<p>Oh my, I guess the rumor about Wash U waitlisting so many students is true…</p>
<p>it seems like there were at least 100 applications to USC, and some very qualified candidates didn’t get in. Would this be because there are only so many students from one school USC can accept, or is USC really that selective?
Example: #578- 3.73UW, 4.56W, 2180 SAT, 800’s on SAT II’s, good EC’s. Maybe these kids were lying, but I thought those type of stats would get you into USC?</p>
<p>mpball, it is true that USC has become more selective in the last few years especially, partly because it can. (It has become a popular alternative, esp. to in-staters, because of the difficulty of getting into certain U.C.'s) I am routinely suggesting USC as an add’l option on the college list of my students, due to difficulty predicting UC campus acceptance.</p>
<p>As to stats, USC prefers high scorers to high GPA’s. Naturally every U wants both, but it is easier to get into USC with > 2200 and below a 3.7, then <2200 and > 3.7.</p>
<p>Yea I’ve noticed that USC has really been cranking up the admission difficulty over the last few years, and based on their freshman profile, I would agree that they take scores over grades. Thats great for me, because I have a 30 ACT but only a 3.5 UWGPA. A longshot, but it’s still worth trying, got nothing to lose other than the app fee. I was a tad surprised by the UMichigan data as well, only one kid got rejected. Is that saying that all of those kids who applied got into Ann Arbor, or everyone was accepted into at least a UM school, like Dearborn or another satellite school?</p>
<p>“In most schools that I am acquainted with, the students have already shared such information with their peers long before it gets posted on Naviance. The smaller the school, the more true that tends to be.”</p>
<p>This is true with my kids’ school.</p>
<p>Before graduation, schools in my area ask students to put the list of colleges that they will attend and publish. Some schools also put the list on local newspapers with a big banner “Congratulations”.</p>
<p>I think people who bash the rejected highstat kids should go to hell.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Go for it. :)</p>
<p>My D also submitted her ACT, btw, not her SAT, because she had looked at Naviance data from her school, which supported that choice for USC in particular. This is why I do not share in the trashing of publishing Naviance data. It was a wonderful college planning aid for our family, especially in steering us away from unrealistic kinds of choices.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But the point is sharing with whomever one wants is one’s choice whereas this is not their choice and it goes to a much larger audience. I strongly doubt in a school this size, one has shared all their information with everyone. Besides, it is their perogative and control, not someone else’s. </p>
<p>Moreover, being a high flyer and public about your stats is one thing but what about the kids at the other end of the continuum? Positive information is great to share, negative is not. </p>
<p>I think you completely miss my point. The issue is whose information is this? It belongs solely to the student, who owns it and should control it, not the school or larger community.</p>
<p>No, I did get your point, starbright. And technically I guess you are correct. (This conversation was also had several months ago – maybe a year ago – about Naviance data.) But if the result is the same (orally published information = graphically published information), it does seem like a technicality to object to it. Or let’s say: it’s an adult objection, because I’ve not heard of the students at my Ds’ school, for example, object.</p>
<p>“The Brooklyn Tech info is really fascinating. Both Harvard and Yale taking kids with CR scores of 560 and 570 while passing over kids with much higher scores. And it’s not like these were kids who were very one-sided math geniuses, their math SAT and subject test scores are less than 700. I don’t know this high school, were these likely to be the only URMs out of the applicant pool from this school to H and Y?”</p>
<p>My husband is a “URM”, first gen student, who graduated from Brooklyn Tech, then Columbia, then medical school, and is currently the chairman of the dept of his medical group, and was VP of the group for quite awhile.</p>
<p>I was second gen, eventually did the private practice thing. Better SAT’s, more “EC’s”, but he is a much better student. Wonder what that means.</p>
<p>Years ago, I stumbled on the Brooklyn Tech data and was delighted to find it. For those of us who do not have Naviance and get no guidance at all at school, this is very, very helpful. I could not find Brooklyn Tech data after that. I happened to meet someone who worked there and mentioned that I had not been able to find it. She said, “Thank goodness they took it down. It was making the kids crazy with anxiety.” That was when they posted the data according to student instead of according to college. The chart showed each student, where he or she applied, what the stats were, where he or she was accepted and rejected, and where he or she planned to attend. I can see how that would make the students more identifiable; it took less work to figure out who was who.
But anyway this data really, really helps the rest of us so thanks to the poster who found it! And, thanks to the OP with his LA suburban data also.
Both look like great high schools, btw.
Excel won’t let me copy this data into it to sort by student; has anyone been able to do this?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I too find this very helpful, given that I have no idea what “Naviance” is (where there might be more/better info).</p>
<p>Naviance is a software that a lot of schools buy. If your school doesn’t have it, that’s probably why you haven’t heard of it. One of the things people like about it is that it keeps track of everyone’s stats in the school and where they apply and where they get in. Using Naviance, a student can see reports that show over the years who from their HS has gotten accepted or rejected from individual schools and what stats they had. That helps you know whether a school is a reach or out of reach, or a match or a safety or whatever.</p>
<p>I think this information is great for the kids to see. My daughter’s year (2008) a lot of her classmates used San Diego State as their “safety” and didn’t get in.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In our school that is certainly not the case. Kids may share the info with their close friends but everybody’s stats don’t become public knowledge. I’ve always encouraged my kids not to share that information because too many kids are into the comparison game, unhealthy IMO.</p>
<p>depends, Wildwood. Our school is not unique, though. Other CC parents have said here & on other threads that data is freely shared at other schools, too, especially smaller schools where the atmosphere is much more collaborative than competitive. In those cases, virtually the whole class can be classified as one’s friends. And when the emphasis is on affirming every student, that atmosphere can be pretty contagious, so that students lose interest in putting others down or building themselves up. (One can find oneself isolated for doing so.)Students at my Ds’ school don’t see life, or even academic stats, as a zero sum game.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t mean to beat a dead horse, but how could it possibly be that all 500+ kids in this dataset have shared all possible detailed information about themselves with all 500+ kids (and their families). It doesn’t make sense. </p>
<p>Even in a small school, you have absolutely no way of knowing if every kid is okay with the world knowing that they were rejected from 5 of 6 schools, had a 440 in math, or what have you. Sure people share information, but ALL information with EVERYONE? No. </p>
<p>I find it impossible to accept that such kids would think its okay for everyone to know all this personal information. And equally impossible that a parent at even a small school could possibly know how each and every kid personally feels about it (and this is said from someone whose kids go to a very tiny close knit high achieving but supportive school). </p>
<p>Not to mention, the outcome is not the point- it is a principle that is violated here. </p>
<p>How would the adults on this board feel about having their salary, their latest raise, and details of their last 360 degree performance appraisal published alongside all their coworkers on the company website? One thing if it’s anonymous, quite another when it’s not. And maybe you don’t mind sharing your information with everyone, as you choose to do, but I imagine you’d feel quite differently if it was solely up to the company’s discretion.</p>
<p>75 kids in my sons 2011 graduating class. 89 in my daughters graduating class from the same school in 08. As far as I can tell, Naviance doesn’t do the scattergrams, but I can identify my D’s data points in the program. It shows how many students where admitted to certain schools, and she was the only one who applied to many of them.</p>
<p>Frankly, I wouldn’t have been bothered about that until I came to CC, and started to wonder “what would people think?”.</p>
<p>starbright, my post above, x-posted with yours, may explain why this is possible & believable. I don’t know about “500+ kids in this dataset,” but in my D’s school there are about 50 in each class. Yes, typically, most in the class would know either exactly, or just about, where all the other students are. This is enhanced partly by the atmosphere I described above, and also by the size of the individual subject classes, which can be as small as 5 students, & usually no larger than 20 students. Also, many of the students are tracked, providing even more opportunities to share knowledge, and less opportunity to hide knowledge, as particular subsets may be in 3-7 classes together.</p>
<p>So far, neither students nor parents have made a federal case out of the scattergrams published.</p>
<p>You’re lucky, epiphany, if there are not a lot of competitive souls at your kids’ school. My experience is that the very system of college admissions fosters a lot competition and envy.
Unfortunately, as evidenced by the many stories of disappointment at admissions time that we have seen on CC, lots of kids tend to measure themselves against their peers in a detrimental way. Having access to such information as this will probably make it harder for some to move past that disillusion and may just embarrass others.</p>
<p>When the information is basically anonymous as it for us on CC, I think it is really helpful to get a peek into admissions decisions. Unfortunately, I think this school gives out too much information that enables other students/parents to identify individuals, and I would object if I were a parent there.</p>
<p>cross/posted with epiphany. Our school also has a class size of slightly more than 60. Kids do not know stats for anybody except maybe their close friends that want to share it. It is considered rude by many to ask someone else about this information.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s not asked, though. It’s usually found out with some gentle persistence (if it’s good information), some volunteer sharing if it’s bad information. Considered bad form (“rude”) to brag, but there are legitimate ways that info leaks out – for example, a student could be standing innocently within earshot of a teacher inquiring about a Subject Test recently taken by one student, or something. Or a student could be sharing good information only to disclose how a different test-prep strategy (such as timing) resulted in a higher score on something the second time, etc. (“I was able to raise my score 50 or 100 points by doing things differently this time, & here’s what I did”…)</p>
<p>Yes, we do consider ourselves lucky. However, part of that was choice. We rejected the cutthroat competitive schools as being downers.</p>