get you anywhere in the top 25 without a very rigorous course load with 4 years of every academic subject including foreign language.

3. Any college with a 25% or less acceptance rate is a lottery for kids with nearly perfect stats

4. Naviance does not account for recruits, legacies, courseload, first gen status, full pay status, etc.

5. It’s a tool, not a crystal ball.

Anonymous wrote:Here's an example from DD's Naviance: I'm picking NYU, because it's popular, but my DD doesn't want to go there. In the last 3 years, 33 students have applied and 6 have been accepted. That's an acceptance rate of 18%, which is much lower than the national acceptance rate for NYU. Looking more closely at the Scattergram, 6 out of 7 students who applied with an SAT over 1400 got accepted. (I'm not sure how many years of application cycles the Scattergrams cover). There were many students waitlisted who scored between 1350 and 1400.

My DD is at a school with a high poverty rate. Less than 50% of students go directly to a 4 year university. A small percentage go out of state. I think that in this circumstance, a high SAT counts for a lot, because universities can't trust that an A means a lot (there isn't much competition). We have a very diverse school, and I want to assure the public that URM's are not getting high acceptance rates simply because they are URM.

It's also possible that NYU doesn't bother to admit many students from DD's school because NYU knows that it offers crappy financial aid. The yield is not likely to be high once students see the bottom line. My conclusion is that IF DD wanted to go to NYU, she would have a very good chance with a 1400+ SAT, but nothing is guaranteed. Thoughts?

Anonymous wrote:Easier to find a scapegoat (i.e. kids of other races) than believe your kid blew his essay/interview or had made a bad impression on the teachers who wrote his recommendations.

I get it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t trust naviance. My son with near perfect SAT score and 4.89 GPA was rejected from every single school except for his safeties.

. What was his unweighted GPA? WHat were the target schools where he was not admitted? The crap shoot schools are crap shoots for nearly everyone.

3.93 target was cmu (rejected)uiuc (waitlisted). Kids with lower stats were accepted. I think he is the wrong color. Sad but true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t trust naviance. My son with near perfect SAT score and 4.89 GPA was rejected from every single school except for his safeties.

. What was his unweighted GPA? WHat were the target schools where he was not admitted? The crap shoot schools are crap shoots for nearly everyone.

3.93 target was cmu (rejected)uiuc (waitlisted). Kids with lower stats were accepted. I think he is the wrong color. Sad but true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t trust naviance. My son with near perfect SAT score and 4.89 GPA was rejected from every single school except for his safeties.

. What was his unweighted GPA? WHat were the target schools where he was not admitted? The crap shoot schools are crap shoots for nearly everyone.

Anonymous wrote:The only schools that practice yield protection these days are lower tier. It used to be associated with Tufts, but they don’t need to anymore.

Naviance is great for getting ideas, but everyone knows essays and recommendations are big factors when everyone gets As (and if the school has GPAs that hit 4.89, there is a whole lot of inflation happening).