<p>Omg. Adcoms have a heart. But you don’t get into a college because you really, really want it- and have since you were in kindergarten- and then that tugs their heart strings and they are oh so miserable. </p>
<p>Be real. This isn’t Christmas were the parent feels guilty if they can’t put the exact presents under the tree that the kid wants. Wanting isn’t everything. Getting into your top college isn’t about emotions, for heaven’s sake, and words like “shattered” are very young thinking. </p>
<p>More than anyone else, adcoms know kids. They spend a chunk of the year on the road, they read thousands of apps, year in and year out, from around the world. They are charged with building the best class they can. They can be sorry for a kid who doesn’t make it. But calling them heartless is a ridiculous extreme- and I wonder if the intent is to get into an argument here. Again.</p>
<p>“You’ve heard from Pizzagirl that low admit rates are only 1.5% of USNWR ranking weight and how it doesn’t matter. However, T26E4 is tired of hearing about “Why is Cornell considered the worst Ivy” I gag when I see idiotic threads like that.” The answer is because Cornell has the highest admit rate. Cornell would not be viewed this way if its admit rate was lower than Harvard’s."</p>
<p>You’ve missed the point entirely. The only people who sit there and compare admit rates and consequently “view Cornell as the lowest Ivy” are insecure, know-nothing high school students, or parents who are from other countries where the choice of college is make-or-break and they foolishly project that to the US. In the real, grown up, sophisticated, they are both excellent schools and that’s that. </p>
<p>I agree @lookingforward! Like my previous post stated, applicants know exactly what they are getting themselves into. There are no tricks, no shell games, no slight of hand. Students work 3+ years to build a resume, take tests, build relationships with teachers for ECs etc. Then hit submit on the common app. Either the ticket is a dud or it’s a winner. Are the adcoms making back door promises of admission that John Q. Public isn’t aware of?</p>
<p>I have said time and time again that it’s the students & parents themselves who have a sense of entitlement. And somewhere it gets ingrained in their heads that they deserve a spot. When in fact, no one deserves a spot. So who should be blamed? The students & parents for feeling entitled? Or the adcoms who are only doing their jobs?</p>
As far as “dreams being shattered is concerned”, a lot of these kids can’t articulate a single specific reason for wanting to go to their “dream school” other than the fact that the school is prestigious and famous. </p>
<p>I can see it in their essays that they haven’t a clue why the school is their “dream school”. There was a “why NYU?” essay this gal proudly posted in the Essay forum about NYU being her dream school. She smugly declared in her post that she had sent it already to NYU so no one could copy it-- she was really pleased w herself! I copied and pasted her entire NYU essay and substituted the name Vandy. The essay read completely fine. It was that generic. </p>
<p>Even the love-sick teenage girls who scream at the sight of justin bieber can articulate what specifically they love about him.</p>
<p>@voiceofreason66 The thing is adcoms CAN’T drastically raise their admit rate even if they wanted to. Your assumption that they take pleasure in keeping admit rates low ignores the fact that there is limited dorms, professors, and classrooms to support those students if more enrolled. Furthermore, the relative number of students admitted stays the same, however more students APPLY each year. Therea nothing wrong with selecting the most qualified among them just as a job interviewer selects the most qualified of applicants. The students know how selective it is going in and the ones who are “crushed” by not getting into ONE school with 10% admit rate need to get over themselves, most move on.</p>
<p>I’ll agree with you that US news overemphasizes perceived prestige and selectivity, but it does NOT always correlate with a better school or academic experience. Indiana University, for instance, has a high admit rate but has a business school comparable to that of Michigan and other much highly ranked colleges and is very highly regarded among employers. Meanwhile, Reed College has academics with the rigor comparable to the University of Chicago, well respected by grad schools, yet with a high admit rate. Similarily, there are quite a few low admit rate schools that most people havent heard of like Cooper Union or College of the Ozarks. Not saying theyre bad schools by any means. Simply that admit rates dont always match reputation</p>
<p>"Imagine how Harvard would be viewed if it actually stated that only kids with 2300 SAT and 3.9 GPA could apply and because of this only a small number of applicants would meet this requirement, the admit rate would drastically increase even though the level of academic achievement of those who attend Harvard would not be much different. "</p>
<p>But that would be a dumb thing to DO, irrespective of impact on acceptance rate. Are you familiar with the US educational landscape at all? There IS no such thing as a “uniform” 3.9 that could be used as a cutoff. Different schools use different scales. A 3.9 at Exeter is not the same thing as a 3.9 at New Trier or a 3.9 at a magnet school or a 3.9 at a rural school or a 3.9 at a school in a rough neighborhood. </p>
<p>@T26E4 From the audio you posted and from the MIT blogs, it seems like those admissions counselors have a bit more invested emotionally than you do. Does it make you a bad person? No. I do however understand the disconnect for you. You aren’t actually making the decisions and you I’m assuming that as an alumni interviewer, you aren’t seeing the application and the essays and letters of recommendation in the way that adcoms. The MIT admissions officers spoke of being brought to the point of tears and the Amherst counselors spoke about holding a rejection for a student they wanted against their coworkers in subsequent days. So if it doesn’t affect you, I guess that’s an egg in your basket. But it seems like for others, they really care about the students and realize that the actual decision is at stake. </p>
<p>“As far as “dreams being shattered is concerned”, a lot of these kids can’t articulate a single specific reason for wanting to go to their “dream school” other than the fact that the school is prestigious and famous.”</p>
<p>Exactly. And voiceofreason unwittingly illustrates it. The only reason he perceives Cornell as “appreciably lower” than Harvard is because of a higher admit rate. Not a real reason based on specific programs, professors, opportunities. More people (per spot) want to crowd Harvard’s doors than Cornell’s doors, so it must be “better.” The un-sophistication of making decisions based on what other people think. It’s like deciding whether you like chocolate or vanilla better by counting how many other people like chocolate or vanilla. </p>
<p>Elite schools often have low admit rates because people recognize their excellence and want to attend, but the low admittance rate doesn’t DRiVE the quality or make one better than the other. </p>
<p>@Pizzagirl A low acceptance rate may drive the perception of quality. Especially for alumni donors who want the school to maintain the illusion of eliteness and prestige. It’s crazy to think that eventually, some of these acceptance rates will be below 5% and eventually, under 4%, and goodness, it may get to 1% as more students apply, and as more qualified students apply. For alum, I imagine that there is a certain je ne sais quoi in being able to say I went to a school that only accepts under 5% of their applicants.</p>
<p>@Pizzagirl I’m pretty sure that @voiceofreason66 is saying that under the pretense that the 3.9 is earned under the same rigor across the board. If you get a 2300 on the SAT, it’s likely that your GPA isn’t inflated and really is just that: 3.9.</p>
<p>Not going to lie, that’s pretty pathetic that UChicago would do that. Biggest prestige snobs in the United States. That is why I find them overrated.</p>
<p>So how do u propose to stop tens of thousands of people from applying lemming-like to harvard to achieve a 60% admit rate? Raise the application fee to $10,000?</p>
<p>“For alum, I imagine that there is a certain je ne sais quoi in being able to say I went to a school that only accepts under 5% of their applicants.”</p>
<p>There is no je ne sais quoi in this whatsoever. </p>
<p>This is how you high school kids apparently imagine grown-up cocktail parties to be like:<br>
“I went to Duke. It’s got a 12% acceptance rate.” Everyone oohs and aahs.
Then the next person says, “I went to Dartmouth. It has an 8% acceptance rate.” More, louder oohs and aahs. Then the next person says, “I went to Harvard, it has a 4% acceptance rate.”<br>
The room breaks in applause, the band starts playing, the ladies swoon, the menfolk are jealous, and within 5 minutes the Harvard guy has 5 job offers and the prettiest girl in the room on his arm. </p>
<p>The grownup world doesn’t work that way. Outside of SOME work and casual conversation, no one much cares where you went to school. And no one is paying attention to acceptance rates except for those whose kids are mid-process. So stop imagining that prestige magically rises and falls every year based in the acceptance rate or that grownups brag about it. </p>
<p>“Not going to lie, that’s pretty pathetic that UChicago would do that. Biggest prestige snobs in the United States. That is why I find them overrated.”</p>
<p>I’m sure they’re devastated that you, a high school senior, find them overrated. I’m sure they will get right on that. </p>
<p>Anyway, time to engage critical thinking skills. These schools all want to ensure they’ve turned over every rock to get these best applicants. That means outreach beyond their backyards (since all colleges and yes that includes Ivies are fundamentally most known in their home region). That drives up the admissions, and the admit rate consequently falls, which is not the same thing as “jacking down the admit rate.” It’s a GOOD thing when schools do outreach so that kids in other parts of the country, or who might not have elite schools on the brain, know they exist. </p>
<p>Since there may be a few posters on this thread who have not already read my opinion on “top” college admissions ad nauseam ( ), I wanted to comment on the statement by NewHavenCTmom that
“And somewhere it gets ingrained in their heads that they deserve a spot. When in fact, no one deserves a spot.”</p>
<p>When a top college is admitting 1500-2000 students, I think it is entirely possible that some of the applicants do <em>deserve</em> a spot.</p>
<p>PG has sometimes analogized the “top” college admissions process to her hiring of a job applicant. This analogy is valid to some extent, but it is limited. I don’t think most people would assume that they “deserved” to be hired by PG, when only one spot is available. Similarly, I don’t think anyone goes around assuming that he/she “deserves” a McArthur award. When the numbers of offers/awards become more numerous, though, the situation shifts. There are certainly people of my acquaintance who believe (and in some cases, correctly) that they “deserve” to be elected to the National Academy of Sciences–there are many more science “slots” available there than among the McArthurs.</p>
<p>If the experiences of the student and their families are limited to their local environments, and they haven’t looked at threads on CC, they may mistakenly assume that the student is among the top 2000 in the country, even if the student goes to Montgomery Blair or New Trier or Harkness (Harker? Harpton?) However, a number of the really top applicants have experiences that go well beyond their local environments. It’s not arrogance to recognize that a person is among the top 2000 of his/her year’s cohort, if that is in fact true.</p>
<p>@Pizzagirl Obviously they will not be in a room bragging about it, but it appeals to them and they are more likely to donate when they see the school lowering it’s acceptance rate and as they see the prestige increasing.</p>
<p>Oh please, voice of reason. No one is saying that adcoms don’t have a heart. What I’m saying is…they aren’t depressed…which is very different.</p>
<p>The reality is that these adcoms…and especially at the very competitve schools…know they will be accepting less than 10% of those who apply. It is their job to find the 10% TO accept. I know a few adcoms. They love their jobs. Yes, they wish the schools could accept some students sometimes…who are not accepted. But to say having to deny admission is causing depression? That is a huge leap.</p>
<p>Plus, anyone taking a adcom job at MIT or the like knows up front that 9/10 applications will go into the deny pile…at least. </p>
<p>Another thing that hasn’t been addressed…at many schools, there admissions is a multipart process. A first pass adcom…and then one who looks in more detail.</p>
<p>And like I said above, all jobs have some part that takes a personal toll on employees. </p>
<p>I have to wonder if this HS senior has ever worked?</p>
<p>@thumper1 I do have a job. Thank you for inquiring. I don’t appreciate you patronizing me.</p>
<p>Again, do many jobs bring people to the point of tears? No. I doubt it. And for two at the same institution, it did. It’s only reasonable to believe that it is echoed in other elite schools.</p>
<p>Callcash- what an odd question. I think people make tough decisions in lots of jobs and those decisions can affect lives. I wouldn’t spend too much time worrying about ad comma.</p>
), I wanted to comment on the statement by NewHavenCTmom that