<p>
[quote]
My concern is that this forum (not uncommon in forums and blogs) is that some of the posts (not all certainly) may meet the test of libel.
[/quote]
May I humbly suggest that law school may not be in your future, abfalle? What a genuinely horrible reading of Black's. Enjoy wherever it is you are going and I do hope the prevailing wind is in your favor.;)</p>
<p>"a standard test for libel is the presence of malice and the use of information that is known to be false."</p>
<p>I'm not a lawyer, but I believe the "presence of malice" test only applies if the person is considered a public figure. The case was Sullivan vs. The New York Times.</p>
<p>man...all you attorneys scare me (teasing).</p>
<p>Abfalle, when a person consents to having their story posted in a national publication like US News, they become a public figure, at least in the context of the article. Also, opinions are not libel or slander -- just false statements of facts. So if someone posted, falsely, that they knew for a fact that the kid cheated on exams -- that would be libel, because it would be knowingly false, malicioius posting. But it is fair game for us to speculate all we want as to whether the father helped with the fuel cell project, or whether a 1380 on the SAT is good enough for Princeton or Duke - they day the article was printed, the contents were essentially thrust into the world for public speculation and comment.</p>
<p>Brandon's mom -- I would suggest that you and your son read "A is for Admissions" by Michele Hernandez, and the book "The Gatekeepers" by Jacques Steinberg - it will give you some insight into elite college admissions. </p>
<p>Class rank is very important at colleges like Harvard, and I don't mean top 10%. I mean, Harvard tends to pick from the top 2 or 3 kids in a given high school, perhaps more if the school is a recognized feeder or very strong academic magnet. That doesn't apply if the kid has some other characteristic that really makes him stand out -- but the point is that Harvard is looking for the best of the best. Brown, which is a less selective Ivy than Harvard, posts some statistics that are revealing; look at the chart for class rank and percent admitted:
<a href="http://www.brown.edu/Administration/Admission/gettoknowus/factsandfigures.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.brown.edu/Administration/Admission/gettoknowus/factsandfigures.html</a></p>
<p>You should also know that coming from a single parent household is not a tip factor -- with the rate of divorce in this country, its very common. Coming from a financially disadvantaged background might be taken into consideration. However, you may run into a different problem -- you said his father rarely sees him but you didn't say that the father is out of the picture. Does the father have money? Because you need to know that Harvard gives only need based financial aid (no merit awards), and the father's income and assets will be taken into consideration whether or not the father intends to contribute anything toward college. So if you are struggling along on $35,000 a year (for example), and Brandon's dad has an annual income of $110,000.... you aren't going to qualify for the full ride that you may have read about at Harvard for families with income under $60,000. This is true at just about any selective private college -- they all ask for the father's income. </p>
<p>Brandon sounds like he is an excellent student with wonderful prospects, but it sounds like it would be very tough for him to get into Harvard. Of course there is no harm in applying -- you never know, and no one can get unless they apply -- but I think you and Brandon would do better to expand the search. Newsweek just published a list of 25 schools it is deeming "new ivies" -- its a good start for getting some names of different schools you might consider. You can find it here:
<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14325172/site/newsweek/%5B/url%5D">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14325172/site/newsweek/</a></p>
<p>JHS post #103 - I cannot agree more with your analysis and insights. </p>
<p>As disturbing as it is to me to read how the kids treat each other on "chances" threads, kowtowing to those with 4.0 and 1600/2400 stats as though they (should) rule the world and dissing those with "only 1450", god forbid 1380, SATs as though their lives were meaningless, it is vastly more distressing to me to read similar thoughts here on the Parent Forum. </p>
<p>I add my voice to those who saw no whining by the boy or the parents in the article. </p>
<p>I join you, soozievt and others who say that we should not judge the "rightness" of college admissions decisions based on limited stats and thumbnail sketches of the applicant, whether successful or not. </p>
<p>And I think we could happily dispense with judging family dynamics based on whether a parent made a spreadsheet, researched colleges and lodged himself or herself somewhere on the spectrum from gentle-reminder to crack-the-whip-enforcement of deadlines. I certainly participated <em>fully</em> in my son's freshman and transfer application process. It's not because he was too busy with higher-order activities. It's because I enjoyed being part of the process, because we were a team and because I could help, without violating ethical principles. I did the same for my step-grandson. I do the same for kids posting here on cc who ask for guidance and ideas. There are a plethora of over-involved, helicopter, controlling parents in the world. Identifying them as such based on two sentences in an article, or their clerical and administrative support for their child's application process is damning based on precious little evidence, imo, and smacks of "holier than thou."</p>
<p>Quote from article: "He knows it was a luxury to choose among schools he loved. "You go where your heart leads you. The environment, the opportunity, my faith and my heart were pointing to Duke.""</p>
<p>Yup, sure sounds like whining to me. :)</p>
<p>JmMom, I applaud your post. The tone of the thread and the dissing of this student as only having a 1380 SAT, the parental help through the process and all this other mischagos (I don't know how to spell that) is disturbing. It is so much so that I bowed out of the thread. I know, I know, why am I posting now then? I dunno except I loved your post. :D</p>
<p>PS...oops, sorry can't help myself, LOL...but, the way this snippet of this boy's life is being analyzed, is not too different than the "what are my chances" threads which most parents here seem to think are a joke as how anybody can judge someone's chances on just a list of stats...but that is going on here, as well. And yes, I agree with whomever said, it is an actual person whose name is published. Discussing the issues are one thing but the dissing of this kid who sounded pretty awesome to me, is unpalatable.</p>
<p>
[quote]
PS...oops, sorry can't help myself, LOL...but, the way this snippet of this boy's life is being analyzed, is not too different than the "what are my chances" threads which most parents here seem to think are a joke as how anybody can judge someone's chances on just a list of stats...but that is going on here, as well. And yes, I agree with whomever said, it is an actual person whose name is published. Discussing the issues are one thing but the dissing of this kid who sounded pretty awesome to me, is unpalatable.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, I cannot help myself neither ... and I have to post a rebuttal of sorts. Do you know what is getting EXTREMELY annoying on College Confidential? The increasing level of scrutiny given to almost every posts that contains divergent OPINIONS, and the measurement of those opinions against some imaginary scale of political correctness. </p>
<p>Ya know what? People are still entitled to think for themselves and share their opinions freely without having to justify the minute details of their thought process in a series of challenges, or even have to address idiotic allegations of libel as it happened in this thread.</p>
<p>For the record, I did not come to this thread to "diss" this student in any way or form. I only posted after people speculated about a fact: the possible involvement of a nuclear chemist in fuel cell research. A five minute check on that revealed another fact: that J. Cross the Elder is indeed a scientist working in that precise field. As unappealing as it may be to the goody-goody crowd, this type of coincidence should raise the eyebrows of many. As I wrote, there is a difference between reasonable parental involvement and the type exhibited by the Louis Bornstine of this world. One of the reasons it is obviously prevalent in the college admission process is that it is hardly ever detected by the organizations in charge of the scholarships and awards. In the meantime, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck ...</p>
<p>As far as having to worry about discussing the private life of a person, that is something that James and Karen Cross SHOULD have considered well before placarding their pictures on a national paper, and revealing the private details of their son's college quest. In this case, their quest for glory and adulation does come at a reasonable price, which is the increased scrutiny of their story. Simply stated, the family had a choice, and they opted for the publicity. Don't tell me they were naive enough to only expect bows and kudos? </p>
<p>Lastly the difference between what constitutes discussing the ISSUES and dissing the kid seems to be quite subjective.</p>
<p>xig, I loved the research, son. I smelled something. Still do. The smell is greater now after reading your links. </p>
<p>One of my first querys is coming back home to rest, too. Exactly how does one become a USA Today Scholar? I find it highly unlikely that one family could have two so honored :eek: . It boggles the mind. What's the math on that? And what are the odds mom was a college-packager? What? 100%? "I think there are specific things you can do to get into the college of your choice," she says. Her sons, Alex and Zachary, both made the All-USA High School Academic Team, among a long list of accolades. </p>
<p>Gee. Imagine that. </p>
<p>Do I know what happened in either instance? Nope. Based on the parents professions, do I think it is best to reserve judgment and demand better investigation by the paper before granting these kids accolades ? Yeah. And I think you have to be more suspect when the head coach's kid is the starting quarterback, too. This ain't really new stuff.</p>
<p>Just in case anybody got lost in my last post due to my poor communication skills, Wisner-Gross is the mom/packager of the TWO award winners, and Cross is the poor innocent father and son xiggi is maliciously libeling.;) (Is that better, xig?) Wanted to keep the record straight. Don't want to end up behind the "vs." with xig. LOL. </p>
<p>The selective college admission process has been compared to a lottery, but Elizabeth Wissner-Gross, a college admission packager in the ultra-competitive Great Neck area of Long Island, N.Y., doesn't see it that way. </p>
<p>"I think there are specific things you can do to get into the college of your choice," she says. Her sons, Alex and Zachary, both made the All-USA High School Academic Team, among a long list of accolades.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And I think we could happily dispense with judging family dynamics based on whether a parent made a spreadsheet, researched colleges and lodged himself or herself somewhere on the spectrum from gentle-reminder to crack-the-whip-enforcement of deadlines.
[/quote]
Agreed, jmmom - very well said!</p>
<p>Does everyone remember the old George Carlin joke about there being two kinds of drivers, idiots and maniacs? The idiots are the ones who drive slower than you do, and the maniacs are the ones who drive faster. Sometimes it seems to me as if we define "helicopter" parents as those who'll do more than we do, and cold, distant parents as those who'll do less.</p>
<p>Well said, frazzled.</p>
<p>frazzled, that sure does take the fun out of bickering, though doesn't it? ;)</p>
<p>What will we cackle at, here at the henhouse ? </p>
<p>I know I've parted company with some very wise folks on this one. In fact some that I just read their post and usually say "Well, that covered what I'd say. I don't have anything to add." But like an old dog, I have a scent in my nose and I can't ignore it. Sooooo.... I e-mailed the author and linked her up to this thread. What'll come from it? Well, I don't know, but as I've said before I don't know anything about these folks. I assume none of us do (but I could be wrong). Maybe she has unreported data that would help me form an opinion based on more data points. I'll continue to be suspicious of the packager and the father/son chemist team but also continue to reserve final judgment, either positive or negative.</p>
<p>I'm likely unwisely posting again. But Xiggi, my friend, I was not aiming my post at you. </p>
<p>Picking apart that his SAT's were not high enough and he didn't deserve to get in....and his dad works in the same field that the son did research in, and mom researched how to go about getting a child into a selective college....and dad did some secretarial work for the son....and...and....and...</p>
<p>People are taking this kid's stats and analyzing if he should have gotten in or not. What? He did not have stratospheric SATs??? Shame shame...no HYP for him! Well, ya know, the kid had a good enough package that yielded excellent results, if you ask me. Kids with 1600 (old SAT) get turned away from HYP ALL the time. His fuel cell research, I'm sure, is not what got him into his colleges. I'm sure it was a mix of factors. Just being a val helps, but is not everything of course, and vals get turned away as well, though their admit rate is often higher than a kid who is in the top 10%. I don't even want to analyze this kid's package because it is no different than analyzing a "what are my chances" thread because we don't have EVERYTHING on this candidate that the adcoms had. We haven't read his essays, his recs, and all the rest. It was a summary about him. Just like the chances threads. We also don't have the rest of the applicants and what the institutional needs were and distribution of students. I believe this kid's outcome was about what one might expect and it could have gone a little this way or a little that way, as the unpredictable nature of elite admissions happens. I just feel like it is not NICE to be saying "he doesn't deserve a spot" at X college because what....his SATs are not as high as some other kid who got rejected? He did research where he likely had contacts or was easily fascilitated having a dad in the field? (look at the kids who do internships in law offices or financial companies whose parents are in those fields!) All I can say is....while my kid had no connections or anything out of the ordinary, I would hate to post her stats and have her eaten alive like this. It is so much like the chances threads where I see kids who can't understand why some kid got in with lower SATs than a kid who got rejected with higher ones as if elite admissions were just a numbers game. It's not. </p>
<p>I think the thread has gone beyond discussing issues, and is feeling, for me, anyway, like vultures going after the kid (and his parents). </p>
<p>I saw the article as a follow up by USA Today of their national academic award winners, which this kid was one (congrats to him) and it just shows a typical very good student who applied to very selective schools and had a positive outcome but also had rejections. For the general public, it is good to see that even vals and such, get rejected at some colleges. It is a jungle out there. It seems to be a jungle in here as well. :eek:</p>
<p>PS...Xiggi, you say that the thread is just discussing opinions openly but it is different, in my view. People are discussing a student here. Things that are being said about him and his parents are not the sorts of things that people say to others face to face, nor do they say it to posters on here (who even get to be anonymous) post to post. I don't see others putting down what a parent or student here did quite in this manner. </p>
<p>Curm, you say you are "reserving judgment" and I guess I am saying that the judging of this kid or parents is too much. I don't think they should be "judged". I don't see others posting judgments of you and your child quite in this same manner in back and forth posts. If they are, they should NOT be. That same level of courtesy ought to be afforded this family whose names are known (out of choice, I understand, but he was a winner, after all, and the newspaper did a follow up on a winner). I think discussing issues is fine, including divergent opinions, but a lot of posts seem to be attacking the boy and/or his parents. Had he been a poster on CC, that would not have been allowed.</p>
<p>So let's get off the subject of the young man and his family and talk about the issue, which is the legitimacy of certain factors in college admissions. Assuming that there is no ONE factor that gets a student into a college, we can look at the fact that there are some factors that are verifiable and some that aren't. </p>
<p>A student's GPA and class ranking are provable and reflect his or her own efforts (assuming you're not a conspiracy theorist). SATs, ACTs, AP tests- all require identification and there are safeguards in place, restrictions on what can be brought into the testing site, to ensure that the scores are legit. (Notwithstanding the fact that students prep and take the test multiple times- but at least the actual student is putting pencil to paper himself.) Student's who audition for fine arts either submit video tapes of themselves or perform in person. Track and field records, pitcher's ERAs, virtually all sports-related records can't be fudged. </p>
<p>However, as we speak, I could if I wanted, find someone (or do it myself) to write an essay on behalf of my son for a contest. I could, if I wanted, hook him up within the organization I work for, and provide him with a fancy title and letter of recommendation. I could, because I run a community service program, fudge hundreds, nay thousands, of hours of community service on his behalf. I could, if I wanted, set him up in any number of ways that would make him look really good, and probably put him over the top; but could never be proven nor disproven to be his own effort. And really, no one would be the wiser. Am I gonna do this? No. </p>
<p>But does it go on? Have you never seen elementary science fair projects that clearly were not the work of children? Have you never experienced a parent donating money or time to a team or club, and getting their kid selected captain or president? </p>
<p>In this competitive world, kids get into college based on a bundle of achievements- test scores, class rank, GPA, curriculum, and ECs. Great lengths are taken to ensure validity with the first four, but not the last.</p>
<p>SoozieVT, thank you for the reply. </p>
<p>There are many issues rolled up in one long post. Regarding the WAMC type of posts, I have long maintained that this it is impossible for anyone to poinpoint why a student was rejected, let alone accepted. All ANY of us can do is speculate or attempt to find a few patterns based on numbers. </p>
<p>In this regard. I still believe that discussing if a sub 1400 SAT does indeed decrease the chances of a strong candidate at the most elite schools, especially if the expectations based on SES are higher, does not constitute an "attack." The same applies to the eyebrow-raising and questioning of the EC. </p>
<p>As far as the article, I did not find it very interesting at all, and if there were supposed to lessons in it, I'm not certain of their positive value. How much difference there is between the USA-Today and the Bergen Record old story is again very subjective. The same subjectivity that causes some to condone the "contributions" of Robert Shaw, Elizabeth Wissner-Gross, Katherine Cohen, and the various scientific awards mills. </p>
<p><a href="http://ivysuccess.com/therecord013005.html%5B/url%5D">http://ivysuccess.com/therecord013005.html</a></p>
<p>
[quote]
Forget "The Apprentice." For real competition, check out "The Applicant" - a contest in which high-achieving Asian kids from New Jersey's moneyed suburbs jockey for the Ivy League.</p>
<p>Consider the case of an Asian girl at a competive high school. Her grades and test scores were top-notch, she ran cross-country and she was an accomplished pianist. Still, her prospects seemed uncertain.</p>
<p>The problem: her all-too-familiar profile.</p>
<p>She didn't, and couldn't, stand out among her peers. She ranked in the top 20 percent in the highly competitive school where nearly a fifth of the students are Asian.</p>
<p>"We needed to get her away from the other Asian kids,'' said Robert Shaw, a private college consultant hired by the girl's family.</p>
<p>Shaw advised bold steps: The family transferred to another high school. There she was a standout: The only Asian kid in the school, she was valedictorian for the Class of 2004.</p>
<p>Next came an extracurricular makeover, one a bit out of character for an Asian girl, said Shaw. "We had to create a contrarian profile,'' Shaw said. "We put her in places where she could stand out."</p>
<p>The girl was accepted to Yale and to Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where she is now a freshman.</p>
<p>Shaw helped the family play the admissions game. The ethnic, geographic and racial profiling that goes into assembling classes at the nation's top-tier colleges and universities is the worst-kept secret in American higher education.</p>
<p>"It's a very well-known thing but colleges don't want to talk about it,'' Shaw said. "It is certainly not a meritocracy, it's about being the right type of kid."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Just want to relate a personal andecdote that may prevent people from jumping to conclusions about family connections:</p>
<p>My husband is a physician in the same field that my son researched. In fact, he graduated from the same med school where my son did his research for Intel. Well, anyone knowing those tidbits would certainly be able to put 2 and 2 together and conclude that this is how my son got his mentor and that this is why he was an Intel finalist (and by the way, my husband's profession and education was in all college application materials). And, in fact, I would be a liar if I didn't admit that early on, I mentioned to my husband that maybe he could be helpful in getting our son connected to a research opportunity.</p>
<p>BUT>>>the truth is that the opportunity had ABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with my husband's connections or background. It happened that this mentor lives in our community (but did not know my husband), and his son attended our h.s. (and, in fact, became a friend of my son's). The dad, who had had many a h.s. student in his lab over the years from other high schools with research programs (but never had a finalist), had always wanted to make himself available if a kid from our school was interested. Well, when my son, who was well known to our h.s. since elementary school, expressed an interest in doing serious medical research, our school resurrected a previously defunct research program, and introduced him to this mentor. And the rest is history.</p>
<p>Quote from Doubleplay: "I could if I wanted, find someone (or do it myself) to write an essay on behalf of my son for a contest. I could, if I wanted, hook him up within the organization I work for, and provide him with a fancy title and letter of recommendation. I could, because I run a community service program, fudge hundreds, nay thousands, of hours of community service on his behalf. I could, if I wanted, set him up in any number of ways that would make him look really good,..."</p>
<p>You certainly could do all this. But, when your son would have gone on interviews, and was asked to talk about all this, I suspect that there would have been no sense of passion or committment. I would like to think that a good, experienced interviewer for a top school or prestigious contest could see right through this. When students are in science competitions, it is very hard to fake a deep knowledge, understanding, and vision when it comes to their research. And I bet that experienced college interviewers (like Northstarmom, for example, who interviews for Harvard) would tell you they can spot a kid who's faking it a mile away. Of course, there may be some very good actors in an admission pool, so who knows?....</p>
<p>doubleplay,
"great care taken" does not "ensure validity." (Neither for GPA, nor for testing.) :
Re testing: LD inequalities, lack of accommodation, major mistakes by collegeboard (& by high schools) in sending/receiving documentation, granting accommodation. Ignorance by high schools & CB about what constitutes & does not constitute genuine need for extended time which will not advantage an LD student.
CB screw-ups; ETS screw-ups (scoring, lost tests, etc.)</p>
<p>GPA: wildly different standards, depending on school, district, region, teachers.</p>
<p>EC's are neither more nor less accurate than the above, in my opinion. Interviewers often ask about these in greater depth. Many a candidate has been nixed after the interview when coming up silent or embarrassed about the actual achievements or the worth of the activity. Sometimes teachers in their recommendations actually go to some length to mention the candidate's e.c.'s because they figure into the rec. somehow or shed further light on the candidate.</p>