<p>Agree with Deaston on the “entitlement” issue. For schools to give money to students who are at the top of the heap is something that I am excited about. If Grinnell can attract students who could potentially get into more “selective” schools, then they keep the competition higher, the environment more enriching. I am glad to hear what they are doing, I think I will make a donation! The better the school does, the more my daughter’s almost-fully-paid-for degree is worth!!! My daughter went on to a very competitive graduate program and she is doing very well and has far more free time than most graduate students - good for Grinnell to keep the bar high!</p>
<p>Ah, I didn’t realize that thirrdplanet hasn’t received a decision yet.</p>
<p>Since I’m still deeply entrenched in the application process, I can understand where that sentiment is coming from. The most stressful thing isn’t the application itself - it’s having to wait months for a decision, and not knowing what your options will be at the end of this process (or if you’ll even have any options).</p>
<p>Seeing others on these boards receive likely letters from some of the schools I applied to is a little disheartening. In that sense, early writes and likely letters do marginalize a portion of the applicant pool who don’t receive them as it makes it seem like those applicants are second-best, even if they are admitted later.</p>
<p>The important thing is not take to it personally – colleges are acting strategically in accepting some students early, which is to be expected. Despite the recent hype surrounding more transparent admissions in top schools, it’s impossible for someone who’s not involved in the process to know why a decision turned out the way it did. More likely than not, an applicant is judged based on the needs of the school and not necessarily on their personal aptitude or merit.</p>
<p>Given the record number of applicants at Grinnell this year, I’m willing to bet that there are thousands of students who are still waiting on a decision. A fair number of them will be accepted, but a number of them will be rejected too. And you know what? That’s fine; it’s nothing personal.</p>
<p>By the way, Earlham is a lovely school. :)</p>
<p>Opaline said, “More likely than not, an applicant is judged based on the needs of the school and not necessarily on their personal aptitude or merit.”</p>
<p>I would like to adjust the statement a bit, if I may. Schools are not blindly altruistic entities in the least. They are businesses that must always weigh return in one form or another. Therefore, I posit that they ALWAYS judge based on their needs.</p>
<p>I just mean that their goal for increasing yield is most likely just what they are saying. It just looks like a ploy to get higher average test scores.</p>
<p>Also, the reason I got a free plane ticket to Earlham was primarily because I’m being recruited.</p>
<p>Thirrdplanet - I would like to point out your reaction and approach really are not very wise, now or in life in general. You have this “since I see the sausage being made, then I do not like it approach.” </p>
<p>If you do not like what Grinnell is doing, you are fooling yourself because every one of the colleges you are applying to are doing something to increase their yield; you just are not privy to what the actual process is. </p>
<p>It really only hurts you in the long run if you react to only the knowns when basic logic says everyone else is doing similar, but their specifics are unknown to you. It is part of the college landscape now - yield is important. I respect more the colleges that are upfront than the ones who pretend yield is not a factor and then do it behind the scenes in smoke-filled rooms. </p>
<p>In short, you are looking down on Grinnell (really punishing only yourself) because it is being upfront and honest. I rather be at an honest, upfront school than one that hides it like you seem to rather want. To me, hiding and denial get pretty darn close to being dishonest with students.</p>
<p>Here’s how I know that Grinnell is not just interested in higher test scores: my oldest was wait-listed with a 33 ACT but not great grades. My youngest, on the other hand, has a 32 ACT but much better grades, and was admitted early with a generous scholarship. Same family, same school, almost all the same courses and very similar (strong) ECs.</p>
<p>That was my point in an earlier post - high scores are mutually exclusive and other things matter - the school can get both!. And since 33 and 32 are pretty much the same, Grinnell put more weight on the other factors. Now, one example is not dispositive, but it does illustrate the point</p>
<p>I much prefer Opaline’s response to thirdplanet than falconflyer’s. Opaline shows he/she is wise and sensitive. I don’t think anyone has any business lecturing anyone else on college confidential.</p>
<p>I did not expect to find the college application process as ugly as it has turned out to be. It’s all a game, and the students are the playing pieces. Some high school principals (not ours) try to assist by making it as fair as possible from their ends. The colleges play the USN&WR game in manipulative, disgusting ways.</p>
<p>This process has made me think twice about donating to my alma mater (not Grinnell). As a matter of fact, until my alma mater stops recruiting athletes, I am not donating a dime.</p>
<p>By the way, falconflyer, your most recent post makes no sense to me: “high scores [and blank] are mutually exclusive”. High scores and grades are mutually exclusive? Is that what you are saying?</p>
<p>At my daughter’s high school, to some extent, high grades and scores are mutually exclusive. To me, that’s absolutely ridiculous. Unless there is an explanation (cultural differences, for example), we would usually expect them to go hand-in-hand. But with extreme variations in grading among teachers teaching the same courses, students in the unweighted honors math program (until weighting of grades begins in honors precalculus) struggling to get As in math classes, and many students taking courses like AP Environmental Science and AP Psychology instead of the more demanding AP classes, the GPA is not a good method to compare all but the top students with straight As in the most rigorous courses. Even then, one or two Bs from the toughest teachers has prevented some top students from getting Berkeley regents.</p>
<p>One very smart girl got something like a 2230 on the SATs when everyone expected her to get a 2300+, and she chose not to re-take the test. One boy with a 4.0 GPA and near perfect SAT scores is not regarded as a true intellectual among his peers but mostly as someone always able to ace tests. For the most part, my daughter and her friends say that if you rank students according to their SAT scores, you come out with a more accurate ranking than by GPA- at least at their school.</p>
<p>Of course, this is not something that people at ho-hum schools want to hear, but it’s definitely our observation at our upscale community public high school.</p>
<p>@nosering. Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I do not expect everyone or even anyone to agree with me. However, I respect honest disagreement.</p>
<ol>
<li> “The colleges play the USN&WR game in manipulative, disgusting ways.”<br></li>
</ol>
<p>I agree and essentially said that in my post. They all play games. But my underlying point was this - let’s say Grinnell is the best college one gets into and can afford. It would be self-destructive to turn it down because one is aware of the “games” it uses, since all colleges use some game. My advice would be to go to the best college you can afford and understand that until things change this is the admissions process one has to deal with. Grinnell is no exception; it is simply more upfront. I cannot knock it for that. Actually, I commend it.</p>
<ol>
<li> “high scores [and blank] are mutually exclusive”. High scores and grades are mutually exclusive? Is that what you are saying?"</li>
</ol>
<p>I missed a word there - good catch! I meant to say “NOT mutually exclusive”. I trust this is clearer.</p>
<p>I guess I did come off as lecturing, but that has to do with the fact that I am 3X older than thirrdplanet. It was the parent part of me that came out there. I would hope my kids get the landscape and do not turn down a top college when they know all other colleges are doing the same thing. Seems self-defeating to me. Knowledge does not alter reality; it just brings it more into focus.</p>
<p>I am not saying I would turn down a college because of this. However, if I am accepted, it might make me think I am a second-string acceptance. If this makes any sense. It might subconsciously affect some people that they don’t want to go to the school if the college doesn’t want them. It is hard to try and phrase my point. I don’t think anyone would specifically think “I’m not going to this school because I didn’t get in early and I’m better than that” but that they might think “Why didn’t I get this early write? Do they not like me as much as others? Do I want to go to a school that is trying to increase their average standardized test scores?” Personally, I really like test optional schools. Not because I did that poorly on them, but because it shows me what the admissions department really cares about when choosing which students they want to attend. I’d rather be accepted to a school because I worked my butt off for my GPA in four years of high school than what I did one Saturday morning. Maybe that’s just me. Standardized test scores are highly correlated with wealth. If they are flying prospies in for free primarily (not solely) because of them, this makes me question things a bit. Just my two cents. I didn’t want to come off upset and like I wouldn’t attend because I didn’t receive an early write. I am by no means the top 5% or whatever of students they accepted! I just question their methods and what they are really trying to get out of it. I wish they would spend the 65k (someone calculated the amount for transport in the article) on scholarships instead of flying out most likely the wealthiest students just to increase their average SAT score.</p>
<p>Oh my.</p>
<p>“Do I want to go to a school that is trying to increase their average standardized test scores?”</p>
<p>Well that’s pretty much all of them. Including test-optional schools. Candidates with higher than the median test scores at a test-optional school are still encouraged to submit their scores, which are looked upon favorably. This is basically what we were told when visiting Bates, as an example.</p>
<p>Going test-optional is a fine way for a school to increase the number of applicants and in turn increase the perceived selectivity, positively impacting USNWR. It’s not just about showing “what the admissions department really cares about when choosing which students they want to attend.”.</p>
<p>Rest assured…GPA counts more than SAT scores. You can look at the common data sets and see that. But SAT scores count, as does yield, as does trying to entice some full-pay students with high SAT scores in order to achieve three objectives in one: $$$ (so that need for others may be met), high SAT scores/positive impact on USNWR and selectivity, and managing yield. It’s just the way it is, and it most certainly is not just Grinnell.</p>
<p>Thirrdplanet - I appreciate your explanation. I do get what you are saying, and I do hope you get into a top school of your choice.</p>
<p>Trekslxchick - I cannot improve on what you said, so hope you do not mind me piggybacking with a simple “ditto”.</p>
<p>Falconflyer - don’t mind at all, I’m flattered! </p>
<p>I also wish Thirrdplanet well. I think if she were to review her post in 10 years (or maybe less), we all might be more like-minded :)</p>
<p>My son never received an offer to be flown to campus as part of his early write. I have no idea, but I’m wondering if they offer that to students who would add a certain kind of diversity, like URM, international from an unusual location or first generation college. This is just speculation on my part. If they wanted to get full tuition from kids from wealthier families, why would they offer them merit scholarships?</p>
<p>The admin director in an article said this is the first year doing this type of program. This, I believe, is slightly different than an early write or likely letter. It was the actual acceptance packet sent early, along with an invitation to visit the campus subsidized by $500. No additional packet is being sent in three weeks. Admin also said they paid no attention to FA requirements in the applications. This is definitely not a wealthier family thing - too much merit aid was given out. They are basically trying to get students who have a higher profile than they normally get to attend. I do think trekslxchick’s post nails everything in a nutshell. This is but one thing being done by admin.</p>
<p>Sorry, I just can’t stay silent anymore. Some of you are complaining that it isn’t fair that schools use money to attract certain students, like high GPA or high SAT or kids from Alaska (the 50-state rule, which you apparently missed). Here is the fact. I am the parent of a full-pay Grinnell grad and I could NOT be happier that the school uses my full pay (and their excellent endowment) to help bring in a)kids who are smarter than my child, b)kids who are from the actual middle class (or what’s left of it), c)kids from all over the world. I could not be more thrilled with the diversity my child experienced at the school, and the challenge that the kids who were actually brighter, or harder working or both, put in front of my child. If Grinnell administration is reading this stuff, please don’t listen to the complaints of people who think that everyone on the playing field deserves a trophy, and keep up the excellent work. I am going to go send you a donation. Thanks!</p>
<p>My thought on the entire thing was a bit different than grumpyoldman’s, who, by the way, truly paid for the right to speak! Along with bethievt who paid also.</p>
<p>However, my take is really more fundamental. It is Grinnell’s money, and it can do what it wants with it. I do not feel I have a right to anyone else’s money. And, I darn sure do not think I have the right to tell Grinnell what to do with it.</p>
<p>^^^^^applause to both grumpy and falcon</p>
<p>As a current Grinnell student I have a similar feeling to what thirrdplanet said. I feel like this early write program is going to set up those students who didn’t receive an early write to feel like second-class students from the very beginning. It just seems to set up a “stereotype threat”. Not to mention that at least in terms of race the top applicants were surprisingly lacking in diversity. I got the sense that none of the top applicants Grinnell invited were students of color and a lot of them seemed to be solidly upper-middle class. In light of the recent problem the school has been having in terms of staffing their office of diversity, this worries me quite a bit. But this is just my observation.</p>
<p>@_Silence</p>
<p>Well, I’m a student of color (though admittedly upper middle class) and I met quite a few fellow prospies of color. I do, however, agree that the vast majority of them were white. I don’t necessarily think that’s because race was really factored into the decisions very much. The feeling I got from the program was that it was solely for students that they felt were desirable and had higher-than-average stats. Given that Grinnell is an LAC, and most LACs get many more white applicants than applicants of color in the first place, I can see how it would end up with more students being white; for various reasons (usually socioeconomic), whites and Asians tend to have higher SAT scores, etc.</p>
<p>This isn’t necessarily a bad thing - the rest of the admitted pool may very well include more students of color to mitigate this fact.</p>
<p>(I did notice the very indignant posters on the tables at Spencer’s! To be honest, those actually assuaged my fears quite a bit; it was nice to know that the students at Grinnell care so deeply about diversity.)</p>