<p>Xiggi, smiles here too. I am glad to know that you know who Paul is!</p>
<p>Carolyn: Thanks for letting us know about the book. This elderly admirer of the "geriatric idol" just ordered herself a copy.</p>
<p>I am also ordering the book and may even become an individual member of the "organization". Mr. Thatcher says that he wants his organization to be a platform for student's views. I'm wondering how the EC's founder will react to the student's opinion that disagree almost entirely with his own. </p>
<p>Mr. Thatcher says that the proceeds of the book will not line his pocket but support the organization. I'll make sure to obtain a copy of the EC future tax returns and check the ratio of expenses to income, and especially check Mr. Thatcher salary. </p>
<p>Mr. Thatcher says he will combat the commercialization of the admission process. That does not stop to find his funding at collegenet.com, a company that is hardly the Mother Teresa of education. </p>
<p>It doesn't surprise me that his book and views are popular among the NACAC crowd. That is the same group which believes to do a good job in educating the students about the college admission process. I'm wondering if that same group ever questioned why the cottage industry of commercial started abd became hugely successful? Could it be that students and parents got fed up of receiving erroneous and misleading advice from a bunch of counselors who could not be bothered to stay on top on their "game"? </p>
<p>Let me be clear that I am not against the views expressed by Mr. Thatcher. My problem is that they are naive and utopian, and worse of all, constitute really bad advice for students in 2005. It is one thing to read the papers written by the MIT and Harvard gurus that decries the current situation that does not allow students to regain their happy childhood. It is another thing to believe it to be genuine and fail to prepare a competitive application for the same schools. </p>
<p>Not until the college themselves clearly demonstrate a change in their admission records will the message of Mr. Thatcher make any sense for our most selective colleges. As long as we will witness single digit admission rates in schools, the key will be to remain ultra-competitive. Will the good old days of great success for well-rounded kids ever return and lazy days at the GC office? They do not have to "return" as they never left. Well-rounded bright kids still find plenty of great schools -the type that the followers of Mr. thatcher will attend. The problem is that you won't find them listed in the first pages of the UsNews -the report everyone hates but still uses as yardstick.</p>
<p>Xiggi, I hope you will read the book. </p>
<p>It is very, very different from what you think it is. There is lots of useful information in there for both students and parents but more importantly, it gives an insider's view as to how admissions really works that is refreshing, although disturbing at times. Anyone interested in higher education SHOULD read this book.</p>
<p>By the way, I have read several in-depth articles about Mr. Thatcher in the Chronicle of Higher Education - he is not making much of a profit, if any, from the Conservancy and has in fact put his own financial well-being at risk (mortgaged his house, quit his job, etc.) to do something about a system he believes is not working. He is also facing quite a bit of grumbling from the higher ed community. He rightly believes that UNTIL these issues are brought out and discussed in public, there will be little change. The impression I get is that getting those issues out into public discussion is his primary mission, not necessarily changing the system overnight. </p>
<p>Frankly, I think his viewpoints - and those of the contributors to his book - are thought-provoking and initiate an important dialog about the future of higher education in this country. </p>
<p>So, before you slash the book, read it. I'm sure you'll find plenty to disagree with in there, but I would bet a few bucks that you will also find plenty that you DO agree with. I'm certain that you will particularly enjoy the essay about how the College Board has strayed from its original mission. :)</p>
<p>I have not read this book. As Carolyn says, it brings these issues out into the open and perhaps is not giving solutions. Still, these issues need to be addressed with the way selective college admissions has become in recent years. And yes, Xiggi, it is true that unless the current situation at selective colleges changes in some ways with regard to admissions, kids still have to attain a competitive edge or play the game of selective admissions. I get your point and it is well taken. </p>
<p>One thing, however, that you, Xiggi, mention near the end of your post...and that had to do with your belief that bright well rounded kids can't find a place at the top schools. I kinda disagree on that. I realize that today there is that notion of that unique or special "hook" and I do believe that helps. But I also believe that kids who are well rounded and excel in several areas both in and outside the classroom, also can find a place. I am only saying that from experience. I do have one child who is what most think of as the epitome of the term "well rounded". She never chose to specialize. True, she has exceled in these areas, but she is not at the top nationally in any one of these areas because to do that, you must specialize. She never wanted to specialize and give up some areas she had a life long interest in. In fact, one of her college essays was on the theme of this well rounded lifestyle and balancing of all these areas of her life. She still got into several selective schools. I interview kids for a selective university and some of the kids that stand out to me in my interviews are a bit like she is.....with very full active lifes that are quite well rounded. I know this bucks the trend of some unique hook but I do think it is possible to be admitted to selective schools with a well rounded life where you have achieved in several areas, not just one. Just my experience, I suppose.</p>
<p>Susan</p>
<p>Xiggi: it's amusing that your "geriatric idol" zinger drew more response than your zingers about the "Education Conservancy," which are savagely funny.</p>
<p>Xiggi: I have to heartly agree with your statement re: US news & world reports. As a former adcom, I would love to see it disappear off the face of the earth! I've been out of admissions for quite some time, but I never liked the fact that as soon as it was introduced and people (i.e. students & parents) started paying attention to its rankings, schools felt they needed to tout their standing, instead of simply communicate the message of their school's mission and majors & programs.
There were plenty of schools guides in the guidance offices for students or parents to use to learn about colleges (like Talbot's & Peterson's). And with the development of websites & using computers to search for a school that fits YOU, the student who wants to attend & earn a degree, I would think it would be even easier for students to navigate the college process.
But for some reason students look to US News to tell them what's the BEST or TOP TEN & feel that those are the only schools worth looking at or applying to...because with our competitive American nature, why wouldn't you want to go to the best??? Who wants to shoot for 3rd best, or 75th best, or God forbid, a third tier place altogether??
Well, the Ivy League & Stanford or Berkeley or Swarthmore, et. all have always been our top universities & probably will remain that way. But not everyone needs to be there nor should be there. There are many, many fantastic colleges for the vast majority of students out there but they need to be willing to look for them, research them, apply to them & GO to them.</p>
<p>Carolyn and Susan~</p>
<p>I think that I wrote in an earlier post that the excerpts from the book seem to show a lot more wisdom that the positions advocated by the EC. Since I did not read the book, I only discussed the positions that had garnered some publicity to the Boston Globe's and CHE articles. As I said, I will order to book but I am not expecting to find many surprises. I also know that little in the book will change my opinion of Mr. Thatcher true plans. </p>
<p>As you know, I have been a steadfast critic of the job that our HS officials perform in helping students navigate the muddy waters of applying to college. I have reserved my strongest criticisms to the Guidance Counselors. It is really not worth to bother you by reciting my litany of accusations. I also recognize that there are numerous wonderful and effective GC among our schools, starting with the gentleman at Susan's school. That is another example why making generalizations never tells the entire story. </p>
<p>The same danger of generalizations looms large when it comes to the definition of BWRK. I think that the are various degrees of BWRK, and some form a group that represents a very appealing group for the most selective schools. Susan, I think you will agree with me that your daughter does not exactly fit the typical definition. She is obviously bright and well-rounded, but she also excelled at every activity she selected, and had stellar scholastic scores. She did not specialize in any athletic event, but she was good enough to be considered by the coaches from numerous schools, and for different disciplines. Hardly your average BWRK!</p>
<p>The problem with stating any pointed opinion is that it invariably ruffles some feathers. While I applaud the efforts of pioneers who try to change the system, I am also afraid that the messages clamoring for an "easier" system may lull people in a false sense of security. As we speak, there are thousands and thousands of families that, having relied on poor advice, will soon face the agony of multiple rejections. The rejection will be particularly hard for families that were told that it was sufficient to be a BWRK who followed a hard curriculum to gain acceptance at most competitive schools. </p>
<p>Will readers of the book truly understand that the admissions' requirements at our top schools are different from the remaining 3000 schools'? Will readers really understand the implications to refrain from presenting the SAT more than once or twice? </p>
<p>Who knows?</p>
<p>carolyn and others - I could not find it on Amazon as I went immediately to add it to my wish list (which becomes a shopping cart when I get to the free shipping level). I went directly to eduction conservancy website, found directly through google.<br>
This book looks wonderful for us addicts, thought-provoking, and will fill the void left in my reading-fix department left by completion of Gatekeepers so long ago (lol).
Thank you, carolyn.</p>
<p>PS Buying it directly does mean all proceeds support Ed. Conservancy. Plus or minus?</p>
<p>weenie - have had similar thoughts from time to time (tho S did apply to one reach). Comforting to hear of others with those thoughts. Agree that excerpts from this book are also comforting.</p>
<p>I'm thinking that we all know in our gut that there are some things twisted about much of this process. Will we see it "un-twist" in our time?</p>
<p>Xiggi, are you an international student? I recall that you are at some wonderful place (Yale?), but not whether you are an international. Many of your sentence formations ("I have reserved my strongest criticisms to the Guidance Counselors," "It is really not worth to bother you," "may lull people in a false sense of security," "Will readers really understand the implications to refrain from presenting," etc) lead me to assume that English is not your first language. If you are from overseas, how did you learn what it takes to get into a top school? Or if you came to the US and applied from a US school, did you have one of those GC's-from-hell, or a good one? If a bad one, how did you figure out what was needed to get into a top school?</p>
<p>I have not read Thatcher's book, but I would be very interested to know what it is that you feel is most important in top school admissions. Also, I am a parent/friend/counselor (NOT GC!) to a large number of kids who have opted out of the SAT drug and only took the ACT once, yet are in top ten schools and Ivies; could you elaborate on what you think is the problem with refraining from taking the SATs more than once or twice? (Two of my kids took the SATs once apiece - one is at a top ten LAC and one went to a top ten U).</p>
<p>The whole topic intrigues me for personal reasons and because I volunteer with students....I see many changes coming down the pike and welcome any additions to the conversation.</p>
<p>Nedad, I plead guilty! The combination of typing too fast and not indulging in sufficient editing leaves many awkward constructions. While I am not an international, my first language was not English. </p>
<p>I'm trying!</p>
<p>"geriatric idol" And I liked you so much, I had you in my will!! Not after that zinger! One can only guess what you would call B.B. King!!</p>
<p>Xiggi, I hope you know I wasn't insulting you!!! I actually LIKE your constructions - they are very logical! I was just interested in your take on high school GC's and your take on what it takes to get into a top school (I would probably agree with you - I am a former Ivy interviewer).</p>
<p>Concerneddad: Well, Xiggi did confess to liking ABBA. De gustibus and all that :) </p>
<p>Nedad: Google Xiggi for his tips on taking the SAT. We've been urging him to write a book!</p>
<p>marite: Despite my earlier post, I still like Xiggi enough to have let the ABBA comment just pass right over my head!!</p>
<p>BWRKs are truly hurt in the areas where there so many truly stellar candidates who have a handle besides being very good at nearly everything. When I lived in Westchester County, NY, I saw many vals and sals who were good athletes, excellent musicians, active in comm svc with high but not top SATs , and they were generally waitlisted. A very few did get into Cornell and Penn, but most of them ended up going a tier lower. Have yet to see one get into HPY. In Pittsburgh, I have seen some get into HPY,and the kids getting into Brown and Columbia do not seem to hold a candle to the Westchester/NYC kids getting into the same schools. </p>
<p>I'm not sure what can be done about the BWRKs. There are just too many of them these days with parents making sure their kids get exposure to all facets of life. I think these kids are going to lead rich, happy lives, and whether they get into an elite school or not is not that big of an issue. Though if you speak to my brother who is a Duke alum, he feels that ultra selective schools are becoming "freak shows" of sorts with kids that have to have that specialty act. A bit extreme, but you know what he means. He said that he was seeing the crossword puzzle champion, every unusual sport in the world, and some off beat interests that seemed a bit contrived to him when he interviewed. (Duke does not do alum interviews anymore, or they are purely optional these days). I don't quite agree with him but, I can see things moving in that direction. A diverse campus with jagged, intent people who have spent a lot of time on one activity does not necessarily make a productive community. </p>
<p>I am looking forward to reading the book, and Xiggi, I always love reading your viewpoints. And I want to hear other CC readers opinions on these issues. What direction is the elite college admissions going, and which way should it be going?</p>
<p>I have a feeling I will be will hounded forever for that my "geriatric idol" comment. :)</p>
<p>Nedad, I had no problem with your comment, especially since it was correct. I am usually doing a couple of things at the same time, and that does not help.</p>
<p>I'll jot down a few of my thoughts on what it takes to create a competitive application.</p>
<p>I ordered the book and am anxious to read it. In case any of you missed my previous posts, I suggest (for some comic relief) Accept My Kid Please: A Dad's Descent Into College Application Hell by Hank Herman. It is a quick read and absolutely hilarious. You will recognize yourself and your kids in the book. It's on Amazon.</p>
<p>Yeah, Xiggi, I 'm going to post that one on the " I knew I was old when.." thread in the Parent's Cafe for posterity's sake. You zinged a bunch of us. But at least he's older than John Travolta!</p>