I would be careful categorizing any kids as mediocre. Just because they got in and your child didn’t isn’t cause for such harsh judgement. I’m guessing they had something that other kids didn’t. And test scores are not everything.
9 Likes
Thanks - I’ve been stewing about the use of that word since I read it. Just sounds like a lot of sour grapes at this point.
There was someone on another thread whining because his kid didn’t get into one of the twenty schools he applied to when far less “qualified “kids did. Then proceeded to further insult everyone by saying the kid had better options anyway and wouldn’t have attended.
9 Likes
Well, by some metrics, my child is less qualified than others who were WLed, rejected.
I think we end up speaking out of both sides of our mouths when we can’t admit that sometimes less qualified candidates are admitted. Including my kid! In some situations.
It’s humans and not computers processing the apps.
5 Likes
Yes lots of sour grapes for sure. My D22 with a better resume got shut out of all the schools my older kid got into. Does it suck? Yep. But I’m certainly not going to imply that the kids that did get into these schools instead of my daughter are somehow less deserving. Our kids are watching and listening. And based on these forums it’s not good at all what they’re hearing.
8 Likes
Even more importantly, the schools we are talking about have holistic admission policies, not solely stats based (rack and stack).
4 Likes
If your only metric for being “qualified” is quantifiable data like GPA and test scores then I think you’re missing the bigger picture. Parents on here are pissed because their kids have the scores. But kids with lower scores clearly have something else that is VALUABLE to the university. Just because it’s not quantifiable doesn’t mean it does not have merit.
21 Likes
Spot on.
But even a holistic process can admit less qualified candidates? Or is a holistic process infallible and unassailable because that is the nature of it? Say you split the AO team in half? Run the same apps through both. Guarantee you they won’t have the same results.
I am not upset either way. Whether my kid is among the less qualified who have an acceptance, or the opposite. All processes will never yield any predictable result unless it is computerized. Not advocating that it be so.
Thus, the kids keep applying to more and more colleges.
5 Likes
I’m not sure what you mean by ‘less qualified’…do you mean based on gpa, rigor, and/or test scores?
Many holistic schools do multiple reads (different people using the same application scoring system), while others do team reads (two readers reading the app together). With that said, I am sure the accepted pools at many schools could look different based on who the reader is/readers are and other variables.
2 Likes
It doesnt have to be quantifiable, but it should be able to be clearly articulated, and replicated. I have no kids in this cycle, nor last. My kids all got to attend their top choice, so it surely is not sour grapes. Rather, it is a preference that colleges use transparent standards( however they choose to define them) in the interest of both applicants and the public to restore some sense of legitamacy and predictability to the process. Claiming the schools"must have seen something" in successful applicants but not being able to explain what that “something” was is no better than admitting there are no standards and the process is arbitrary according to the whims of the AOs.
14 Likes
You write that “higher grades/test scores does not mean more deserving”; why?
1 Like
By that, I mean look at the rubrics that the college AOs use. Not just scores.
So say for Harvard, they have a bunch of categories (including intellectual curiosity).
Now take 2 kids. Harvard AO will check off 1, 2 or 3 based on essays, LOR and achievements.
Different readers could easily assign values in those sections for the 2 kids completely different from each other.
So a kid that most people on the street would find more intellectually curious could easily get a lower score than another.
And thus “less qualified” - I’m not bothered either way because to me, might as well throw a dart and save the bother of reading.
2 Likes
What I think doesn’t matter.
AOs who work in holistic systems use many other inputs when deciding who they want on campus…so not just grades and test scores, but course rigor, letters of rec, essays, demonstrated interest, ECs, intended major, and even the family’s ability to pay.
AOs at these schools are building a class with applicants who fit what they are looking for…and that can change from year to year.
I understand people want more transparency. I personally don’t think more transparency is coming. Meanwhile most 4-year colleges accept most students, and plenty of 4 year colleges are rack and stack.
Students don’t need a prestigious college to be successful, something mitchris just said about MIT on the MIT reinstates tests thread.
4 Likes
Is Class of 2026 an outlier year for college admissions?
In my opinion, yes.
Is it “fair”? Probably not. Welcome to Adulting 101…life isn’t always fair. Sometimes, you do not always get what you were hoping for. It totally sucks.
If you (the proverbial “you”) only apply to Top 20/Top 25 schools, then yes…you are setting yourself up for disappointment. Is your life going to be over if you don’t go to Northeastern, Northwestern, Boston College, Georgetown, Univ of Chicago, Harvard, Princeton, Columbia, etc?
NO.
If you get rejected from a school you were really hoping to get into, ABSOLUTELY take a few moments to mourn that. It’s normal to feel sad about it. But don’t go talking smack about how the people who did get in didn’t deserve it.
Is a college of your top choice REQUIRED to admit you if you have perfect SAT/ACT scores & a perfect GPA? NO!
Is college admissions often about more than the test score-GPA combo? YES!
Then what else is it based on? It varies depending on the school. Go look at the Common Data Set for the schools you are/are going to apply to. They’ll tell you what their most important factors are right there on their website.
9 Likes
I can’t speak directly to Harvard’s process. But in cases where the applicant was scored differently that is often resolved either by the readers coming to an agreement, or the application getting evaluated by a larger committee.
An applicant with a lower score on the ‘intellectually curious’ input isn’t necessarily a ‘less qualified’ candidate in the overall picture.
Many tell you exactly what they’re looking for. UCLA lists 13 items that they consider. I don’t feel like it’s incumbent on them to tell us exactly how each is weighted. I’m fine with the flexibility in admissions even tho it didn’t help my kid. There are a lot of exceptional kids out there who don’t necessarily “look great on paper”. More power to them if they can see past that and admit a kid who doesn’t have the typical definition of success.
4 Likes
I think many people on this thread have the opinion that AO’s have more power than they actually have. My husband is a former AO and worked at one of the schools mentioned early on this topic. The class is “shaped” by Administrators higher than the AO. I would beg to differ that AO’s would deviate much from their co workers. Yes, they can absolutely push for particular students but with the sheer volume of applications at some schools I doubt that is happening much. Also, the notion that AO’s have personal agendas and no accountability couldn’t be further from the truth. Admissions is one of of the accountable offices in every institution. Yes, it is possible there could be a rogue AO but they probably wouldn’t have a job for too long. Although, he hasn’t been in Admissions for some time now his feeling is that in the case of a school like NEU receiving 91,000 apps it has to be more of a computer aided decision. Also, a school could be hiring outside readers. I’m not sure any school with close to 100,000 applications is spending too much time on any one app. Perhaps kids with higher stats from one particular school are being rejected or wl’d because in the past kids from that school didn’t enroll at NEU. The problem is there is no way to know how the incoming class will be shaped. But with the sheer number of applications to certain schools the odds are not in your favor. From a personal perspective I totally understand as my own child prepares to apply for the incoming class of 2023. Schools have become brands that every kid wants. I’m trying my hardest to steer her clear of the “'hot” schools but that isn’t always easy.
7 Likes
Let’s assume you have two applicants with the same range of grades, class rigor, and similar ECs, but you have only one spot.
(And admissions folks look at ranges — the kid with the 3.9 GPA doesn’t automatically win out over the one with the 3.83 GPA and never has. The student ranked 2 in the class is “close enough” to the one ranked 6, in most cases.)
Student One’s essay reveals them to be involved in several groups as an active member, but not leader, and an empathetic person who notices a peer who is struggling or left out and reaches out to make a difference with those individuals on a regular basis.
Student Two’s essay reveals them to be someone who takes initiative, spearheading campus-wide efforts and creating an organization to better address issues of diversity and inclusion (but who might rush by a lonely classmate in the hallway on the way to lead another meeting).
Which student does an AO pick? Both are students you would like on campus. Maybe you have too many students like Student Two already, so you opt for Student One. I think many here might say Student One was less qualified because of fewer leadership positions, but that person actually demonstrated leadership in a different way.
That is the nature of holistic review.
If this year is an outlier, I think it is not because standards have changed, but because:
(a) application numbers have increased, so there are fewer cases where a large percentage of the applications are being seen by the same set of eyes. More readers at the start of the funnel results in less predictability at what comes out the narrow end (plus there is less time to analyze each individual app); and
(b) it is more difficult to compare ECs during a pandemic when different students had far different access to activities and/or different personal risk factors. It comes down to the individual and highly personal judgment calls of different admissions staff.
14 Likes
NEU Indeed uses a computerized system to assist them with admission. I also doubt that there is “ double read or discussions” about any given applicant with a volume of 91,000. It would be nice if AO read the application at least once in its entirety))) , I hope they do . But I agree it’s more data driven computerized approach that they using .
1 Like
Ok, in that case, if it’s a computer - then what factors are they putting in?
Are we allowed to say that “more qualified” students are not getting in (according to whatever rubric NEU uses) because they are unlikely to attend?