<p>“If one day he gets big money from his invention, he wants to found the development of the “new tests” and programs for kids with high test score/low GPA in top schools” - Interesting idea. </p>
<p>But I gotta tell you, often (not always) kids who are lopsided with high test scores struggle in the demands of college. They are used to a “wing it” approach to academics because so much come easy. I have one of those kids. I tell my friends with younger kids, “Willpower trumps Brainpower in almost everything… .except for crossword puzzles and Jeopardy”.</p>
<p>Note that, even if kids take a gap year they rarely get into the schools that rejected them the year before. Transfers to the usual suspects aren’t easy either. (For several years for example Harvard didn’t accept any transfer students at all.)</p>
<p>It’s also pretty rare that even a stellar student with the package that will get them accepted at a top school will get into them all. My oldest for example got into Harvard but was rejected by MIT, Caltech and Stanford and waitlisted by Harvey Mudd. He had 1570/1600 (writing didn’t count his year), 800s on all his SAT subject tests, 5’s on 9 APs, top 1% of his class, Science Olympiad medals, freelance work experience etc. Stellar students get rejected all the time.</p>
<p>Four years later, he graduated from Carnegie Mellon and is in his dream job. It really does turn out fine in the long run.</p>
<p>Gosh, thumper, that’s ancient history! I’ve got a happy junior at College Park now. I’m pretty sure that by the time my HS freshman is ready for college applications her stats, which are (so far) similar to her brother’s, will not be enough to gain admission to U-MD. Towson and Salisbury get more selective every year, as well.</p>
<p>My very first post on CC ( a year ago) stated that this year’s application process was the worst ever. A year later, I stand by that thought. Every year is the worst.</p>
<p>The opacity of holistic admissions processes at highly selective private schools makes them look like lotteries from the outside (as well as spawning all kinds of speculation about the relative value of legacy, race, region of residence, types of extracurriculars, etc.), even though they are not.</p>
<p>Also, public schools may have different goals in their admissions processes. Rather than looking for a “diverse class of unique individuals” or some such, their processes (even if based on holistic reviews) may be designed more for consistency and scalability.</p>
<p>Not necessarily true. The most selective private schools take very few transfers. On the other hand, selective public schools often take a lot of transfers at the junior level from in-state community colleges. Some private schools like USC also take a decent number of transfers.</p>
<p>“Stellar students get rejected all the time.” - So very true.</p>
<p>I thought it was funny that DS’s MIT interviewer had been rejected by Harvey Mudd. DS got accepted at Mudd. But not MIT (which was ok by him - a return visit in Feb was lackluster).</p>
<p>I know that there is a perception of “lottery” and my D was rejected SCEA at Stanford, just for disclosure, but . . . of her classmates who were accepted just about everywhere ivy and similar the people who know them would have been surprised if they hadn’t. One kid in her band was accepted to most super top notch schools so one would imagine that they all saw the same great qualities in his academics, music, research, essays etc. All those schools are likely not wrong. Similarly CPU on parent thread was accepted to many top schools. She must be a kid with a whole application that stands out from the crowd to have that consistency. There are stories of kids who are accepted to several and rejected from 1. However, rejected from all is not lottery but more likely something about the app that is either not in the mix with the other candidates or has some fatal flaw. Many of the kids in her group who chose 1 or 2 good fit ivies or similar were accepted as well.</p>
<p>Here is my opinion…regardless of your stats…and strength of application…when you apply to those tippy top schools, you should HOPE for acceptance, not EXPECT it.</p>
<p>Performersmom said it: This is a HOLISTIC process … and etc. Others have reposted it. Everyone should reread it. Not holistic at all schools, but for any school using the CA, adcoms have an abundance of info to read through and react to.<br>
Mini added great advice in #64 and his others.</p>
<p>I can’t speak for whatever happened with UM Amherst (assuming it’s your flagship,) but look at all the talk here about gpa, scores and gpa vs scores. But top private colleges get thousands more apps than they can admit; it’s a buyers market. Stats are only part of the game- they show a kid can muscle up the effort and savvy to master the school work and the tests. (A huge indication he or she can tackle college level work.) After that, I always say, “it’s the kid’s to win or lose.” The CA is where the kid’s “stuff” comes through. It’s where he or she tells the tale. Or not.</p>
<p>I would almost agree to the lottery perception. My kid had some better stats and ECs than some of the kids that posted here. Rejected at 3 ivies, 2 waitlisted and admitted to MIT, UVA, GWU (with a Dean scholarship of $30k a yr).
I learned of others not offered at Ivy but got into MIT. </p>
<p>Also interesting, some of the Ivies said on their sites or reported in articles like NY Post where most kids were coming from. PRinceton said" , with the largest representation from New Jersey, followed in order by California, New York and Texas. Interesting.</p>
<p>Most of the students that get into the tippy top schools are highly qualified. But there is not enough room for all of the highly qualified student that apply. </p>
<p>There are lots of reasons that students make the “lottery”. Sometimes fit. Sometimes hook. Sometimes good fortune. When a student gets into many tippy top schools, it probably means that they had exceptional qualifications and application. In addition, they may have had the advantage of good coaching (either GC or professional).</p>
<p>I feel sorry for Mary and others whose children were rejected from all schools. If a kid attends a public high school without adequate counseling (more and more common in these days of state budget cuts) how is s/he supposed to find out about the concept of safeties? I am very sympathetic. I feel college admissions these days can be gamed by those in the know. </p>
<p>If you or your kid are too busy working to stumble across College Confidential or have the time to read it how are you supposed to know how to play the game? Even though things turned out fine for my kids, I have total sympathy for others with less fortunate results. It makes me very sad. </p>
<p>On the other hand, if all those super-duper-human kids who are getting into the Ivies did not pad their applications then I for one hope to see solutions to global warming, cancer, hunger, the energy crisis and an end to all wars in the next decade! Bring it on.</p>
<p>Even way back in the pre-internet days, college bound students had the concept of safeties to apply to. However, admissions was a lot less competitive back then, so often the local state university was an obvious safety, and even the most selective flagships were safeties for a lot of applicants. Cost of attendance was much lower (after adjusting for inflation) back then, so more schools fell into the financially safe range for a given family income even at list price.</p>
<p>This thread… pinnacle of late 21st century American culture. “It couldn’t possibly be my son’s fault, he’s perfect! It must be that his classes aren’t challenging enough and he got screwed by admissions and the standardized tests aren’t fair and and and…”</p>
<p>Newsflash: Both you (mentalgardener and OP) and your kids screwed up. Your kids screwed up by having [relatively] low GPAs while having much better test scores, which to an admissions officer is invariably a sign of laziness. In addition, it seems as if your kids applied for too many reaches and matches without finding any true safeties. This is as much your fault as it is theirs.</p>
<p>In addition to retention rates, some schools have large study abroad programs (ie Georgetown, Middlebury) and/or internships in NYC or DC so that spots open up for transfers and make admittance to these schools relatively easier for transfers than for freshman, who will not take advantage of those opportunities until later in their careers.<br>
Also, late bloomers often have significantly better grades, activities and achievements in their senior year of HS that do not get accounted for in the frosh admissions process.<br>
So, I stand by what I said, although I admit this is not necessarily the case for all schools. Will look for some statistics, as so far just anecdotal and common sense.</p>
<p>I think that in both these cases the parents need to think about what was in some of the letters of recommendation. This may not have been just a statistical anomaly, it does not sound like at least some of the options were so reachy.</p>
<p>I wonder too if the OP’s child’s gap year (or the reason for the gap year) was a factor. </p>
<p>It is not always a matter of not picking the right mix of schools. There are other reasons that kids with okay stats don’t get in to some places…</p>
<p>D2 worked with a private counselor. D2 had a long list of ECs she was very involved in. One thing the counselor kept on saying to her was, “You need to keep up your grades, drop some of those ECs if you start struggling in your courses.” He said that too many people believe holistic means great ECs could make up for bad GPA. He said another important factor are teachers LORs. Most of us do not get to read them, but there are key phrases which are kiss of death for top schools, and good LOR do not necessary come from teacher where you are the best student. </p>
<p>Kids with low GPA and very high test scores, very likely also do not have glowing LoRS. I am sure there is nothing more frustrating to teachers than to have students who don’t perform to their potential. More often than not, those very smart students probably have lower grades by not doing their homework.</p>
<p>A lot of what D2’s counselor said were all common sense and what many parents know on CC. For us, it was easier coming from the counselor than from us, especially when D2 had to cut back on some ECs.</p>
<p>Private counselors??? it NEVER crossed my mind. And I have money! Sink or swim, succeed or fail - no college acceptance comes with a “life guaranty” - parents are perpetuating this myth and feeding the education bubble of perception and prestige. It’s all garbage.</p>
<p>Find a school you can afford - excel there. LIVE life to its fullest.</p>
<p>Little bit judgmental? We all choose to spend our money differently. In our case, most of it went to our kids’ education.</p>
<p>Hindsight - hiring private counselor was the best thing we did, even though the original reason was because we were moving outside of US and we weren’t sure if D2 could get the right guidance at her new school.</p>
Sink or swim, succeed or fail - no college acceptance comes with a “life guaranty” - parents are perpetuating this myth and feeding the education bubble of perception and prestige. It’s all garbage.</p>