I have recently noticed an increased tendency of parents of children rejected from their top college choices to blame athletes, URMs and legacies for unfairly “taking their kids well earned spot”. I find these assertions of victimization to be offensive on multiple fronts:
First off it fails to consider the time, effort and contribution put in by athletes and the eventual prestige they provide to the school they attend. Similarly it does not value the hours worked by a socioeconomically disadvantaged student to support a family , or quantify the inability to take test prep, or lack of parental support etc… Lastly, it fails to recognize that frequently legacy contributions fund scholarships, financial aid and ultimately benefit the entire institution. We can debate the value or fairness of this but we all no the rules of the admissions game.
More importantly however blaming these groups isn’t consistent with the realities of the current admissions process. Hooked kids compete with other hooked kids and the best prevail. Similarly the unhooked kids compete against one another for albeit a smaller percentage of total spots. Yet to be clear unhooked kids do get in for those that are selected as the best candidates.
Consequently if your kid is unhooked and gets rejected, blaming the aforementioned hooked kids, randomness, or reverse bias is simply a cop out. The overwhelming reality is some other kid who was competing on equal footing took your child’s place. You might not agree with the result and some luck may have played a part but in no way was your child victimized.
When parents take this approach they suggest to a kid that hard work doesn’t pay off because the system is stacked against them and diminishes those that earned admissions spot fair and square.
Off my soap box and intended to spur dialogue and not offend.
I would also add being irritated at the whining that the system is unfair because a student with one point lower ACT score is admitted over your kid. It’s not all about stats. Universities are crystal clear that there is more to admission than academic performance.
I recently got; “My kids essays were the best his private ($200 hr) college coach had ever seen” as proof the system had to be rigged because it was clearly unfair. Uuuuurgggghhhh
Fair is not equal, and so the benchmarks (mean score and range) for each group are likely not equal. Naviance and a general awareness told us that being above the 75th percentile, having every application piece and an overall impression that the puzzle fit seamlessly together were very important for an unhooked candidate.
As if it were any given person’s god-given right to get into a given School X … which accepts some tiny percentage of its applicants. It’s infuriating.
“momofsenior1” raises an issue which relates to much of the college confidential dialogue. Too much emphasis on standardized test scores.
SAT and ACT test are not IQ tests. SAT and ACT scores are not the best predictors of college GPA performance and their effectiveness diminishes dramatically after the first year and disappears by the third year. GPA rules!
Now if we could only get a handle on college GPA and its relationship to professional success we would be onto something.
Should a student be an extrovert? Are introverts as effective in the workplace? What do ECs have to do with anything?
Personally, I believe that teamwork counts in today’s professional world, but that is just an opinion. What does experience playing a team sport contribute here? If I play an instrument or sing with a group, is that teamwork?
What constitutes leadership?
Does it make a difference if the candidate really wants to contribute to a better world?
How about perseverance in challenging situations? Where does self-confidence fit in?
Now tell me again that it is all about standardized tests scores as we try to prepare tomorrow’s leaders.
“As if it were any given person’s god-given right to get into a given School X … which accepts some tiny percentage of its applicants. It’s infuriating.”
You said it porcupine98 but it is so prevalent today. Parents are unwilling to tell their kids you worked hard, it didn’t entirely go as we would have hoped, the effort wasn’t lost, and I am proud of you. Instead we hear it’s unfair, someone else cut the line, it social engineering, only the rich get in, only the poor got in, the needed an oboe player, they must have had an in, yada yada yada.
When my neighbor’s daughter was waitlisted at our state’s flagship, the neighbor was irate and said to me, among other things, “I’m a liberal but…” And then began the first of several long tirades about the university choosing to let in students with 2.3 GPAs because they’re URMs instead of her “nearly perfect” daughter. Nearly perfect daughter had applied late but that wasn’t supposed to matter, according to her mom, even though applications increased 20% at the school this year and it has rolling admissions. Oh, and guess what: daughter was eventually admitted off the waiting list.
On CC I have read numerous accounts of students who were “wronged” by the process. In spite of my rant your experience and opinion is valued. Please share your story if your childs results in your view weren’t fair, deserved and consistent.
No complaints from me about the process regarding my son’s experience. Could not be happier with where he was admitted and where he will be attending.
That said, I do not agree with some of the athletic preference, legacy and AA policies from a philosophical standpoint. And to muddy the waters even further, I don’t necessarily think they’re bad or should be eliminated, my issues are more in the ways that they are implemented and unintended consequences. Different issue than objecting to them because they hurt my kid - they haven’t.
But totally agree on being frustrated with people who think it’s all about stats, who overestimate their kid’s competitiveness or who believe their child is owed something. That’s all pretty silly.
I agree that playing the victim card is offensive. Too many parents take the college application process personally and see it as some indictment on themselves when Junior doesn’t get accepted to wherever. Holistic admissions is pretty self-explanatory, but parents still feel wronged when their darling 1550/4.5 child gets denied. It’s baffling when people can’t understand that more qualified students than available spots equals the very good possibility that Junior may be on the chopping block. I don’t have much sympathy for parents or kids who feel entitled to anything. It’s perfectly understandable to be disappointed when you don’t get into a certain school, but it’s ridiculous to blame it on some “less deserving or qualified” person.
How do these parents react when Junior comes home and says the girl he asked to the prom said no? We all need to teach our kids that rejection is part of life that no one escapes, no matter how smart, wonderful, good looking, or hard working they happen to be.
Remember that Yale adcom who said something like (paraphrasing here) “we could take this year’s class, replace them completely with a whole new class out of this years applicants, and have just as strong a class, and we could do this several times over?” Whenever you’re looking at a <20% acceptance rate school, there is absolutely just pure luck involved in getting accepted. Once everything is equal and the schools have several times over more totally acceptable kids than they can accept, it’s luck.
The kids that do get in would benefit from counting their blessings as well. My D17 got into one of those low-acceptance rate schools, and we all know she got lucky along with having worked really hard in high school.
One of my kids went to a small private college prep HS in an affluent area.
One of her classmates in HS was not an academic superstar and did not take the most rigorous course offerings. In a HS like that, it’s noticeable.
This student was passionate about art and also passionate about helping others – maybe art therapy down the line.
This student was also URM and low income. She was accepted to a Top 20 with an amazing financial aid package.
My D filled me in on the reaction of the peanut gallery. I was shocked by the horrible, mean things some of the other kids (and their parents!) were saying about this student and the acceptance.
Midwest67, that’s when I hope the student knew enough to ignore them, in the full knowledge that he or she got in, and that’s all that really matters. The people saying those things weren’t likely to remain his or her friends past graduation anyway. I just hope they don’t run into the same attitudes on campus, though I know it’s quite possible.
Stats alone don’t mean a good app package, down through LoRs and interview. Nor do they mean a good essay. And a lit of kids who think their ECs are brilliant, to boot, have no way to compare. Then there’s the Why Us.