Letter to the editor of Princeton alumni magazine about college admission frenzy

Parents Forum
41

<p>Proud Dad, as an alumna of the class of '78 and the mother of a girl in the clas of '09, I beg to differ. Actually, I insist on differing. Princeton has changed enormously. </p>

<p>When I walked in my P-rade for my 25th - the only Reunion I have attended -I passed as they always do all the other classes who lined the parade walk. At the top, the oldest classes. At the bottom (we go down a hill), the youngest. At the top, white men. Then you see a few Asian men, a few African American men, and some women. Then more women. Then more Asians, more African Americans, Latinos. Then the flags start, the Gay and Lesbian rainbow, the Women's Soccer team NCAA champions, the East Indian clubs. And all the faces of the youngest class look at you and smile.</p>

<p>I was a fish out of water in the 70's. There were 5 boys for every girl. I wore jeans with patches on the knee and a bandana on my head. Most everyone else wore pink pants and belts with whales. I joined a co-ed eating club my junior year, and quit, because I couldn't bear it. The academics, however, made up for the social scene.</p>

<p>My daughter is having a completely different experience. Princeton was always friendly, the Southern feeling it has contribute. But it used to be socially segregated and full of privilege. In my daughter's experience, that is no longer true. She chose between Princeton and Stanford. I did not influence her at all in her decision. And my California D with leftist sensibilities says she and her friends think they are at the best college in the country. I have zero interest in whether that's true BTW, only in how she feels about the school. She feels it is home. And, BTW, she loves her eating club. And her dance club. And her junior paper advisor. And not everyone is white any more. And not everyone is male. And the academics are, still, extraordinary.</p>

<p>Shirley Tilghman is only continuing Princeton's evolution.</p>

<p>Now, you still don't have to like the place. But it has changed a lot of whits.</p>

42

<p>"Her younger D's safety, her ace in the pocket, is NW! She didn't send out her apps wondering if she'd get in anywhere due to the current crush, the fact she's female, competition from her stellar h.s. classmates, etc., etc. She actually is in a worry-free situation."</p>

<p>It was my understanding that there's no such guarantee at Northwestern that profs' children will get in. I'm not sure we can all conclude her dd is an automatic in there.</p>

43

<p>


Hah! OK, I'll give you some whits! ;) Though it's hard to tell from those accepted to P from my neck of the woods!</p>

44

<p>Pizza girl is correct. While fac brats at NW get a boost in admissions (and a large break on tuition, the amount depending on the faculty member's standing) they are by no means auto admits.</p>

45

<p>Okay, Proud Dad.
Princeton isn't Bard. Agreed.</p>

46

<p>Bravo to the "fit" and "passion" haters. Sign me up.</p>

<p>I think I dislike "fit" more than passion. I always want to counter the "fit" frenzy with some variant of "bloom where you are planted."</p>

<p>D. is at a school that is uncomfortable for her in many ways; she loves the academics but she's off kilter socially, being far more liberal and secular than a lot of her classmates. One of the most valuable things she is learning though is how to work through her discomfort, and how to stay true to herself even if she's a bit lonely at times.</p>

47

<p>I agree on the "passion" thing. A hackneyed, meaningless phrase in the world of college admissions. </p>

<p>I don't agree on the "fit" thing, though. Of course, it's impossible to know absolutely whether a particular kid will wind up happy at a particular school, and no school is perfect. (No kid is perfect!) But I think trying to make that evaluation is important and valuable. Despite the learning experience it provides, I'd vastly prefer that my child NOT wind up at a school where he or she is uncomfortable or off kilter or lonely. I just don't see that as a good thing. And if the discomfort is bad enough, the kid winds up transferring. It's not the worst thing in the world, but as the parent of a kid who did transfer, largely for lack of a social fit, I believe transferring is something most families would prefer to avoid. I can't come up with another way to figure out whether a kid stands a good chance of being happy with his or her choice aside from carefully evaluating "fit."</p>

48

<p>I went to a school where the academics were perfect and the social fit was not - for me. To this day I wonder how my approach to life might have been different if I'd gone to a school with "fit". So whether or not it's necessary, I believe it does exist. After all, we don't think that an adult who is dying to live in NYC should decide to live in Paducah without expecting some adjustment issues.</p>

49

<p>I guess I have to agree that a certain degree of fit is necessary. I just think that there seems to be an undue emphasis on it at times, as if there is only one perfect kind of school for every kid. In fact, kids can like different schools for different reasons. I know mine has applied to a variety of places. About the only thing they have in common is that they all have high quality academics, and none of them is enormous.</p>

50

<p>I guess it's pretty obvious that our family doesn't take fit to seriously. D1 has only visited three of the 16 schools she applied to. We have just figured she'll worry about fit this spring when she knows which ones are actual options.</p>

51

<p>I agree re: "passion." As someone with what would normally be called a 'passionate personality,' but very widespread (sometimes short term) interests, I hate being asked a question that implies the need for <em>one</em> direction, <em>one</em> real love in life. The good news is that I think "passion" is more of a buzzword than anything else, because I've always responded honestly--"I love many things. I love learning new things, and I throw my time and effort into a variety of pursuits. But I'm still exploring...last week my passion was for Russian history, this week it's for Billy Joel, and also, I really want to learn how to play the bagpipes"--and y'know, framed in the right way, this has always been an acceptable response! It's even served me well. My college prided itself on an interdisciplinary approach to education, and when I was applying, it was reeeaaally easy for me to talk about why I loved that! Some kids really do discover their callings from a young age, but for everyone else, I think it's a better idea to be honest--to say "Right now, I just love trying new things," or "I love activities that let me help people, but I'm still figuring out where that will fit in to my life"--than to contrive a particular interest. </p>

<p>Re: "fit", of course it's also a bit of a buzzword, and maybe a stressful one if interpreted too narrowly, but I do see the importance here. It doesn't mean that there's one school out there for every person...simply that some environments might be more conducive to a person's preferences/learning style than other environments might be. It's also important to realize that some kids are "bloom where you're planted" types, where "fit" doesn't need to be a huge concern, while others really are more heavily influenced by their environments. </p>

<p>There's no mysterious science to this. If you hate science and want to be a dance major, don't apply to MIT. If gloomy weather triggers your depression, maybe Cornell isn't for you. Some kids will take more "fit" factors into account; some will weigh these factors more heavily overall; some won't use a specific rubric, but will follow their gut instincts. Some won't pay any special attention and will be just fine anyway. I don't think a kid can totally ignore "fit." Consciously or not, it's why they'll refuse to look at certain schools, refuse to get out of the car on certain visits, be blind to reason when it comes to another school, toss out some brochures and look at others more closely...apply to 16 schools instead of 300! The kid might not actually be correct regarding what's really important to him and what will make him happy in a college, but the screening process will still involve some version of "Can I see myself here? Is this how I want to spend 4 years?" And some kids may simply have a more complex evaluation system than others. </p>

<p>I liked the "bloom where you're planted" comment in a previous post. At the risk of carrying an analogy way too far (my apologies in advance), consider the fact that some stuff will bloom anywhere. There are even plants that thrive in seemingly adverse conditions. Then there are plants that will grow in a pretty good number of places...stick 'em in a pot, in a garden, in a field, along a road, in a vase...and maybe sooner, maybe later, you'll get flowers. Throw the same seeds somewhere else, results will be totally different. And some plants are just incredibly picky...they need a certain climate, a certain amount of space, a certain type of fertilizer...and these little details can make a big difference. So "fit" doesn't have to mean finding the <em>one</em> perfect environment (given the unpredictability of admissions, it shouldn't mean that...too much pressure), or even the <em>best</em> possible environment. It just means finding a place that will allow them to thrive. It might still include some struggle, some loneliness, whatever, but at the end of the day, the kid feels mostly comfortable and does mostly okay.</p>

52

<p>I saw this a few pages back. Skimmed the rest to see if anyone else addressed it, and didn't see it. Sorry if I missed something.

[quote]
I think her credibility suffers from even mentioning her D got into Princeton.

[/quote]

But wasn't this lady writing as a Princeton Alumni, to the Princeton alumni newsletter? Isn't it appropriate then to make sure that she is pointing out that she has both a past and current connection to Princeton? If she had written a letter as an outsider saying, "you rejected my kid, and I don't care because there are lots of other good schools out there" - would they have published her?</p>

<p>I think her letter is appropriate in the medium it was first published in. The fact that she is recognizing that Princeton is one good school among many might be new info for a lot of the readers of that magazine. I feel sure she would have worded it differently had she known it would be here, with a completely different audience.</p>