College admissions are so unfair

Applying to College
1

<p>Very few kids are capable of recognizing the importance of doing well in high school by themselves. So, kids with parents who motivate them early on are much more likely to make good grades and take challenging courses than kids with parents who do not motive them.</p>

<p>This is just not fair.</p>

<p>An average kid can get into an elite school easily if their parents send them to a private school, discuss the importance of doing well in school (and force them to do study, etc.), pay for SAT prep, get them into good EC's, etc, etc. Anyone halfway intelligent can get 2150+ on the SAT with prep, and anyone halfway intelligent can make excellent grades in difficult high school classes if they try. </p>

<p>Conversely, a very intelligent kid (I'm not implying I am, by the way) has no chance at good schools if they are raised by parents who, for example, graduated with bad grades from state schools and don't care for academics. Most kids in this environment, being immature as kids typically are, will not try in high school because their parents are only concerned that they 'pass' and never put any significant importance on academics. A kid in this environment is very unlikely to have good EC's (in the minds of colleges), good grades, and so on. Their standardized test scores will be good (given that they're intelligent), but they won't be THAT good given, after all, they didn't prep (or take and try in challenging courses) and the people who scored higher nearly all prepped (with a somewhat small percentage of people who didn't prep either, but are even more intelligent).</p>

<p>The point, I am guessing, at which most kids who have unconcerned parents begin to realize just how important high school, test scores, and everything else are is at some point during senior year (perhaps even later). This is not fair. </p>

<p>Once a kid realizes how important school is, they will, of course, give maximum effort in college. Who would a college prefer having: a smarter kid who will give full effort in college or a dumber kid who will give full effort in college (assuming, for simplicity, that both are equally well rounded otherwise)? Obviously the smarter kid. </p>

<p>So why should colleges choose kids who are obviously dumber (this is a relative term) simply because they made significantly better grades in high school?</p>

<p>Yes, taking the smarter kid with much worse high school grades is much riskier, but let me adjust my point so that I'm only talking about kids with applications that make it clear they have just realized the importance of school and will try in the future.</p>

<p>Example to demonstrate my argument:</p>

<p>I. 2100 SAT, 2.50 unweighted GPA at public school.
II. 1900 SAT, 3.50 unweighted GPA at private school. </p>

<p>Assuming both applicants are equally good in all other areas of the application, who would a college of course take? The second applicant. </p>

<p>But, given that both will try equally hard in college, and given that it wasn't the first applicant's fault that they didn't understand the importance of school (and therefore didn't try) and it wasn't a result of the second applicant's 'goodness' that they tried in high school, it is clear that it is just a joke that colleges will always choose the second applicant over the first. </p>

<p>Closing statement: Just as colleges do not punish students for going to a high school that offers limited AP courses, colleges should not punish students for having parents who do not motivate them to try in school. Sure, there's no guarantee, although I'm assuming the student's application makes it seem likely they will 'redeem' themselves in college, the student who didn't try in high school will try in college, but there is likewise no guarantee the student who didn't have the opportunity to take AP courses will succeed in challenging courses in college even though the rest of their application makes it seem likely they will. </p>

<p>Not fair.</p>

2

<p>SAT's are lame.... hahaha</p>

3

<p>lllklll: Sorry but life's not fair. How about the roughly 3 Billion people who are actually wondering where their next meal is coming from? And each of them who are parents-- who have no hope that even their CHILDREN will ever rise above poverty. Really. Selective schools admissions is nothing in comparison. </p>

<p>While social inequities exist in many forms and you correctly cite some of them, my question to you would be: how do you fix it? Make progenitors become better parents? Give extra points to the kid WHO HASN'T PERFORMED because dad or mom is a doofus? </p>

<p>The solution isn't to lower the bar certainly. Citing a problem isn't hard. What could be a viable sol'n?</p>

4

<p>Whoa, whoa, whoa.</p>

<p>...lol.</p>

<p>I completely agree with everything you said.</p>

<p>I'm simply saying that it is a joke colleges punish kids for having parents who didn't motivate them. They don't punish kids for having parents who sent them to a school without AP courses. It's a joke.</p>

<p>It doesn't make any sense. That is the only point of my thread. I completely agree life is not fair and all of the reasons for me to be grateful for what I have.</p>

<p>I realize LIFE is not fair, but college admissions SHOULD be fair. They're not. It makes me mad.</p>

5

<p>You're saying that colleges shouldn't base their admissions off of your poor freshman/sophomore year grades because it's your parents' fault?</p>

<p>lol.</p>

6

<p>What, is this some kind of excuse for why you didn't make the cut at your favorite college or something?</p>

<p>My parents let me do my own thing throughout all of high school and I didn't need any forced studying or prep courses to get into a top 10 business school.</p>

<p>A halfway intelligent kid can get a 2150 on the SAT, but in reality most kids aren't very smart at all. They watch mtv and listen to rap and live their lives for themselves in the here and now like those things teach them to. Part of showing their intelligence is to make decent grades without having someone there to hold their hand or being paid to show them how.</p>

<p>This thread is founded on backwards logic and petty excuses for apathetic kids who were not intelligent enough in the first place to see past the short-term.</p>

<p>EDIT: I'm white and go to a public school that is over 80% minorities. Let me just say that there are plenty of people here that aren't going to college. I've seen plenty of whatever there is to see and more often than not it's simply living with the consequences of what you've chosen to do instead of anything unfair.</p>

7

<p>"This thread is founded on backwards logic and petty excuses for apathetic kids who were not intelligent enough in the first place to see past the short-term."</p>

<p>Backwards logic how?</p>

<p>Also, "intelligent enough in the first place"....are you kidding?</p>

<p>Kids raised in an environment in which academics are not a major concern are MUCH less likely to see the point in trying in high school. How on earth can you disagree with this statement?</p>

8

<p>"Part of showing their intelligence is to make decent grades without having someone there to hold their hand."</p>

<p>What a horribly wrong comment.</p>

<p>(I just noticed it.)</p>

<p>"I've seen plenty of whatever there is to see and more often than not it's simply living with the consequences of what you've chosen to do instead of anything unfair."</p>

<p>You're missing the point. Most of the people who 'chose' to not try made that choice because they were raised in an environment in which school was not valued.</p>

<p>How many more times must I repeat myself?</p>

9

<p>i'm a firm believer that a 2100 in a school where even 1800s are rare (considered high!) is looked at more highly than a 2200 where the 25th percentile score is a 2400. </p>

<p>actually, i think all schools are firm believers of that...</p>

10

<p>^ Ok, I think I'd agree, but what has this to do with my argument?</p>

11

<p>i skimmed your argument, and thought it had to do with it! don't worry, i will fully read it this time, and give you a complete literary analysis!!!!!!</p>

12

<p>lol</p>

<p>(kadfldkfd;f)</p>

13

<p>i read it.</p>

<p>it supports communism!</p>

<p></p>

14

<p>"Anyone halfway intelligent can get 2150+ on the SAT with prep,"</p>

<p>LoL last time I checked less than 2% of the scorers (thats not even counting dropouts or people who dont take it) can get a 2150. IQ is malleable based on SES but not to the extent your suggesting and this is something that has been studied for ages. Your statement is absurd. Just because your kid cant be an rocket scientist doesnt mean you have to demean people who work hard and are capable of attaining that score.</p>

15

<p>lol</p>

<p>You guessed it!</p>

<p>Well, halfly correctly. I'm a socialist! I'm impressed.</p>

16

<p>"An average kid can get into an elite school easily if their parents send them to a private school, discuss the importance of doing well in school (and force them to do study, etc.), pay for SAT prep, get them into good EC's, etc, etc. Anyone halfway intelligent can get 2150+ on the SAT with prep, and anyone halfway intelligent can make excellent grades in difficult high school classes if they try. "An average kid can get into an elite school easily if their parents send them to a private school, discuss the importance of doing well in school (and force them to do study, etc.), pay for SAT prep, get them into good EC's, etc, etc. Anyone halfway intelligent can get 2150+ on the SAT with prep, and anyone halfway intelligent can make excellent grades in difficult high school classes if they try. </p>

<p>Not true at all. I know students who took expensive prep courses and had parents who provided all sorts of other support, but still couldn't break 1800 on the SAT.</p>

<p>There also are plenty of students who study very hard, but still aren't able to even crack a 3.0 in high school.</p>

<p>"Most of the people who 'chose' to not try made that choice because they were raised in an environment in which school was not valued."</p>

<p>I know plenty of professors' kids -- including mine -- who got mediocre grades in h.s. due to lack of effort despite having been raised in families in which education was highly valued. I even know a professor's son (not mine) who got an 800 on his SAT CR, and an "F" in AP English because he didn't bother to do the homework.</p>

17

<p>"Anyone halfway intelligent can get 2150+ on the SAT with prep,"</p>

<p>LoL last time I checked less than 5% of the scorers (thats not even counting dropouts or people who dont take it) can get a 2150. IQ is malleable based on SES but not to the extent your suggesting and this is something that has been studied for ages.</p>

<hr>

<p>Ok, I'm admittedly exaggerating for effect. Bump my numbers down a bit, and my point still remains.</p>

18

<p>Not true at all. I know students who took expensive prep courses and had parents who provided all sorts of other support, but still couldn't break 1800 on the SAT.</p>

<p>There also are plenty of students who study very hard, but still aren't able to even crack a 3.0 in high school.</p>

<hr>

<p>Another case where I'm exaggerating for effect. </p>

<p>...I should have backed down on my numbers, lol.</p>

19

<p>It's called Socio-economic discrepancy, and its a problem with no solution. </p>

<p>It's been like this for all of human history. </p>

<p>The ancient nobility rose from the ruling class with enough money to educate their children, knights arose from those who could pay for their titles/armor/horses/weaponry, European officer commissions were purchased from the state with no regard for military or leadership ability, British Public schools account for less than seven percent of all British children but have 44 percent of acceptances at Oxford. </p>

<p>Considering that inequality was set in law for the vast majority of human history, I'd say we're at the good end of things. </p>

<p>and the best students wouldn't need parents to push them to higher standards.</p>

20

<p>Exagerating lol, more like lying. Top 2% of test takers (which is a 2140 according to the CB) not even the whole population isnt halfway smart its damn smart. Your points are rediculous and are easily refuted by numerous studies of which I am too lazy to post.</p>