I don’t think it is a matter of having straight As or anything and a C isn’t the kiss of death, though not encouraging, but I think a D really crosses an invisible line. I can’t see an Ivy taking a student with a D under anything but exceptional circumstances which the kid doesn’t have.
A school I am familiar with (lots of friends) gets at least 15 acceptances to H every year. I am not sure if that is a feeder or not but the high school is featured in H website as one of the most represented publics. Apart from special cases (athletes etc mentioned above) the kids that get in still have the whole package (gpa+sat+ec). On the other hand students that are a bit “special” but not great across have great chances for top LACs. That is true to our school. Exceptional students that are not great across the board have excellent results with Carleton, Amherst etc. Especially Amherst is giving a second look to our kids due to our zip code and greatly rewards intellectual pursuits. So, as already mentioned above, although there are student with compromised grades at all ivy schools I would be very careful guessing if my student will be one of them. I also want to mention that EC’s are not as special as they used to be and some parents are delusional there too. I am quite familiar with the ECs from kids from our school and I am at awe at what kids are doing these days. Writing on line books with lots of followers, winning scholastic competitions, creating their own award winning puppets and the list goes on and on. And this is a mediocre public high school (in a city though).
A HS that sends 15+ kids to H every year is a feeder.
First of all, I would take that comment “no problem” with a measured grain of salt. Some folks tend to embellish on how much a school wants their child or how much “pull” they have. While a C or D, may not be fatal, it can present an appreciable problem for admission–its all in the context of how the grade was received and whether their was improvement. So, while there is some flex, their has to be a compelling reason and hook for admission. That said, this is a rather provocative article on this very issue------http://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/articles/3801/wanted-smart-students-from-poor-families
The Harvard feeder that was mentioned is probably Boston Latin. I remember hearing years ago that H automatically accepted the top 30 kids in each graduating class and the valedictorian was given a full scholarship. It’s very difficult to gain admission to BL, and even more difficult to stay in. It’s extremely rigorous. It’s a large school, so the top 30 kids would be very strong candidates.
“I’d just encourage her to cast a wide net because you never know what’s going to happen with admissions.”
That’s good advice. As long as the kid has a safety, he’ll be fine. April may be very disappointing, but the kids get over it.
Maybe the school doesn’t give many As and Bs because the kids don’t do the level of work needed to get those grades. Just a thought…
If the kid attends a feeder school, then it’s a pretty good bet that the school has a very strong college guidance system. One thing that makes a school a “feeder” is a the level of trust that the college ad com develops with the guidance counselor at that particular school – the g.c. will steer the right students toward the Ivy, and steer students who fall short to other colleges.
An Ivy might very well accept an extremely lopside student – a student who has exceptional talents in some areas, but weaknesses in another-- but the college acceptance is based on wanting the strengths. But the key to that is that areas of strength do need to be special – it’s more than just getting A’s. On the other hand, the kid who seems to be a loner and won a city-wide poetry contest could very well be an extraordinary writer who struggles with subjects like math.
@calmom, True, some universities admit by school or major, and I’ve seen an engineering school at a top university take kids who are great in the technical subjects and care not a whit whether they are good/bad/terrible at writing poetry. Likewise, a communications college (even top-rated ones) may not care if a kid bombs calculus if they are terrific in writing.
But my point is that Ivies and elites also take “lopsided” kids – and it doesn’t require an application to a particular school or major. It may require a good mesh with the college’s priorities. And the areas of strength really need to be something that will outclass other applicants, in those areas.
Of course that’s also why athletes get admitted with stats that may be atypically low - sometimes the area of strength that impresses the college is prowess in handling a ball.
Not so many lopsided kids. The tippy top colleges are looking at the individual, but with the needs of the whole in mind. The kid still needs to pass the “holistic muster.” She needs to show what she will contribute to the whole, how much she can take from it, and that she is able to meet the four-year expectations, be a swell choice over all those other great kids. “Standing out” isn’t so much about one particular talent, but the way all the efforts pull together and then how she presents herself through all the writing portions.
Harvard made some statements about wanting more poets- but that doesn’t throw holistic out the window. And yes, C and D can be fatal, in a fiercely competitive pool.
Where a lower grade doesn’t matter so much is particular. That super STEM kid with research experience and some nice rounding, may be fine with a B in French. Assuming the great poet has the rest of the package, maybe it’s ok she stopped at pre-calc.
@lookingforward, I think this is really a lovely formulation of what students come to CC to find out: what are admissions officers looking for in a successful candidate? Thank you for stating it so simply:
@calmom, I believe that @lookingforward is correct when you’re talking about universities that don’t admit by school or major. Look through the results threads, and the schools that admit holistically aren’t overlooking terrible grades/scores no matter how lopsided the kids may be.
Here’s what I have learned over the years about dealing with “those” kinds of parents and college admissions:
- No matter what you do or don't say to a parent, it is virtually impossible to shake his/her deep-seated belief that the child is uniquely special and will stand out no matter what the odds and no matter what anyone says to them, so there is little point in attempting to educating them - hence, the smile and nod tactic;
- The college admissions process remains a mystery to most of us and can surprise us all when it comes to who they admit and deny - hence, any advice you give could be wrong anyway; and
- Popular meda/TV does not help the situation because on TV shows everyone gets into (or came from) the top schools with seemingly little effort.
“These” parents - heck, all of us - just need to let our kids go through the process and try to get them to target the best fit schools. The best advice is to remind parents to have their kids apply to at least a couple of academic and financial fits.
No chance with C’s. But inner-city school, URM, nearly all A’s, decent not great ACT/SAT, & good essays will get into a few top 20 schools.
“Holistic” does not mean every kid is the same. “Holistic” means that the ad coms are looking to fill each class with individuals with a variety of strengths and interests, with the end goal of collectively admitting enough students to fill various niches.
If the kid is at an Ivy-feeder magnet school, then the guidance counselor at the school knows whether or not the kid would be attractive to his target school, and will advise him accordingly. A g.c. at a feeder school is likely to know the regional admissions rep well, and may informally vet questionable candidates ahead of time-- describing the kid’s strengths and weaknesses and asking whether it’s worthwhile applying.
I do know of specific instances of kids with strong writing skills getting into top schools, including one Ivy, on the strength of their writing accomplishments. I say “accomplishments”, because the kid who was accepted to the Ivy (in a result which surprised everyone, including him) was having his work regularly published when in high school – I’d assume that his application package included a c.v. or writing samples.
I know of another case of an elite LAC admissions where the kid did in fact have at least one D in high school, but did submit a large chunk of writing samples-- kids was an English major who later graduated phi beta kappa.
someone earlier made a comment that there was a rumor that Harvard guarantees to admit the val of Boston Latin and give them a full scholarship. That simply is not possible. The Ivies don’t give scholarships, only (full) financial aid. So if the val of Boston Latin is affluent, they are not getting a full ride.
@calmom, we (most of us) get it, but the top universities (that aren’t admitting by major/school) are rarely overlooking terrible grades/stats in non-hooked/ non-URM applicants even if the applicant is terrific in some other aspect. The scuttlebutt on here (and elsewhere on CC) is that top LACs tend to be more forgiving of weaknesses. In generally, they also don’t have as competitive an applicant pool to choose from either.
For every lopsided kid, there are plenty who meet the fuller expectations. There IS some expectation of conformity- not the dreaded sort, but the ability to function, fit and thrive, as that institution operates, the ability to choose to pursue rigor and do well, get out of your little seat and do something beyond your own personal “passions”- and be some sort of social asset. The niches exist within pretty conventional spaces. People tell tales on CC of a few exceptions they know or heard of- but you have to realize the sheer number of lopsideds who don’t make it through.
We also need to remember how much has changed in the recent past, in terms of aggressive hs educations and the sheer number applying. H now has double the number of apps for the same number of slots, as roughly ten years ago. It changes everything.
And just as an aside, the URM and low SES applicants are getting better every year.
That’s why I said that the lopsided kid typically is very exceptional in the area of strength. Because kids with exceptional strengths also very often have significant weaknesses in areas that don’t motivate or interest them - they can be so consumed or driven in their passion that they simply don’t have time or motivation to meet the expectations of teachers of subjects that don’t interest them.
There are some kids who spend their high school years trying to do everything “right” in order to get into a top college – they make sure to take the “most rigorous” curriculum, they aim for leadership positions in various EC’s, they aim for high grades and high test scores. The Ivy’s get a lot of applicants like that, and they accept many of them. CC is dominated by those kids and their parents, constantly looking for validation that they are on the right track to get into a top college.
And then there are kids who are more driven by their own interests and passions, and they often break a lot of “rules” about what courses they are supposed to take, or what schools they are supposed to attend-- and just keep at whatever it is that motivates them. They tend to care more about pursuing their passions than they do about attending a particular college, and they are unlikely to spend their time on CC, because the last thing they care about is validation from the masses (and if they don’t feel like they have time to do the busy work that their 5th period teacher seems to insist upon, they probably also don’t have time to be looking at internet forums about college admission).
Some of those kids end up being particularly good at whatever it is they are spending their time at, whether their strengths are in math or poetry or music or something else-- and some of those kids end up applying to top colleges, and some of them get accepted, because their application stood out from the others because of whatever it was that they did do.