Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:‘24. The role of hooks, narratives, and packaging.

This really resonated with me.
It's all about sales in the end. All those endless flyers and emails from various schools. Even College Board is more about selling (your data) than about testing ('adaptive' computerized test - how is that a standardized test?).
I can't tell you how many mailers we got from U Chicago hoping my kid would apply just so they can up their application numbers and decrease their yield.
All these organizations are trying to sell.
It's no surprise that the student has to do some hard selling too.

I didn't know where to put this comment, so resurrecting this thread.
Parent of '25 here who did quite well this year (many T20 admits etc.). I had followed a lot of advice on this board, including from this thread and this one: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1235389.page

But, helping a friend's kid with WL LOCI last week, and saw the kid's (#1 in class, so many national awards, athlete, major school leadership, passion project) application for a bunch of Ivies and T10. Kid was dinged or WL everywhere. Parents were shocked. But they shouldn't have been. It was a scattered application with no story, no narrative, no "tagline" or application persona. It seemed like random accomplishments and interests thrown together, and a major that didn't quite seem connected to much in the application.

I explained that the kid didn't "package" themself and came across as too well-rounded. Like there was no thread between everything. It's quite sad, to be honest, when people don't realize the rules of the game. They thought the stats would carry the day (valedictorian, 35 and 1580).....It doesn't matter.

You don't need a counselor to package your kid (we didn't have one). You just need to learn a little (from this place, and podcasts or books, or webinars) and then be involved in reviewing your kid's applications.

There is still a lot to do after acceptance. I thought you get in and you get happy but no, a lot still and that goes into summer with orientation, having to find housing (I know that is school dependent, was hard for us).

Anonymous wrote:I was surprised how mean and judgmental people can be about other people’s kids. Adult snark is one thing, mocking teenagers quite another. Regardless of the anonymous nature of this forum, I don’t understand why anyone feels the need to belittle a high schooler’s character, intellect, or choice of ECs, college, major, etc.

+1000!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was surprised by the actual definition of first generation (which varies from school to school). It can mean first generation to attend college in this country (e.g. mom went to the Sorbonne or Oxford) and only refers to one parent. So, you can have dad be a Harvard grad who married the Sorbonne grad and their child/student is considered first gen. Pretty wild.

Which schools have that definition?!?

I am curious about this as well. But, in any event, it must be old definition, which colleges account for when making decisions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is a strong student but didn't care about the so-called top 20 schools, he wanted a place where his major was strong and there was a great student experience, he had 2 safeties he would be delighted to attend and a bunch of targets that were lovely. He added 2 reaches in the end but wasn't fixated on them. It made the process much smoother given he didn't focus at all on the highly rejective schools and used scoir to ensure his targets were were really targets for his HS. As a result, he got in nearly everywhere and is happy with results!

Aim realistically and don't hype up the overhyped schools, and this process can be fun not depressing.

My kid's list was similar to this, but surprisingly they wish they had applied to more reaches.

This was my kid too. She did apply to 3 reaches and surprisingly got into one of them. But she liked some of the other schools that she got into so much that she is not sure she will accept the reach, despite its ranking and “prestige.”

It’s kids like these who are happiest with the outcomes. They know their lane. I do think a reach or two is worth going for as long as the kid is realistic about their chances.

Anonymous wrote:I was surprised by the actual definition of first generation (which varies from school to school). It can mean first generation to attend college in this country (e.g. mom went to the Sorbonne or Oxford) and only refers to one parent. So, you can have dad be a Harvard grad who married the Sorbonne grad and their child/student is considered first gen. Pretty wild.

Which schools have that definition?!?

Which schools have that definition?!?

Anonymous wrote:My kid is a strong student but didn't care about the so-called top 20 schools, he wanted a place where his major was strong and there was a great student experience, he had 2 safeties he would be delighted to attend and a bunch of targets that were lovely. He added 2 reaches in the end but wasn't fixated on them. It made the process much smoother given he didn't focus at all on the highly rejective schools and used scoir to ensure his targets were were really targets for his HS. As a result, he got in nearly everywhere and is happy with results!

Aim realistically and don't hype up the overhyped schools, and this process can be fun not depressing.

My kid's list was similar to this, but surprisingly they wish they had applied to more reaches.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is cliched by now but just how many high stats (1550+, 10+ AP’s, all A’s highest rigor) kids with demonstrated extracurricular involvement are turned away. Not even waitlisted but rejected outright .I understand that no college wants to fill its class with so-called robots, but I have a hard time believe that there isn’t something that these kids bring to the table. (And no, my kid doesn’t fit this high stats profile, so this isn’t personal)

They do "bring something to the table. But it's simple math.

Harvard had over 57K apply. They accepted 1968. Of those 57K, I'm going to guestimate that 30-40K+ are all "qualified students that Harvard would happily accept". But they only want 1600-1800 students in their freshman class. See the math issue? Factually, they will be rejecting many many (10s of thousands) of highly qualified applicants.
Also, Harvard and many other schools smartly realize that a 1550/10+ AP, 4.0UW student is not any "smarter" than a 1500/8AP+/3.9UW student---both will excel at Harvard, so they look beyond that for major, EC, what the student brings to the freshman class. Your error in thinking is that 1550+ is actually different than 1500+

They were test required this year —so these were high stat kids. The schools that converted to test REQUIRED saw a decline (weeded out low scorers) while the few Ivies that stayed TO saw an increase.

So then closer to 50K were "highly qualified studetns" Which means it's all math. 95%+ of the highly qualified are getting rejected, so stats don't matter, as long as you pass the basic lower threshold. (Which is not 1550)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that we’re done, I’m surprised by how personally I’m taking this (awful, terrible, no good) process. My really great kid got rejected from every reach (that are reaches for everyone - he really and truly had the lottery ticket for all of them). I’m mad at myself for not grooming him more and getting him (or getting him to do) all the fake crap that other kids seem to do to for the sole purpose of getting into college. I’m mad that AOs don’t see through the bullshit and keep falling for it. and my feelings aren’t just for my kid, really. I’m sad for all the sincere, genuine kids who are KIDS and do the stuff that needs to be done because it needs to be done (student council, school clubs, tutoring, working real jobs) and get hosed.

I feel somewhat the opposite. Ive always known “who gets in and why”. It was never about any school clubs.

There are kids at my kids schools shooting daggers at mine bc my kid picked a niche humanities major that matches EC list, national ranking award; there is no evidence or hint of CS or robotics or anything anywhere bc my kid didn’t do that in high school school. Truly a humanities kid and app reads that way. Got into 3 T20 & WL 1 Ivy. Test optional.

The kid shooting daggers applied as language major and had all the CS stuff and robotics and quiz bowl all over ECs along with that state dept language program(s). Leadership in several big school clubs. Nearly perfect stats/scores. Brilliant kid but looked scattered I’m sure it looked liked a back door to CS. The application didn’t hang well and have heard tone of essays a bit righteous and activist (active in pro-Gaza demonstrations). Didn’t get into any ivies. Going to OOS flagship.

You have to market yourself and know what to omit and what to highlight.

+1
And there is nothing wrong about marketing oneself. In fact, it is a core life skill. AOs certainly seem to believe so.

We should not have kids from 12+ having to "market themselves". We need to let them be kids, explore interests and try different things (if they desire) in HS. And no, most kids should not be taking 10-14APs. Yes it's a core life skill, but doing so in your career (taking on projects that will help you get promoted or attending conferences to network and get a new job at different company) is very different than developing from age 12+ and choosing courses and activities solely to get into college. They are kids and should be allowed to choose

My kid did what they love. Didn't market themself or think about college apps until summer before senior year. Then we thought about how to "package" kid.
It worked.
You don't need to do stuff from 12+.
But the major is the key. Very very important.

well major should be what the student wants. Also, my kid had 4 schools ranked 30-65 (their safety was about 65) to choose from ultimately and none are direct admit for anything except nursing. So my kid could change their major anytime. Much less stress and more enjoyable for an 18yo, knowing you are not locked into a major

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that we’re done, I’m surprised by how personally I’m taking this (awful, terrible, no good) process. My really great kid got rejected from every reach (that are reaches for everyone - he really and truly had the lottery ticket for all of them). I’m mad at myself for not grooming him more and getting him (or getting him to do) all the fake crap that other kids seem to do to for the sole purpose of getting into college. I’m mad that AOs don’t see through the bullshit and keep falling for it. and my feelings aren’t just for my kid, really. I’m sad for all the sincere, genuine kids who are KIDS and do the stuff that needs to be done because it needs to be done (student council, school clubs, tutoring, working real jobs) and get hosed.

I feel somewhat the opposite. Ive always known “who gets in and why”. It was never about any school clubs.

There are kids at my kids schools shooting daggers at mine bc my kid picked a niche humanities major that matches EC list, national ranking award; there is no evidence or hint of CS or robotics or anything anywhere bc my kid didn’t do that in high school school. Truly a humanities kid and app reads that way. Got into 3 T20 & WL 1 Ivy. Test optional.

The kid shooting daggers applied as language major and had all the CS stuff and robotics and quiz bowl all over ECs along with that state dept language program(s). Leadership in several big school clubs. Nearly perfect stats/scores. Brilliant kid but looked scattered I’m sure it looked liked a back door to CS. The application didn’t hang well and have heard tone of essays a bit righteous and activist (active in pro-Gaza demonstrations). Didn’t get into any ivies. Going to OOS flagship.

You have to market yourself and know what to omit and what to highlight.

+1
And there is nothing wrong about marketing oneself. In fact, it is a core life skill. AOs certainly seem to believe so.

We should not have kids from 12+ having to "market themselves". We need to let them be kids, explore interests and try different things (if they desire) in HS. And no, most kids should not be taking 10-14APs. Yes it's a core life skill, but doing so in your career (taking on projects that will help you get promoted or attending conferences to network and get a new job at different company) is very different than developing from age 12+ and choosing courses and activities solely to get into college. They are kids and should be allowed to choose

Agreed! But then you must agree that it really is ok to shoot for and apply to schools other than the T25. The kids who get in to the top of top schools have the "it" factor and are able to put together their applications that genuinely show their narrative. That is what is meant by "marketing".

But many of those kids were pushed to do so, it's not 100% their own efforts and desires. They grow up in homes where the parents are laser focused on getting into a T20 and start pushing that narrative as young as MS. And I'd argue, we should let a kids drive it a bit more, and step back. It's been like that for years, but has gotten much worse over time. But I attended a T10 35 years ago, and recall multiple people who were "premed" but they hated it and were too afraid to tell their parents (who were driving it). I told them "do you really want to be miserable and in school and residency for the next 12 years simply because your parents want that for you? If you don't speak up, that is what will happen. "
A few went one as "premed majors", despite being miserable, but a few did have a heart to heart with their parents and grow up and start speaking up for themselves and switched to what they had interest in.

As a parent I cannot imagine pushing my kids like that. Most we did was require the STEM oriented kid to take the most advanced courses available, but they were qualified for that Alg 1 in 7th, Bio in 9th. And easily got As in all courses, including the APs they took. But we let them drop Spanish after year due to scheduling conflicts and the AP teacher being beyond terrible (personal experience with them). We didn't force them to take APUSH or AP Eng because it would allow them to continue with their EC 20+ hours a week and make them a happier HSer. They could have done it, it might have gotten them into T20, but who knows. Instead they are at a school ranked in the 30s, extremely happy and thriving. And in reality, I think happier than if they'd gotten into their T10 choice (which is a pressure cooker).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The idea of perfect fit is utter BS...most kids could be happy at many different places - parents are just putting more pressure on kids to subscribe to some concept of the perfect fit when its not realistic.

No one is seeking perfection fit. I think wise parents are advising not to let rank (ie, prestige) overshadow fit.

This! Smart parents know that student will thrive where they are happiest. So rankings don't really matter....if your kid will be miserable/not as excited at a "higher ranked school", then let them go to the better fit. What matters most is what your kid does while at college and beyond.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that we’re done, I’m surprised by how personally I’m taking this (awful, terrible, no good) process. My really great kid got rejected from every reach (that are reaches for everyone - he really and truly had the lottery ticket for all of them). I’m mad at myself for not grooming him more and getting him (or getting him to do) all the fake crap that other kids seem to do to for the sole purpose of getting into college. I’m mad that AOs don’t see through the bullshit and keep falling for it. and my feelings aren’t just for my kid, really. I’m sad for all the sincere, genuine kids who are KIDS and do the stuff that needs to be done because it needs to be done (student council, school clubs, tutoring, working real jobs) and get hosed.

I have a lot of sympathy for you (and wonder if I'll feel this way next year: I have a junior). It's tough. At the same time, dh and I are trying hard to keep reiterating to our kid that it truly doesn't matter where you go. My evidence for this is that we both went to Ivies and our lives are normal. We make less than most people. Neither of us had an amazing college experience, and neither of us have worked in fields where it matters where we went. The most successful kids from my high school class went to less selective undergrad schools and did exceptionally well. In the end it is about what you do, not where you go.

I could have written the above post but substitute in “WASP” for Ivy and the only thing different is that I did have an amazing college experience. You’re absolutely right- if the college experience is amazing and transformative, that’s great and one can get that at hundreds of places.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is cliched by now but just how many high stats (1550+, 10+ AP’s, all A’s highest rigor) kids with demonstrated extracurricular involvement are turned away. Not even waitlisted but rejected outright .I understand that no college wants to fill its class with so-called robots, but I have a hard time believe that there isn’t something that these kids bring to the table. (And no, my kid doesn’t fit this high stats profile, so this isn’t personal)

They do "bring something to the table. But it's simple math.

Harvard had over 57K apply. They accepted 1968. Of those 57K, I'm going to guestimate that 30-40K+ are all "qualified students that Harvard would happily accept". But they only want 1600-1800 students in their freshman class. See the math issue? Factually, they will be rejecting many many (10s of thousands) of highly qualified applicants.
Also, Harvard and many other schools smartly realize that a 1550/10+ AP, 4.0UW student is not any "smarter" than a 1500/8AP+/3.9UW student---both will excel at Harvard, so they look beyond that for major, EC, what the student brings to the freshman class. Your error in thinking is that 1550+ is actually different than 1500+

They were test required this year —so these were high stat kids. The schools that converted to test REQUIRED saw a decline (weeded out low scorers) while the few Ivies that stayed TO saw an increase.

Anonymous wrote:My kid is a strong student but didn't care about the so-called top 20 schools, he wanted a place where his major was strong and there was a great student experience, he had 2 safeties he would be delighted to attend and a bunch of targets that were lovely. He added 2 reaches in the end but wasn't fixated on them. It made the process much smoother given he didn't focus at all on the highly rejective schools and used scoir to ensure his targets were were really targets for his HS. As a result, he got in nearly everywhere and is happy with results!

Aim realistically and don't hype up the overhyped schools, and this process can be fun not depressing.

spot on.