Geez. I finally looked up the tuition to H-W. Almost $300K for all 6 years. That’s a lot of “cheddar” for grades 7-12.
Please refrain from engaging in debating and addressing other users in a combative and snarky manner, which is against Forum Rules. They are at the bottom of the page for anyone who cares to look. Posts deleted or edited. Thanks for your understanding.
1 Like
For those in the 3.0-3.2 GPA range, you have good odds applying to these schools:
Colorado (13/13), SMU (9/9), Indiana (8/8) and NYU (6/11). U of Miami (5/14) is more selective than NYU in this GPA range. That seems to suggest that NYU also favors high pay HW students.
In the below 3.0 GPA range, the true safeties are Oregon, Arizona and ASU with 100% admittance.
I think we can reasonably conclude that these 3 colleges of the 5 college Claremont consortium, located about 1 hour away from H-W, don’t want H-W students from the middle 50% of the class. 
1 Like
Actually, given that Pomona accepted no unhooked over the past three years, we can reasonably conclude that they don’t want anyone in the top echelon either:
Applications: 13, Admissions: 0 (3.8+)
Applications: 2, Admissions: 0 (3.6-3.799)
Applications: 2, Admissions: 0 (3.4-3.599)
Applications: 2, Admissions: 0 (3.2-3.399)
Total Applications: 19, Total Admissions: 0
Actually, given that CMC admitted exactly one unhooked from each GPA group, we really can’t reasonably conclude anything about the connection between GPA and selection:
Applications: 7, Admissions: 1 (3.8+)
Applications: 2, Admissions: 1 (3.6-3.799)
Applications: 8, Admissions: 1 (3.4-3.599)
Total Applications: 19, Total Admissions: 3
Actually, given that Harvey Mudd had no unhooked applications from the second tier, we can only reasonably conclude that they don’t want students below a 3.6:
Applications: 3, Admissions: 2 (3.8+)
Applications: 0, Admissions: 0 (3.6-3.799)
Applications: 3, Admissions: 0 (3.4-3.599)
Total Applications: 6, Total Admissions: 2
The most recent data, when viewed in toto for these three schools as opposed to selectively, might change some prior-stated “reasonable conclusions.”
1 Like
It’s nearly all 0’s and 1’s, a bunch of binary numbers. A reasonable conclusion would be that Claremont Consortium “no likey” H-W. And what’s odd is that the schools are only about an hour apart.
One would think close proximity would increase potential yield.
we can reasonably conclude
Several users are misspelling “I” in their continued debate from which @Lindagaf “asked” to desist 4 days ago. Move the conversation forward please.
1 Like
I don’t think that’s the conclusion. Hooked H-W get in. Alternate theory is they take enough H-W students, and the hooked students are all solid applicants, they never get to the unhooked. This seems possible for Pomona anyway.
2 Likes
I agree……and 30 hooked students in the last 5 years going to one of the 5Cs isn’t insignificant. Too bad we still don’t know HW’s definition of hooked.
Yes, the admit rates look very different for hooked (with “distinction”) vs unhooked. A comparison is below for the 2017-19 sample. There is also significant year to year variation with the small sample (unhooked Pomona was 3/18 in earlier years)m and there are notably different results among different Claremont colleges. For example, among relatively lower rank applicants to Scripps, the admit rate was 6/9 = 67% for unhooked and 6/6 = 100% for hooked.
Pomona Unhooked – 0/22 Overall, 0/10 4.3+ GPA, 0/5 4.1-4.3 GPA, 0/7 <4.1 GPA
CMC Unhooked – 2/21 Overall, 1/3 4.3+ GPA, 0/2 4.1-4.3 GPA, 1/16 <4.1 GPA
Mudd Unhooked – 6/19 Overall, 4/7 4.3+ GPA, 2/4 4.1-4.3 GPA, 0/8 <4.1 GPA
Pitzer Unhooked – 3/10 Overall, 0/0 4.3+ GPA, 0/1 4.1-4.3 GPA, 2/9 <4.1 GPA
Scripps Unhooked – 6/9 Overall, 0/0 4.3+ GPA, 0/0 4.1-4.3 GPA, 6/9 <4.1 GPA
Pomona Hooked – 6/13 Overall, 0/1 4.3+ GPA, 1/2 4.1-4.3 GPA, 5/7 <4.1 GPA (3.2 GPA admit)
CMC Hooked – 3/6 Overall, 0/0 4.3+ GPA, 1/1 4.1-4.3 GPA, 2/5 <4.1 GPA
Mudd Hooked – 3/6 Overall, 1/1 4.3+ GPA, 1/1 4.1-4.3 GPA, 1/4 <4.1 GPA
Scripps Hooked – 6/6 Overall, 0/0 4.3+ GPA, 0/0 4.1-4.3 GPA, 6/6 <4.1 GPA
Pitzer Hooked – 2/3 Overall, 0/0 4.3+ GPA, 0/0 4.1-4.3 GPA, 2/3 <4.1 GPA
1 Like
I agree. The unhooked HW kids applying to the most selective Claremont schools (especially Pomona) face same reality as the unhooked HW kids applying to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, MIT, Duke, and a few other of the most selective/competitive schools at HW. There is a surplus of HW applicants who not only excel academically, they also possess special, recruitable talents (sports, music, art, performance, etc.) and/or other desirable characteristics (legacy, URM, dean’s list, etc.) The most selective/competitive schools (like Pomona) can easily fill their coffers with excellent+ HW applicants without accepting many (or any) excellent applicants who lack that plus.
That’s the reality. There are many more extremely qualified HW students than there are spots at these top schools. Pomona’s class size is only around 400, and it values economic, cultural, and geographic diversity. Realistically, only so many spots will go to kids from schools like HW, and once it takes it’s excellent+ apps, the rest face long odds.
1 Like
In my mind, it’s not about the hooked applicants, I’m assuming that most of the H-W families donate huge sums of money to many colleges, not only the Claremont consortium, but Ivy’s and so on. They’re spending $300K on just middle and high school.
Most applicants every year that go thru each admissions cycle are non-hooked and that’s what us plebeians care about. Not the “donation class.”
Not sure why it is relevant, but next year tuition is $42,600, so your calculation is a bit off. Believe it or not that is pretty standard (maybe even low) for non-parochial private schools in Los Angeles. And very few families are of the “donation class.” Around 20% receive financial aid (average award covers more than 3/4 of tuition.). Many others scrimp and save because they feel (rightly or wrongly) that their kids are getting a stellar education.
Anyway, I wasn’t referring to any “donation class” but rather to athletes, musicians, performers, artists, as well as URM, first generation college, and legacies as well. There are an abundance of such students at HW, and many are extremely well-qualified academically as well. Surely it makes no sense to exclude from consideration excellent students just because they also happen to be extraordinary violinists, actors, runners, or any possess any other characteristic that top schools might value.
The tuition may not be relevant to you, but it is to me. If you have $300K to spend on middle school and high school tuition, then there’s going to be donations to the various alma maters, etc. Large donations are a hook. Money buys influence.
And the money flow doesn’t stop at just the $43K H-W tuition, I’m sure. We have private schools in Northern California too. The private schools that I’m familiar with charge over $50K/year. But, there are fundraising committees that raise funds beyond just the tuition, asking families to contribute additional funds. I’m sure there are families that contribute well beyond the H-W tuition. That’s how wealthy private schools work. At any rate, I’m rounding. If you desire to be more exacting, that’s cool.
And as for all those brilliant and talented artists, musicians, athlete, etc., there are bright unhooked kids all around the country. Intelligence and talent aren’t limited to H-W.
Unhooked applicants from H-W don’t do well at the Claremont consortium, which was my original point.
But honestly, I don’t care “a lick” about H-W, UofC or the Claremont consortium.
And please don’t call me Shirley. 
Again, money buys influence. And if it’s anything like the private schools that I’m aware of locally, then it buys a lot of influence. Yes, I’m sure there are musicians, athletes, artists, performers, poets, authors, etc. who are also accepted to the various Claremont schools.
Kids with recruitable talent and stellar academic credentials do exist everywhere, and they have a much better chance of admission to elite institutions than their classmates who dont quite match up in one or the other.
As for the rest, I know who many of these HW kids are, and they didn’t “donate” their way into Pomona or similar elite schools.
A friend full paid for kid’s tuition at Wake Forest. In the late fall of freshman year, a development officer took the parents out to a very nice dinner and asked for a donation. They said they were barely able to pay the full freight out of the 529 savings, so sorry. Maybe they got an admissions tip due to high school and address plus full pay, like NYU and Chicago give at H-W.
I think the unhooked student admissions’s plight is really the main point, at least for me.
I expect legacies and athletic recruits (and maybe URM?) make up the bulk of those Pomona admits. The donor admits no doubt happen, but they aren’t driving the numbers.
4 Likes
My expectation is that money is a hook and that drives the numbers as well.
There are lots of articles on the wealth in private schools, including H-W. It’s not just H-W. It’s our local private schools up here too.
1 Like
I have seen two students in my kid’s prep school buy their way into Ivies (but not HYP) over the years. I know, I know… “but you didn’t see their apps, the LOCs, etc.” LOL.
See my user name, I know of the wealth of which you and the article speak. My kid attends an elite boarding school with some astoundingly wealthy students (he is emphatically not one of them, and is about as unhooked as they come). I have no doubt some students have bought their way into colleges. There is a lot of privilege on display. I am clear-eyed that his college prospects are hampered by his unhooked status. He’ll survive.
The author of that article is quite the hypocrite. Gripe though she does, she says she would totally make the same choice to send her kids to private school again. Because for her and her moral high ground it is “all about the education”. But then she is more than happy to decimate the education for others now that her kids are out - surely imposing her flippant 2% quota on college admissions concept would do that, and it does nothing to improve public schools. And it assumes that the percentage of qualified students in publics are the same as in privates (and that is simply not true). The issue is a wee bit more complex than that.
I have an idea - let’s just deal with the real problem and improve k-12 public education rather than finding scapegoats, and in that way make the privates obsolete. Kiddo wouldn’t be at a private school but for the fact that our public schools were failing him.
Off my soap box now. This is all just to say that we are watching in real time as the Ivy+ schools decrease the number of admits from tony high schools and grapple with privilege. There is definitely room for improvement, but it is happening. The complaints about the phenomenon are about 5-10 years behind the curve of colleges trying to improve their admissions practices. Just ask the college counselors in the high schools.
4 Likes