Family Gets Lesson in Admissions

Parents Forum
401

<p>One of the points of my earlier post about children who got help from their parents was that just because a kid is "packaged" -- and, believe me, I am just as disgusted with what I read/hear as any of you, except that some of it just seems silly to me -- doesn't mean that the kid doesn't really have the goods. Mozart was packaged by his father, too, and it doesn't matter, because it turned out that he was Mozart. Same thing with Tiger Woods, as curmudgeon pointed out (although I don't share his suspicion that there are horrible psychic scars there -- he really seems remarkably free of them). It does seem a little yuckier when Dad hires a consultant to do the packaging, but that's just efficient division of labor.</p>

<p>I don't know whether to feel proud or guilty about how little I have done to "package" my kids. They'll just have to stand in line with all of the other unpackaged little overachievers -- no book contracts, no patents, no charities founded, no worlds saved, ECs an unfocused, eclectic mess . . . . I take comfort from the observation that other such kids still seem somehow to wind up at colleges I admire, for the most part.</p>

402

<p>JHS, you are right...strong students with significant accomplishments, even if not amazing, still get into very selective schools. </p>

<p>Packaged ones may get in, as well, but some who do some fairly ordinary endeavors but do them extremely well out of interest, also get in. </p>

<p>And those who have done some very good things, were not all packaged to the point of coming up with a game plan and seeking something out of the ordinary or finding connections. I am not as cynical as some.</p>

403

<p>It was interesting to me that Byerly, the Harvard advocate who posts often on the Harvard board, recently posted that Harvard likes kids who take a gap year. As Jazzymom stated above, HYP are looking for kids who have already reached their potential for the most part. Hence, I believe, the gap year emphasis. They want early bloomers. And if not early bloomers, then kids who have taken the time to bloom before they arrive on campus. Other schools, one notch less selective, are willing to bet on potential.</p>

<p>Why should that be? If I am friendly, well, because the HYPs of the world think the early bloomers will lend more to the campus. If I am disgruntled, perhaps because the early bloomers, with their media-worthy resumes, add more to the prestige/brand of the college they attend. If I am truthful, well, then I admit that I just have zero idea....</p>

404

<p>"As Jazzymom stated above, HYP are looking for kids who have already reached their potential for the most part. "</p>

<p>That's not actually true. HPY want students who have excelled and isn't looking for late bloomers. However, HPY also wants students who are blooming and will continue blooming in college and afterward. A big part of the HPY experience is the campus EC experience. Consequently, those colleges want students who already have shown lots of passion, creativity and independence in being active in ECs of all kinds.</p>

<p>The kind of students who have done a lot in h.s. only to get into college, and plan to rest on their laurels once in college are not the kind of students Harvard wants.</p>

<p>"Other schools, one notch less selective, are willing to bet on potential."</p>

<p>Probably those schools also would like to have the students who are blooming and plan to keep blooming, but, in general those students get snapped up by HPY and are likely to turn down the one notch less selective schools that accept them.</p>

<p>Some of those schools that are a notch less selective have excellent merit aid to attract the kind of blooming students that normally get snapped up by HPY. Examples of this are the excellent merit aid packages offered by Washington U, Emory and Vanderbilt.</p>

405

<p>To be clear, I did not mean reached their potential for the rest of their lives. I mean reached their potential as high school students.</p>

406

<p>Thanks for the clarification, Alumother. I agree.</p>

407

<p>NSM,
I totally agree with your post #404 !</p>

408

<p>Packaging is a term that has different meaning to different audiences. There is a difference between presenting a candidate in the best light possible, stretching the truth a bit, and finally creating a franken-candidate. This later category does include the use of activities that are simply well beyond the capabilities or understanding of a typical student and the blatant embellishment of otherwise pedestrian accomplishments. </p>

<p>People seem to uncover new fountains of "tricks" to fool overworked and probably overly indulgent admission officers on a regular basis--enough of them to even write a book about it. Books with phantom authors, misleading definitions of awards, fabricated extra-curriculars, and pure of simple exxagerations of the value of certain "accomplishments." --such as merely filing an application at the USPO--all lead to fool the unsuspected who may not know how easily they were obtained nor have the time to check. </p>

<p>The saddest part is that the packaging in its most egregious form DOES seem to work, as more and more stories of fantastic candidates appear. Maybe it is time to check the complete definition of fantastic </p>

<p>
[quote]

  1. conceived or appearing as if conceived by an unrestrained imagination; odd and remarkable; bizarre; grotesque: fantastic rock formations; fantastic designs.<br>
  2. fanciful or capricious, as persons or their ideas or actions: We never know what that fantastic creature will say next.<br>
  3. imaginary or groundless in not being based on reality; foolish or irrational: fantastic fears.<br>
  4. extravagantly fanciful; marvelous.<br>
  5. incredibly great or extreme; exorbitant: to spend fantastic sums of money.<br>
  6. highly unrealistic or impractical; outlandish: a fantastic scheme to make a million dollars betting on horse races.<br>
  7. Informal. extraordinarily good: a fantastic musical.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fantastic résumés, indeed!</p>

409

<p>Actually, I think so many Harvard students have overachieved so much in high school Harvard believes they'll come to Harvard refreshed and more ready to learn if they take a year off. They've been encouraging this for a long time - I'm pretty sure it was part of my acceptence letter. (I took a year off before attending without any issues in any event.)</p>

410

<p>Xiggi, I agree with you about the definition of packaging.</p>

411

<p>Sigh...</p>

<p>Well, I for one would love to have a package-able kid. Or a kid who wants -- looks for -- help from parents to achieve full potential (heck, or any potential.)</p>

<p>Clearly, H & I are failures as parents. Our children will never by HYP material. And don't even care! All they are is -- self-reliant, independent, wanting to forge their own way even if it means slightly lower grades & other less-than-impressive consequences. </p>

<p>Where oh where did we go wrong?</p>

412

<p>


I agree that Tiger seems "remarkably free of them". I'm not even that suspicious that he has them, just that it would be something to look at if I was counseling him. (Another prodigy, Todd Marinovich, of Robo-quarterback fame is not having quite the career predicted for him.) </p>

<p>I keep tooting the same daily horn. You don't have to cheat to win a spot at any school. You don't have to embellish or stretch the truth. And you most certainly don't have to create Franken-candidate. And here's the other part- if you did , and you got in, you probably don't need to be there. "If they don't want you, you don't need them."</p>

413

<p>I don't think college admissions is different from any activity we have where there is a "prize" involved. People lie, cheat, buy. With the world wide web so many resumes have turned out to have lies, many from people who got competitive jobs based on those lies. The most selective colleges are clear about what they will do if they sniff fiction in those apps. That is the consequence. I have not heard of anyone thrown out after acceptance or have a degree rescinded for a contrived app unless the lie was a real whopper ( a Princeton student was exposed some years ago of faking his credentials. He was also doing criminal acts which is what resulted in the discovery).<br>
What seems to get most peoples' goats in packaging is not the blatant lying (that I think is rare), but the avenue those with enough money take. I have seen so many exotic "community" service package for sale these day. Kids go to far flung locations in a package deal just as you would buy the wilderness experience or the travel tour. Again, there is the gray area, because these kids are doing service, doing some good, and I am sure some needed services are being provided by these packages.<br>
As for the child prodigies, I think about Christy Yamaguchi's comment when she was presented with a tiny figure skater who was truly phenomonal. The father asked if Christy was that advanced at that age. Absolutely not, was the answer, but it is not how you begin that is as important as how you end up.</p>

414

<p>"I'm not sure that these kids can be pushed to do the the kinds of things we've been talking about."</p>

<p>I thought that same thing, when someone posted about the supposed packaging of the boy who studied under the Byzantine iconographer. The kid had been studying Greek in an after school program for seven years. Maybe I'm just naive (or my child is particularly oppositional) but I just don't see that happening from ages 10-17 without some real interest and motivation on the part of the child. </p>

<p>I don't find it that odd that a specialist like the iconographer would be willing to take on an apprentice who had already made that commitment to Greek. Aren't there people who like to teach kids to fish and swim and dance and play football and crochet? Why wouldn't there be people who like to teach kids Byzantine iconography? Or nuclear physics? Or medical research?</p>

<p>Not to mention that an apprentice is free labor; in this kid's case, free, apparently reliable labor. Scientists sometimes take on high school students to mentor because the scientist has more data or research questions than budget or interested graduate students. If a project isn't sure to lead to a published paper, your average grad student can't afford to devote any time to it. But a high school student can take the chance; he doesn't have to land a tenure track position ten minutes after he gets his diploma. </p>

<p>Except for the most egregious cases, I don't think you can say that a child has been packaged unless you've lived in that home and been privy to the parents' decision making processes. We live on the outskirts of a neighborhood with a much higher median income than ours, so some of D's friends had opportunities that to me seemed incredible and would probably reek of packaging--if you didn't know the people. Like most of us, these parents were just trying to make sure their kids grew up to appreciate the same things they did. </p>

<p>If you like art and think it's important, maybe you do hire a private art tutor for your 3 year old (and keep it up even through high school) if you can afford to, and you know that art instruction in our school system is limited. I don't think it necessarily means that you've hatched a sinister plot to fool Ivy adcoms some 14 years in the future, or that the child's art awards weren't earned. Some of the most packaged-looking kids D. knew never even talked about applying to particularly selective universities, despite stats, awards and ECs. Some of them applied only to the state flagship U (a sentimental favorite). Oddly, I didn't hear one parent complain that all the packaging was a waste. </p>

<p>In a way, colleges are darned if they do, and darned if they don't. If they take the kids with the most impressive credentials, we complain about the packaging. If they adjust for the fact that some kids have better opportunities than others, we complain about affirmative action.</p>

415

<p>Excellent points, conyat. </p>

<p>I think that most kids are highly unlikely to put in much time or effort on something they do not care about -- unless, perhaps, they are just desperate to please (don't have any like that myself ;)) Parents who are supporting their child's interests and talents are not necessarily packaging. They may simply be trying to help their kids "self-actualize." </p>

<p>In many cases I suspect there is a mix of motivations -- genuine support of the kid's interests, along with an interest in garnering recognition for the kid (and thus the parents), and, in some cases, a hope that the activity will "pay off" in college admissions. </p>

<p>What I think is of concern in the case that opened this thread, however, is that the student may have inappropriately benefited from the dad's professional expertise.</p>

<p>If it was a matter of the kid being captivated by the dad's dinner-table discussion of his work, and taking off on his own from that, that's of course great. </p>

<p>If, rather, it was a case of the dad spoon-feeding to the son ideas and projects that were then promoted as the kid's own work, that is another. </p>

<p>We don't know, and the colleges often don't either. They can only attempt to do a reasonable job of evaluating the situation.</p>

416

<p>This is great topic and one my wife and I grabble with as parents ... talent/potential and desire are 2 very different things and as parents my wife and I try to stay on top of both. One of our kids is a very gifted athlete ... not sure how gifted but he obviously has a very high upside. Not being the oldest he has always been exposed to sports and started very young and excelled from the get go. The challenge ... his skill has always made playing "older" and playing with "select" teams very feasable and maybe even desirable ... while we (mostly me) has to careful we don't push him we always want to make sure he is always being given the chance to do his best. Trying to understand if kids are relaying their true feelings or trying to please a parent can sometimes be difficult to separate and something we always try to determine. Ultimately, we offer him options to do more or do things more intensely but try to be totally neutral in the conversations about his options to help figure out what he wants to do. It has been fascinating watch this evolve as he got older ... for example, this year he dropped the first sport in which his "gift" for sport appeared ... it's incredibly weird not watching play soccer but he is clearly picking favorite sports at this time (up to now whatever sport is in season has been his favorite sport ... sometimes 2 sports a season were his favorite). </p>

<p>The punch line ... we try to help our kids experience as many things as can so they can find their passion(s) ... along the way they may also find a gift(s). Helping them if they have a passion for their gift is a challenge (don't burn them out) ... helping them if they don't have a passion for their gift is also a challenge (don't push them to the gift). While we're fine with the kids totally picking their EC involvement ... this also is challenging for academics; how to parent kids who just do not naturally want to maximize the academic potential ... a much more important and challenging situation!</p>

417

<p>
[quote]
how to parent kids who just do not naturally want to maximize the academic potential ... a much more important and challenging situation!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I agree! It's been easy helping math-loving son. No pushing needed at all. He's been lucky that there were resources available to nurture this love, but nurturing is very different from packaging; it is also different from pressing and prodding. </p>

<p>Kids who actually need pushing and prodding are those who do not have a passion and no discernible gifts, the "whatever" kids.</p>

418

<p>"Actually, I think so many Harvard students have overachieved so much in high school Harvard believes they'll come to Harvard refreshed and more ready to learn if they take a year off. "</p>

<p>Harvard believes that the students who take a year off will come to Harvard more focused and mature than do students who don't. This probably is the case for virtually all students who are headed to college after senior year in high school. Harvard, however, is a rare college to suggest a gap year probably because Harvard knows that after that gap year, their accepted students still will be happy to come to Harvard instead of trying to get into a college perceived as better.</p>

<p>Having some real world experience by working a job, doing full time volunteer work, traveling independently teach teens things that they can't learn in high school.</p>

<p>My S is taking a gap year after high school, and I already have noticed that his maturity level and confidence has been soaring.</p>

419

<p>


Excellent post, conyat. In my son's case, I think this was true. The only help he had from his dad or me was an off-hand comment I made that some kids do research at local colleges over the summer. He ran with that, and made contacts without any help or input from his parents. (Not that we could have helped him at all!) He spent M-F, taking a train and two subway lines, to get to the lab where he volunteered. Some of what he did was grunt work -- what else could a HS kid do? But he was able to work on a particular experiement, where the results had some significance. He wrote a paper, as required by the professor in charge, and that was a wonderful experience although it was never intended to be publishable. It's just that scientists document their results. Believe me, he put more effort into that paper, without a grade or any other "reward" involved, than he did in almost any other paper I can think of. The whole point of the activity, in my mind, was to let him get a feel for what the life of a research scientist is like. The path is long and hard, and I think it was great for him to see what he'd be getting into. Did he benefit based on where we live? Of course, but most parts of the country have a local college where something like this could happen. But there's no way a kid is going to work 30-40 hours a week over an entire summer, if he's not interested.</p>

420

<p>sjmom, sounds like the kind of self-starter that is in danger of getting lumped in with those who are trying to package kids. I applaud your kid's efforts. </p>

<p>(Now , speaking in general, and not about sjmom's kid) I for one have no problem if a kid has , as one of several motivating factors, a desire to increase their attractiveness to selective colleges by going beyond the norm . I really don't, and in fact I kind of like it as it suggests the kid is taking ownership of the app process . I do have a problem with parents or "counselors" or "packagers" deciding that a kid should do that when the kid has expressed no interest. </p>

<p>I would agree with other posters that longevity of the activity is one factor to look at when the colleges are judging the sincerity of the endeavor (although my D had two short term projects on her list, her projects "fit" with her history and I guess that was enough to allay any suspicions).</p>