Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1985
3.7
1210
Harvard Rejected
Brown Rejected
Stanford Accepted Attended
Tufts Accepted
Wesleyan Waitlisted
Northwestern Accepted
Boston University Accepted
This is why Stanford should be the lowest of the elite. Their priority was not, and is not, in academics.
Please email the school, cc Guido Imbens and let them know your very valuable opinion. It will have a tremendous impact on everyone around the world. Please feel free to create your own version of "elite" on the toilet paper, while you think about it - Ivy alumna who had Dr. Imbens as TA.
Stanford student paper has been complaining about school’s fetish with athletes at the expense of non-athlete students. As long as its focus is on sports, the paper argues Stanford will always be below academic institutions such as Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Princeton, MIT. Stanford took its rightful spot below these institutions.
They should have attended a different school. BTW, all the schools above with the exception of MIT have special athletic recruitment and my H went to one of them to play a sport. Brown has a weak spot for celebrities and royalty.
True, except Stanford is the only one offering full rides to athletes. Ivies don’t do that. Additionally, Stanford pours extra money to athletes to make sure they graduate. I don’t believe ivies do that.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Y'all still remember your GPA and SAT score from three or four decades ago?!
I sorta know my GPA. I have no idea on SAT.
1987 Grad.
Anonymous wrote:Y'all still remember your GPA and SAT score from three or four decades ago?!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don't remember. I graduated in 2002 from high school. Obviously I know where I went to college, but aside from remembering I'd be satisfied if I broke 1300 on the SATs, don't know any of my stats.
This. Who remembers this stuff so long? One of the slight comforts I don't tell my college kid about just yet is that several years out of college, no one on Earth will ever care again what her high school GPA and SAT/ACT scores were! I graduated from HS more than 30 years ago, and have zero idea what my "stats" were. They were likely high by today's standards but I was a big fish in a small pond so it's not comparable to kids at super competitive, academically very rigorous high schools in this region today. Got into the university I wanted early admission or whatever it was called back then, and I don't even recall finishing applications to other colleges where I'd started the process. Thank God, too, because the other options were never going to be good fits for many reasons.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’ll play lowest SAT- I think posted 1020 540 English 480 Math…. Graduated 1991. I was in top 20 percent of my class GPA-wise
Accepted UMD NYU VT PSU Pitt
Rejected Georgetown
Attended one of the state schools due to cost. Never in a million years would I have been accepted to any of these schools today.
SINce 1991, there’s been a huge grade and standardized score inflations.
I remember about 7 yrs ago, one of my coworkers said her niece is on scholarship with a 4.0 gpa. Her plan was to become a medical doctor. In the old days, 4.0 meant straight As and probably the valedictorian of the HS. When my own kid applied to colleges, I learned 4.0 means 70th percentile. The niece has since graduated and now works at the doctors office as a receptionist answering phones.
Your bitterness has made you make a very unpleasant and distasteful post, recounting a story of a friend in a pejorative way and insulting a person who does honest work without all the details. You should be ashamed.
Yes there are many more high-performing kids than before. The culture seems to have changed to value academic performance more. Is that a bad thing?
Or are you suggesting that highschool and standardized tests are easier now than they were in 1991? Please provide data to support that.
You can do your own googling on the last point. But thanks for your feedback on your first point. I was only trying to be positive towards the PP who said s/he could never get into schools nowadays.
That’s a mature mea culpa on the first point and I genuinely admire you for it.
As for the second, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’ll play lowest SAT- I think posted 1020 540 English 480 Math…. Graduated 1991. I was in top 20 percent of my class GPA-wise
Accepted UMD NYU VT PSU Pitt
Rejected Georgetown
Attended one of the state schools due to cost. Never in a million years would I have been accepted to any of these schools today.
SINce 1991, there’s been a huge grade and standardized score inflations.
I remember about 7 yrs ago, one of my coworkers said her niece is on scholarship with a 4.0 gpa. Her plan was to become a medical doctor. In the old days, 4.0 meant straight As and probably the valedictorian of the HS. When my own kid applied to colleges, I learned 4.0 means 70th percentile. The niece has since graduated and now works at the doctors office as a receptionist answering phones.
Your bitterness has made you make a very unpleasant and distasteful post, recounting a story of a friend in a pejorative way and insulting a person who does honest work without all the details. You should be ashamed.
Yes there are many more high-performing kids than before. The culture seems to have changed to value academic performance more. Is that a bad thing?
Or are you suggesting that highschool and standardized tests are easier now than they were in 1991? Please provide data to support that.
You can do your own googling on the last point. But thanks for your feedback on your first point. I was only trying to be positive towards the PP who said s/he could never get into schools nowadays.
That’s a mature mea culpa on the first point and I genuinely admire you for it.
As for the second, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1985
3.7
1210
Harvard Rejected
Brown Rejected
Stanford Accepted Attended
Tufts Accepted
Wesleyan Waitlisted
Northwestern Accepted
Boston University Accepted
This is why Stanford should be the lowest of the elite. Their priority was not, and is not, in academics.
Please email the school, cc Guido Imbens and let them know your very valuable opinion. It will have a tremendous impact on everyone around the world. Please feel free to create your own version of "elite" on the toilet paper, while you think about it - Ivy alumna who had Dr. Imbens as TA.
Stanford student paper has been complaining about school’s fetish with athletes at the expense of non-athlete students. As long as its focus is on sports, the paper argues Stanford will always be below academic institutions such as Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Princeton, MIT. Stanford took its rightful spot below these institutions.
They should have attended a different school. BTW, all the schools above with the exception of MIT have special athletic recruitment and my H went to one of them to play a sport. Brown has a weak spot for celebrities and royalty.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’ll play lowest SAT- I think posted 1020 540 English 480 Math…. Graduated 1991. I was in top 20 percent of my class GPA-wise
Accepted UMD NYU VT PSU Pitt
Rejected Georgetown
Attended one of the state schools due to cost. Never in a million years would I have been accepted to any of these schools today.
SINce 1991, there’s been a huge grade and standardized score inflations.
I remember about 7 yrs ago, one of my coworkers said her niece is on scholarship with a 4.0 gpa. Her plan was to become a medical doctor. In the old days, 4.0 meant straight As and probably the valedictorian of the HS. When my own kid applied to colleges, I learned 4.0 means 70th percentile. The niece has since graduated and now works at the doctors office as a receptionist answering phones.
Your bitterness has made you make a very unpleasant and distasteful post, recounting a story of a friend in a pejorative way and insulting a person who does honest work without all the details. You should be ashamed.
Yes there are many more high-performing kids than before. The culture seems to have changed to value academic performance more. Is that a bad thing?
Or are you suggesting that highschool and standardized tests are easier now than they were in 1991? Please provide data to support that.
You can do your own googling on the last point. But thanks for your feedback on your first point. I was only trying to be positive towards the PP who said s/he could never get into schools nowadays.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1985
3.7
1210
Harvard Rejected
Brown Rejected
Stanford Accepted Attended
Tufts Accepted
Wesleyan Waitlisted
Northwestern Accepted
Boston University Accepted
This is why Stanford should be the lowest of the elite. Their priority was not, and is not, in academics.
Please email the school, cc Guido Imbens and let them know your very valuable opinion. It will have a tremendous impact on everyone around the world. Please feel free to create your own version of "elite" on the toilet paper, while you think about it - Ivy alumna who had Dr. Imbens as TA.
Stanford student paper has been complaining about school’s fetish with athletes at the expense of non-athlete students. As long as its focus is on sports, the paper argues Stanford will always be below academic institutions such as Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Princeton, MIT. Stanford took its rightful spot below these institutions.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don't remember. I graduated in 2002 from high school. Obviously I know where I went to college, but aside from remembering I'd be satisfied if I broke 1300 on the SATs, don't know any of my stats.
This. Who remembers this stuff so long? One of the slight comforts I don't tell my college kid about just yet is that several years out of college, no one on Earth will ever care again what her high school GPA and SAT/ACT scores were! I graduated from HS more than 30 years ago, and have zero idea what my "stats" were. They were likely high by today's standards but I was a big fish in a small pond so it's not comparable to kids at super competitive, academically very rigorous high schools in this region today. Got into the university I wanted early admission or whatever it was called back then, and I don't even recall finishing applications to other colleges where I'd started the process. Thank God, too, because the other options were never going to be good fits for many reasons.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’ll play lowest SAT- I think posted 1020 540 English 480 Math…. Graduated 1991. I was in top 20 percent of my class GPA-wise
Accepted UMD NYU VT PSU Pitt
Rejected Georgetown
Attended one of the state schools due to cost. Never in a million years would I have been accepted to any of these schools today.
SINce 1991, there’s been a huge grade and standardized score inflations.
I remember about 7 yrs ago, one of my coworkers said her niece is on scholarship with a 4.0 gpa. Her plan was to become a medical doctor. In the old days, 4.0 meant straight As and probably the valedictorian of the HS. When my own kid applied to colleges, I learned 4.0 means 70th percentile. The niece has since graduated and now works at the doctors office as a receptionist answering phones.
Your bitterness has made you make a very unpleasant and distasteful post, recounting a story of a friend in a pejorative way and insulting a person who does honest work without all the details. You should be ashamed.
Yes there are many more high-performing kids than before. The culture seems to have changed to value academic performance more. Is that a bad thing?
Or are you suggesting that highschool and standardized tests are easier now than they were in 1991? Please provide data to support that.