I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again (even if it’s not perfectly germane here): If Malala Youssafzai wants to go the Harvard, or Yale, or Stanford, they’ll find a place for her regardless of her test scores. The Montana applicant might have other unusual attributes (e.g. Native American heritage, ranching or outdoor experience, et al). Back in the paleolithic era (ie. the early 1970s), the conventional wisdom was that scores over 600 on Math and Verbal SATs indicated to college admissions offices that a student was capable of doing the work at any college. With the re-calibration, you could now raise that to 650+ for each section (and adjust appropriately for the ACT). They are aptitude tests, and most students who will gain acceptance to the top tier of college will be outstanding, not merely competent, but Harvard is perfectly free to determine that a 2050 is adequate when a student demonstrates other outstanding qualities.
“Educated students use their education after they leave the school to impact on their home community” Preciesely why if they are going to take someone it should not be the kid in my example above. It should be someone who is “really” from Montana. Even if he the Mayor’s kid or the dentist’s (or veteraniarian’s) son or his parents are migrant workers who moved to ND because of the oil boom. At least they are part of community. Think Breaking Away and the concept of townies. The Provost’s son in my example is not part of the community and his dad may have a better job at another university before he graduates from Harvard so he is NEVER going back to Montana. In fact, his father was the Vice Provost in some other state until right before this kid started high school so he is barely from Montana.
I do think the kid of educated parents even if they have always lived in Montana would have similar SAT review as the kid from New York. In fact there is a very successful online tutoring company that would be more than happy to help him prepare. Even people from New York use them.
The Nativ American issue would distort this example. We are talking about non URMs from under served states.
“In my opinion, it’s not about having “too many kids from New York” but getting “a couple of kids from Wyoming”.”
Oh if we could only apply this to the ongoing discrimination debates - no one sees wanting a couple of kids from Wyoming as a smoking gun that colleges secretly despise kids from NY.
There are PLENTY of admitted NYers with lower stats, because there are plenty of development case families that live in NY.
I think the Ivies have geographic diversity because a person from Montana generally is much different from a student in NYC. They live under different circumstances (one rural, one urban), the schools are different (one generally better, one generally worse) etc. and that is what constitutes diversity.
Also, it is much harder to get a 2400 in Montana than in NYC generally, as there are a plethora of SAT Prep classes in NYC while you basically have to study by yourself in Montana. There are generally less opportunities in Montana than in NYC so if you have 2 kids who have the same stats/achievements, but one came from a more privileged background, you would generally want the less privileged kid because he had to overcome many more obstacles to get to that point.
Ivies don’t HAVE to admit somebody from a particular state if they don’t want to or if they don’t see any potential. Princeton accepted 0 kids from Nebraska a few years back.
Don’t engage in the CC fallacy that everyone in Montana ( insert other state of your choice) is some kind of hayseed. Have you ever been to the mansion district of Helena? I assure you there are families there who are well to do, well traveled, educated and who could buy and sell plenty of New Yorkers for lunch.
It matters very little. It may be like ooh. But it would only be as big as winning a regional writing contest or something. There are definitely powerhouses from Montana just as there are unexpected turnouts in New York
@GMTplus7 I agree to an extent… NY is sort of a cesspool of different people of different cultures. You can have the poorest 1% and the richest 1% (in the US) living on the same block (i.e Park Ave)… It just sucks that people assume that the entire applicant pool from NY is consistent of these Dalton, trinity, Ramaz, and stuy students. Do AO also generalize on NY applicants?
I want you to think about this. Why would you think that adcoms wouldn’t be fully aware that NY encompasses all different types of people/backgrounds? Why would you expect to them to think all NYers are Dalton types or Stuy types?
@Pizzagirl Because ADCOMS want their schools to seem appealing for all potential applicants. Theoretically speaking… HYPSM can admit all of their students from NYC… Regardless of the dalton stuy ramaz and trinity types… But they dont… Because they want geographic diversity. Therefore when a NYer applies… theyll just assume that hes an “elite”. Which is particularly disadvantaging when you dont go to stuyvesant or any feeder school
This is a silly discussion. Adcoms are far more aware than you are giving them credit for.
@Pizzagirl but they still need geographic diversity
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
This thread is now just going around in circles. I’m therefore closing.