<p>I seriously doubt the ND is binning apps with ACT scores below 33. Rather, it seems likely that for students that fall into the category of pure academic admits - no great hooks, no legacy, no athletic recruitment, etc. - they established a few key criteria to winnow down the numbers. I think the hook part is the key. As ND's apps rise, they will receive lots of apps from "typical great students" - if you don't have some major personal accomplishment or other factor in the app, it will be increasingly difficult to get in.</p>
<p>As far as the legacy part, I think it has a lot to do with the way ND thinks of itself and the way students bond with the school. IMO, that's probably the biggest advantage of ND - if you go there, you are a Domer for life. That's true to some degree at many schools, but nowhere as much so as ND. I suspect that ND gives legacies more of a boost than some schools specifically to maintain the bonds that hold generations of ND grads together.</p>
<p>Hoedown-what I meant by that was that you seemed to be entertaining the thought that the cut off was a possibility, after doubting it in an earlier post. Only the people in the admissions office will ever know for sure, and I only know that we were told they used one this year. I wouldn't classify what goes on as bad faith, shenanigans, etc., but you have to admit that ND has some peculiar practices, or at least an unfortunate inability or unwillingness to be upfront about those practices. It's really not important in the big scheme of things, but if ND is becoming less? attainable to the non-connected or those with a hook, well then, isn't it better that people know that? Average Joes, (well average by CC standards) should know that the statistics they read about ND admissions do not contain all the facts about the percentage of kids that get in through a hook. It's just a school, but unfortunately there are a lot of kids in this country that want to be a part of that 'mystique.' Maybe now more will be aware of what they are up against, and GC's and students that inquire will be given a legit reason-if there is one other than there just wasn't enough room for so many kids of equal caliber AFTER we filled a large percentage of the class with kids we had to take. Bleh-the whole thread got off track, re-read the original title-it's not supposed to be about fairness, just honesty. It really is (was) quite simple.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It's very un-Christian of Notre Dame to admit less admissible legacies, recruited athletes, development cases, etc. That's just corrupt and evil!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Is it any less unchristian for Notre Dame to accept the monies generated by these recruited athletes (Didn't the footbal team just have a bowl game which generated big $$ for the school)? </p>
<p>Maybe it is just plain evil for the school to take the donations that come from legacies and developmental admits (where do you think the monies for need based financial aid in the form of grant/scholarship aid comes from- other people's parents)?</p>
<p>after all has been said and done, colleges admit a class of students that are aligned with their institutional missions. Yes, this means that they will have legacies, developmental admits, athletes, urms, rocket scientists, dancers, musicians, good deed doers and just some plain ole folks who show the promise to do extraodinary things </p>
<p>I think one of the bigger issues at hand that right now there are plenty of stellar students and limited numbers of seats at a school and you really don't hear any school talking about increasing the size of the freshman class. Sadly, this will go on for a few more cycles and colleges are not going to be able to admit all of the wonderful students who toss their hat into the ring.</p>
<p>Catholic schools should provide a free education. The more you give, the more you get, remember? It is corrupt to admit a less admissible student simply because of money. Such practice is against the social justice ideals that the University professes. It would be better for the university to go bankrupt than to do this. </p>
<p>I cannot believe how materialistic Notre Dame is.</p>
<p>Football is perceived as a male/masculine sport. Unless Notre Dame makes a move towards gender equality, it should abolish its football program. Condoning its existence (and generating money from it!) is against the Catholic ideals of social justice. This is outrageous.</p>
<p>I think one must realize that early action is a different ball game than regular decision. ND will admit to anyone that they are only looking to accept kids who would DEFINITELY have been accepted regular, and consequently many kids in the gray area (under 1450, under 33) find themselves rejected when the worst they expected was a deferral.</p>
<p>I think from now on if anyone has ANY doubts about an EA app, go regular because early action is a tough, tough nut to crack.</p>
<p>If anyone is in the mid 50% range I would caution towards applying regular rather than early. Especially this year, with a 1200 applicant jump.</p>
<p>As for legacies, even they weren't in the clear this year. I have heard stories all over by hopping mad alumni mad that their kid with a 1350 and 3.5 GPA was out right rejected this year.</p>
<p>I was admitted early with a 1470. A good friend of mine with almost identical stats was deferred with a 1410. The EA "cut-off" for scores can be misleading because almost all of the kids being admitted (based on the several hundred I have found out about for this year so far) have the excellent EC's, GPAs, service, and all that. So, all things being equal, it must come down to numbers.</p>
<p>3800 applied, 1350ish were accepted Early this year. ND needs the SAT/ACT equalizer when they have 2000 kids with the same clubs, GPAs, and great essays.</p>
<p>Are there athletes, legacies, VIPs, etc admitted who had substandard apps? Absolutely, but sadly a school can't run without an endowment and well...so goes capitalism today.</p>
<p>There's really a lot of conjecture on this post that does make us in admissions not want to talk about our decisions on an individual level. Regardless, I think it's important to understand that at this time of year it's really difficult for admissions officers to address every "Why didn't I get in?" call they get. I've had several calls from guidance counselors since our early decisions went out and I've had to cut them off and tell them that in all fairness to the other applicants I needed to get back to reading (I'm taking a snack break right now :)). The fact of the matter is schools like Notre Dame get far more applicants who can do the work academically than they have spots for in their entering classes. In addition, highly selective colleges and university put far more in to their decisions than just looking at a GPA and SAT. We also look at more than just ECs, rank, legacy status, etc...,; we look at potential for growth, evidence of whether or not the student will take advantage of the opportunities offered at the school, and intellectual curiosity. If this doesn't come through in the application, we're not going to think the student is compelling. Even so, the OP's daughter probably was compelling - like so many kids applying to these schools are! It's easy, though, to just tell someone "This year's pool was the most competitive we've had" and then mention test scores (as most applicants and parents seem to think they are so important) because it's generally applicable to most students who are denied. </p>
<p>This being said, there are some highly selective schools that don't OFFICIALLY have any cut-offs for test scores but do pay VERY close attention to them (for a variety of reasons). However, it seems as though 32 and above ACT scores have been more numerous than in the past (and I work at a school with one of the highest SAT/ACT middle-50%s in the country). It also seems like a lot more students are submitting the ACT than in the past - maybe this is just at my institution though. So maybe the 32+ score isn't AS powerful as it used to be...</p>
<p>All of these posts that been very interesting; however, we need to remember that these applications are being read by human beings. What one thinks is a compelling application, another may be in disagreement... Also, a 4.0 in one high school may not be equivalent to the same grade in another high school.. The only "steady" criteria for many admissions decisions is the score: ACT/SAT. And, unfortunately, sometimes selection comes down to just that with so many qualified students applying.</p>
<p>and wutever 11 AP with a 3.8 unweighted means nothing if you dont have a equivalent SAT/ACT to back it up...some schools can be ridiculously lax about APs where kids who took the AP class ends up getting 3s or 4s in the real test...we offer 26 APs at our school but it's actually real ap class that prepares kids for the tests and the level beyond, unlike the joke APs in some schools, 90% of the kids end up getting 5s, the rests are 4s..if you end up getting a 3, you would have failed the class...
We do AP Physics C mech and E/M in one year...the mid term was a past mech AP test, graded like the AP but without curving...meaning that 57% would have gotten you a 5 on the AP, but you would have gotten an F for the final if you got a 57% on the test...
so you have to consider the "actual" level of the program</p>
<p>Bearcat-a 5 on the AP exam, or even a 4 for that matter shows the student mastered the material. I'm sure the colleges are aware of how AP courses vary in intensity from school to school. But hasn't this thread shown that some people only care about the number? How you got there can be discussed 'til the cows come home. Boy, your school seems awfully number oriented-so here's another. An adcom has read 1,000 apps, 80% which contain mostly 5's with a few 4's, including my D's. Do they go thru and decide which 4's and 5's count due to the 'rigor' of particular HS? I doubt it. I think you would be disappointed to find that a 5 by a student from say a small school in Indiana is as much 5 as one from your 'real' AP's. I think a lot of people are taking themselves way too seriously, considering that NONE of this stuff is going to matter the day you set foot on a campus as a freshman.
As to the post from the admissions officer-point taken and appreciated. I'd love to discuss the large amounts of apps that schools get, and some of the reasons for it, but that is for another thread! lol! I do not envy the decisions you guys have to make. But back to my original posts, I'd still like to know why, in the case of our school, ND seems to be out of reach for non-legacies. And again, these are solid apps, one or two year after year, that are denied-and I tink GC has a legitimate reason to want to learn if there is something about the school, or could it be the a quirk? This HS doesn't send a lot of kids to HYP, kids really don't apply-but typically when they do, they get in. We still have the luxury of living in an area of the country where people are not insane about college admissions. Smart, nice kids can come from anywhere. I'm not sure why the frenzy hasn't caught on here, but I'm glad. I'm sure it's coming. But thanks for taking time out of your reading schedule. I believe someday this whole insanity, along with the high costs will HAVE to be self correcting. Kids will start applying to colleges they WANT to go to, it won't be a contest among parents and over zealous HS kids to see where they can get in. I am amazed and saddened by all of this, and so so so glad my youngest is almost through the process. I think people seem jaded now because the whole process is, without a doubt, one big out of control mess! Smile everyone, April 1st this will be over! My oldest couldn't be happier in college, and I know my D will make the right choice from her acceptances, not look back on the denial, and all will be well. I truly believe it usually is.</p>
<p>I don't know if anyone can tell why a particular high school doesn't do well at a particular college. At my d's school, we have lots of kids getting into HYPS, but many fewer get into Brown even when they get into HYPS; for several years, no one got into Brown. No clue why, and I'm not even sure that admissions could tell us.</p>
<p>we get around 25% going to ivies each year , another 50% gets into top 40 nationals (as per US news) and the top LACs like Williams and crap ....but i hav no idea the top kids get nailed with 20 waitlists at tufts every year it's ridiculous while it is almost safety for most of those kids while the lower tier kids get into tufts with scholarship</p>
<p>It is well-known in our school in MA that top students get waitlisted by Tufts because of so-called Tufts Syndrome. The rumpor is that Tufts ADCOMs are apparently insecure that they get Ivy rejects, i.e., if a kid is good he/she really wants to go to Ivys but keeps Tufts as a backup. So Tufts isn't sure about the yield. Their answer: Waitlist top students and admit second tier students who are sure to accept the offer!
Well, that is what we are told by the GC and passed out students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What one thinks is a compelling application, another may be in disagreement...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This bears repeating. This may not apply in this particular instance, but I have been surprised and disheartened at the disparity between students' and families' self-assessment of their candidacy, and the way the application actually stacks up. Students here will argue very forcefully that their recommendations were "awesome" and their essays were "outstanding" when in truth they have little way to know how these aspects of their application will be received by readers, or how they compare to the other hundred or thousand of applications the readers are evaluating. That kind of confidence is, in a way, admirable, but it leads to distorted discussions here sometimes. (also, for reasons I don't understand, some students also lie about their test scores and grades here) </p>
<p>Any admissions rep can tell you of cases where students were so convinced of their admissability they have taken (or threatened) legal action against schools--when, in truth, their candidacy was nowhere near admissable. I have been told (anecdotally) that this disparity is also true in performance-based applications. I find this personally even more surprising because these are students who have supposedly been subjected to years of more-objective evaluation of their talents. I guess one only need to watch auditions for American Idol to find evidence of this, but I continue to be surprised.</p>
<p>While it may not apply to the students discussed in this thread, I think that this is something to keep in mind when you hear people talking about who got in, who didn't, and who deserved to.</p>