Best way to help a kid get past a rejection?

<p>Tell them the truth: They just aren't that good enough for that school. They'll appreciate the honesty.</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Spoken by someone who is a kid and doesn't have kids, I'm sure...</p>

<p>Umm, spoken by a kid who understands other kids and is in high school going through the college process with hundreds of other kids. I'm pretty sure I understand "kids" and their thought processes. They don't want to hear that Harvard is making a mistake for not picking them. Obviously Harvard doesn't make mistakes.</p>

<p>You misunderstand a basic tenet of child rearing. When a kid does something bad, you don't say, "YOU are a bad boy." A parent says, "you have done a naughty thing." You don't label and personalize the kid himself for his actions. You call the behavior bad.</p>

<p>When a kid doesn't get into Harvard, you don't say, "YOU are not good enough."</p>

<p>"Obviously Harvard doesn't make mistakes."
Does the name Larry Summers ring a bell?</p>

<p>We've been preparing for this from the start. For reasons discussed at length in another thread, my son applied to 16 schools including 5 Ivies and several NESCACs. Some would have to be reaches and some the college counselor called probables or safeties. My son and I have discussed explicitly how much of a crapshoot admission to these schools is, how they don't necessarily looked for the best kid academically but want to create a "well-rounded class out of angular participants," and how not getting in to any or all of these schools will not say anything about him. We also discussed the fact that some schools might reject him outright because they don't want to mess with a kid with learning disabilities, no matter how bright, or because his application is complicated to read (partial public high school, partial home school, art supplement, many recs).</p>

<p>We discussed as an example, his Moot Court partner, who was a pretty good student, a pretty good runner, who got into a prestigious NESCAC school last year. My son was a much, much stronger student and was told that in the semi-finals of Moot Court that the judges had to decide whether to let a team with one strong partner (my son) and one weak one to win even though the strong one by himself had beaten a pretty good team. They let his team win but were explicit about the issue. But we discussed how my son might not get into that same school and it clearly had nothing to do with his intellectual capabilities, grades or board scores, but might have to do with the school's desire to get a pretty good runner who was also a pretty good student. So, we've been preparing and I hope that means we are prepared.</p>

<p>A quick note to StevenW. There are many more qualified candidates to Harvard and elsewhere than there are spots. So, aside from the first couple of hundred absolutely stellar kids, there isn't much difference among the next few thousand (great grades, great board scores, great ECs, great essays) and the admissions folks will probably tell you they could have gone either way on quite a few. So, giving guidance to someone who is not admitted does not mean pretending that the infallible Harvard made a mistake, but merely that you the applicant were one of a number of completely qualified kids who didn't get in, or if it was a long shot (e.g., you weren't one of the next few thousand, the parent would be saying, well, you tried but you knew it was a long shot. In neither case is the parent saying, "poor little you, you should have gotten in and some mean rotten kid got in in your place" but instead is saying something a lot more accurate.</p>

<p>Just as an aside, an investment management company that I helped start hired a bunch of kids from MIT, Harvard, and Princeton (maybe others). By far the best (brightest, most entrepreneurial, most productive) of all was someone who didn't get in to any of those schools but went to UMass Amherst. Without a doubt, I'd say that Harvard, among others, didn't pick the strongest kid. Was that a mistake?</p>

<p>
[quote]
"Obviously Harvard doesn't make mistakes."
Does the name Larry Summers ring a bell?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, and Andrew Fire didn't get into Stanford. He is now on their faculty and won the Nobel Prize. There are other indications of excellence than just one school's admissions, and often they conflict with one another. There's a guy on the MIT board that made RSI, USAMO, and had a 4.0 at Thomas Jefferson HS. He got rejected by MIT.
Should we tell him he's not as good as MIT admits with no awards and who got B's in math or science? No, because he's in fact better than most of the admits.</p>

<p>^^at the beginning of the college application process, my husband made some sort of complicated calculations of national #of valedictorians/salutatorians & perfect/near perfect SAT scorers & national award winners (also noting athletes and legacy considerations which might even overlap the first group) compared to available freshman spots at ivy/elites where our kids would be applying designed to show there just weren't enough spots to go around for all the super qualified applicants.</p>

<p>That would seem to me a good approach well in advance of the OP's question.</p>

<p>I've never heard of Larry Sandberg. And I still believe Harvard is flawless.</p>

<p>Just tell your son to be thankful for being alive and being smart, and stop obsessing about college. In the great scheme of things, where you go to college doesn't really matter that much. I work at a community college where students are grateful to be getting any kind of a college education. All this hand-wringing over prestige and Ivy League is really disingenuous. It doesn't exactly create the right kind of adult that this country needs right now.</p>

<p>@alh, The student to whom collegealum was referring is actually somewhere beyond "super qualified," in your husband's scheme. Are you familiar with the RSI program at MIT (and the numbers of students it takes) or the USAMO (and the number of qualifiers)? The student in question was also a Siemens and Intel semi-finalist, I'm pretty sure. The 4.0 at Thomas Jefferson was among his least note-worthy accomplishments, but you ought to look up the average SAT scores for Thomas Jefferson to get some idea of the quality of his fellow students. This was just another of those weird MIT decisions. There were two I noticed on the CC MIT forum last year, one who wound up at Caltech and the other at Harvard. From the standpoint of a scientist, I'm reasonably sure that MIT could not fill half of their class--let alone have all the top schools fill their classes--with people at the intellectual level of this young man. I don't know the young man and we don't live anywhere near the East Coast, but I surely do empathize with him.</p>

<p>I think ParentofIvyHope was praising the MIT decision making process as being particularly clear, but it always seemed pretty opaque to me. That said, it was my judgment that while MIT was a better fit for my son than Harvard that he had about a 50% chance of getting into Harvard and only a 24% chance of getting into MIT. And as it happened he got rejected from MIT (after being deferred) and into Harvard. So perhaps their admissions wasn't so opaque after all!</p>

<p>My D is still waiting to hear from almost all of the schools she applied to and she had a reach-heavy list. She and I have talked quite a bit about the possiblity that she will get a bunch of rejections in the next few weeks. However, her plan is to immediately post rejections on her Facebook page and have friends console her (I guess they are standing by at the ready). She got rejected from MIT last week and seemed to get over it pretty quick after talking to friends. </p>

<p>D has gotten into her two safety schools and I tried talking them up yesterday but that just upset my D because she thought I sounded too pessimistic about her chances at the other schools. Whatever I try to say usually doesn't turn out to be the right thing to say. So I think I will try to be helpful and comforting but realize that what her friends say is really what makes the biggest difference at this time in her life. </p>

<p>Getting accepted seems to be hard also. A friend asked me to keep it a secret that her D got into a particular school because one of her friends was rejected and was quite upset. Another girl at their school got a likely letter from Stanford but seemed to be playing it down so as not to upset everyone else. It probably makes a difference that my D goes to an all-girls school and emotions are always running pretty high. I can't wait for April 15 when everything is settled.</p>

<p>Quantmech: I apologize if my post sounded callous and am even sorrier if this is your child. This is actually a situation close to my heart and which still pains me. I do know what all those programs and awards are (they were included in the national award winner component of the formula) and have a remarkably similar child, who after being laser beam focused on MIT for some years and after a call from MIT to clarify the FA application was waitlisted. He had other excellent choices and did not pursue the waitlist. If the parents of the child alluded to above are reading this post – my kid got happy real quick at another school and had all acceptances for grad school.</p>

<p>Obviously my husband’s approach included more than a bit of exaggeration, but we had been very concerned from the beginning of the process that everyone was telling our kid MIT was an absolutely sure bet and we just didn’t see that there were any sure bets in this process. There weren't. Still it was very very difficult.</p>

<p>No need to apologize, alh, I didn't think your post sounded callous. Also, I don't know the student. But I do think that your husband's analysis is factually wrong with respect to students at the level of qualification of this young man--he's "Waiting for Godot," I'm reasonably sure. And from what you've just posted, your husband's analysis may well have been wrong with respect to your son as well.</p>

<p>I'm glad the alternative worked out well for your son--and from what you've said, the grad school acceptances would have been predictable. Five to seven years from now, when your son is on the job market, ask him to seriously estimate how many people were actually qualified at your his own level, at college entrance time. I'd be willing to bet it will be fewer than 1500 by quite a lot! </p>

<p>I have a reasonably good handle on the number of academic job openings in chemistry and physics each year, and the number of suitable candidates who are on the market. It just doesn't project backwards to such a huge number of genuinely exceptionally qualified students at the time of college admissions. If one argues that the students are hard to differentiate, I'd agree--but that should be the responsibility of the people in admissions. </p>

<p>On the other hand, I'm not gainsaying the <em>wisdom</em> of your husband's approach (as opposed to its accuracy), because some MIT admissions decisions have been--in all honesty--peculiar in the past few years, and it was just as well to be prepared for the possibility. </p>

<p>Also, I'm not endorsing everything in Waiting for Godot's viewpoint. In particular, I support affirmative action. MIT could have made an equal number of AA admits, while making different decisions about majority males. I believe that they are admitting some majority males who are weaker than the ones they are rejecting.</p>

<p>No one in our household has applied to MIT in the last 38 years. (But they took 100% of those in our household who applied, back then.)</p>

<p>
[quote]
But I do think that your husband's analysis is factually wrong with respect to students at the level of qualification of this young man--he's "Waiting for Godot," I'm reasonably sure. And from what you've just posted, your husband's analysis may well have been wrong with respect to your son as well.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Quantmech: You and my son are scientists. My husband and I are not. The only point to the exercise was to emphasize to son how many very fantastic applicants there were. It was clear to us there were very few applicants that looked as good on paper as he did but that wasn’t the point; son, being a math/science guy was doing different kinds of calculations which all pointed to his unquestioned admittance to MIT. Every other adult he knew never considered the possibility he might not be admitted. We could have gone further into variables other than academics that might favor other candidates but preferred not to for a variety of personal reasons. Our personal approach was that, regardless of how special you are and how many goldstars you have, there are lots of special goldstar winners out there in the wide world. Because we think high achievers (or super achievers) sometimes need to hear that. Not every parent will agree. And obviously some kids need a lot more positive reinforcement and encouragement than others regardless of their accomplishments. </p>

<p>I rarely read the student forums but an hour ago just looked briefly at the MIT one and the speculation there. Who can ever know what is going on but I will throw out my own wild speculation: just maybe MIT is also looking at where they think that student has already been accepted, will be accepted, and what sort of attractive scholarship awards may be offered. Maybe they decide that competing at this point for that particular student will be unsuccessful and if they think there is no possibility of acceptance may just reject the applicant outright. Sort of a wacky variation of when the ultimate safety school rejects an overqualified applicant. Or if they think there may be a slight chance maybe they prefer to just waitlist with the idea that the student could approach them if interested. That may all be totally off base. Probably it is. No one has to tell me I am full of it. But I like it better than what I was reading. I do think one of our jobs as parents is to help our kids learn to be gracious losers. Sometimes this is difficult when kids get a long ways along in life before ever losing at anything.</p>

<p>And although this is obviously still distressing to me years later (even though my first choice for him had never been a tech school LOL). It was only distressing to my son for a couple of days at most! I don’t know any students who haven’t loved the college where they ended up regardless where it was ranked on the original list. Overall, I think it is much harder on us parents. JMHO</p>

<p>sorry for the length of the post from a parent not even involved in the current process!</p>

<p>
[quote]
I've never heard of Larry Sandberg. And I still believe Harvard is flawless.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>LOL. I love this guy.</p>

<p>BTW, Larry Summers was the president of Harvard and won a well-known award (Bates Medal) in economics for being the brightest economist under 40. 40% of Bates winners win the Nobel Prize in Economics, so its a big deal. He also was the Secretary to the Treasury under Bill Clinton. He also was one of the youngest faculty member ever to gain tenure at Harvard--at 28. Yet, he was rejected by Harvard when he was 18. (He went to MIT, then Harvard for grad school.) I doubt his rise was much of a surprise--two of his relatives won the Nobel Prize (pretty good genes!)</p>

<p>Larry Sandler is a well-known comedian--> so I suppose Larry Sandberg might be a really funny economist.</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>My D and I had the "happy friend" talk. As disappointed as she may be with her college results, I told her that it is important that she be happy for her friends who had good news. It's tough to be happy for someone else when one got in and the other one didn't at the same school, but it is bound to happen this year and being happy for your friends in the wake of bad news for yourself is a mark of maturity.</p>

<p>Plus Larry Summers is doing something in the Obama economic team as the director of the National Economic Council. Hope he can come up with something that works! Hmmm--entered MIT at age 16...did he try to transfer to Harvard when he was 18?</p>