<p>I would suggest that you endeavor to show the AdComs just WHO you are and why they MUST admit you instead of others with similar credentials: not everyone can author a book, qualify for the Olympics, or start a Model U.N. chapter that wins coveted prizes in the first year of competition, for example. The key to admission to the elites is to stand out. Don’t tell CC what your unique quality is; keep it to yourself and for the AdComs!</p>
<p>Good luck!</p>
<p>Barristerdad, have you had a good look at the common data sets for top schools? When you take a close look you understand that for the unhooked candidate, SATs matter much more than many people here acknowledge. A 700 in any section is simply sub par at the top schools, and when you consider that 40% of every class have a hooked, it becomes clear that a candidate who does not have a hook and scores 700 is unlikely to be admitted. Every college counselor we consulted (including former ivy adcom) with 3 kids advised retaking a 700, even before things became as nuts as they are today.</p>
<p>Fair point, hmom5. I just happen to disagree with you. If you consult folks like Elizabeth Wissner-Gross, Michelle Hernandez and Rachel Toor (authors and/or college consultants) they can bring some clarity that you might not find on the college board site. I have talked with two of these ladies and they are amazing and prescient!</p>
<p>More particularly, our public school’s valedictorian last year had supreme credentials
(2370 SAT, 2370 SAT IIs, most rigorous curriculum, top notch ECs, etc.) and was denied at both Harvard and Yale after a long wait list. It is difficult to know why. The reasons are always complex. However, there are a few admittees, I suspect, with 700 SAT subscores, that stood out otherwise in their applications.</p>
<p>The kids that don’t have special hooks must stand out. While I would concede that it is better to have a 2390 than a 2290, what do you do with the kid that has a combined 2290 with a 4.00 UW, and the 2390 is combined with a 3.85 UW?</p>
<p>When we parents are finished with getting our kids safely into college, maybe we should collaborate on a book venture ourselves!</p>
<p>Michele post here so maybe she’ll chime in, and I will admit to being a former client who she told to retake a 700 (my oldest 7 years ago!).</p>
<p>Lots of 2300 kids get rejected from HYP and always will, but it doesn’t mean unhooked 2100’s get in!! It means that 2300 plus kids are a dime a dozen applying to HYPS and they need more. Yet very few 2350 kids with top ranks get rejected from the other ivies and top schools, the mystery is much smaller below the holy trinity.</p>
<p>BTW, hmom5, did you hear or hear about the NPR report wherein UChicago’s dean eviserated MH and called her everything but competent? It was really nasty! I have read books by all three (MH, RT and EWG) and must confess that I have not met MH. I think that we can best enhance our learning and aid our children if we explore a variety of sources, and make our own informed choices in concert with our kids.</p>
<p>Have a great Sunday!</p>
<p>Barrister, with 3 kids I’ve done a lot of college exploration! While Michele reminds me of myself and many blunt New Yorker like people that rub some the wrong way, it’s hard to dispute the fact that she is very bright and she has been around the block more than a few times where admissions are concerned. I didn’t always like what she had to tell me (nor did DS!!) but I found her advice more than valid and worth the high price.</p>
<p>Her advice jibes with the data in CDS’s, it’s the RARE candidate that beats the numbers odds and those that do fulfill a specific institutional need. Granted, you never quite know what an institution might find themselves needing, but I stand by my belief that outside of HYPS there are few mysteries in college admissions and the hope that a great essay or rec might overcome a statistical weakness has a slim chance of happening.</p>
<p>buuuuuuuump!</p>
<p>anybody else?</p>