“when Fitzgerald applied to Princeton, the admissions board looked at Fitzgerald’s troubling grades and asked him why they should let him in. Fitzgerald then responded by stating that it was his seventeenth birthday. It is possible that Fitzgerald’s charming personality played a role in his acceptance. Fitzgerald himself stated in Ten Years of Princeton ’17, “Priggishness sits ill on Princeton.” Perhaps this is why he was granted admittance despite his questionable grades in high school.”
Is there something to this? Do schools prefer non-“Priggish” kids?
110 years ago? Probably. But college admissions was a lot different then. HYP for the rich, white, male, Christian (preferably Protestant, which FSF was not), feeder-school educated was pretty much assured.
From a few decades later, here is JFK’S application to Harvard. I doubt he’d be admitted today.
While being generally likeable is always an asset in life, a writer’s anecdote from >100 yrs ago seems unlikely to indicate anything specific about current balance in college admissions. Likeability will not outweigh bad grades.
Unlikeability could be enough for a denial at very selective schools.
Two months prior, Kennedy wrote this application essay to Princeton. Neither essay would get him into either school today. But then when you list your father’s occupation as “Chairman of Securities & Exchange Commission”… So, he had no problem being admitted to Princeton and I believe to Harvard, as well, but chose Princeton in spite of his father’s wish. Due to a gastrointestinal illness that put him in a hospital, however, he only spent the fall semester of his freshmen year at Princeton before transferring to Harvard to be near his family.
I’ve read on CC that some people think the essay is the defining characteristic that lets kids in or leaves them in the reject pile. While, I personally don’t think the essay matters THAT much: An essay by F. Scott Fitzgerald is unlikely to have been ignored.
Sadly, schools like Princeton overly focus on perfect GPAs rather than outstanding ability in a single field. I’d love to see more stellar kids at top schools who obviously prefer one thing over another. As it is, a kid has to do well in everything in high school in order to leap the bar into schools like Princeton.
He’d be in the reject pile immediately these days. This makes me wonder, would he still have gained entree into the salons in Paris and elsewhere if he hadn’t been a Princeton man? Sad to imagine American literature without him.
Notice the photograph. The main reason that photos were required was to enable them to identify non-White applicants, and to try and identify Jewish applicants. That is also why alumni interviews were added. Part of the interview was to probe the applicants to see whether the applicants were Jews (or other members of other groups) who “passed”.
Princeton strongly prefers stellar kids. There aren’t that many of them.
Fitzgerald was not cut out for traditional education. He failed a bunch of subjects and quit Princeton :-). Not inconsistent with the initial judgment of the admission committee probably.
Essays matter immensely. Not instead of academics and other characteristics. But in addition to them. I am speaking from a sample size of one – that is very scientific :-).
Top schools often quote that 75-85% of kids can do the work. The only decision point is choosing which kids meet a Universities’ need for a diverse class. I’d guess with 2 million high school graduates annually they could fill a Princeton class 200 times over. And, still be at the same academic level.
And he went on to become one of the best writers in a century which is certainly more than most Princeton/other graduates have done or will ever do. Education is great. But, personally I am honestly glad Fitzgerald lived the Jazz age rather than sitting in classes. His life experience sings and I can’t imagine that his time would have been better spent in geometry which he failed.
So you believe and have said many many times. Sample size of 1 doesn’t cut it.
Isn’t it more like (today) that such colleges want to see perfect or near-perfect GPAs and something outstanding (to the college and beyond the GPA) somewhere? Given the level of competition for admission, they are able to get that in most cases.
In a lot of ways, sure. But, elite colleges still suffer from groupthink and seek those who subscribe to their same brand of moralizing and virtue signaling. Wait! That’s quite priggish, isn’t it?
In the eyes of the beholder. And perhaps all of these kids bring something stellar. Some are indeed outstanding in something and thousands of those outstanding/stellar kids are still rejected. Not enough spots. Has been this way for a long while.
Naturally, you think your kid Princeton kid is “stellar”, it’s assumed bias. But by definition most parents would assume that any kid with a perfect GPA and national title in something is stellar. But they still wouldn’t be accepted to Princeton. There are thousands like this. The parents of the rejected kids don’t think their kids aren’t stellar.
But others might disagree on the definition. I know some Princeton grads and kids who are just ok and some who are really outstanding. Again, it’s likely a matter of what one weighs as important. Yet, in any case there are thousands of stellar kids by any definition in a calendar year.
Yes, they want to see both. And I think that’s pretty reasonable. But even if they pick the top in both categories there are thousands (maybe even tens of thousands who aren’t getting into these schools). No difference at all among candidates there’s just not enough room.
That’s why even a kid who is outstanding today and gets 2-4 Ivy acceptances, still won’t get into every Ivy. There isn’t a standard bar to reach. At some point, it’s also partly based on what the school needs to complete the class. Of course, every year there is a kid who gets into all the Ivies or something. But given the millions of graduates that’s an extreme example.
Agree to disagree over the meaning of “stellar” I never said your KID thought he was stellar. I have no basis for anything since it’s only you participating in the discussion of stellar.
I wouldn’t disagree there are kids far off the charts at many schools including P. There are more kids who are off the charts than can be accommodated at the top 5 schools, for sure ( and even top 25+). That’s my point. There are many kids every year who are many sigma’s away from the norm in multiple categories who will never attend any of these schools including Princeton.
I don’t believe there is some small group of 2,000 kids who outshine all others and therefore deserve a spot because they are “stellar” and I can’t imagine that some parents think only a tiny fraction of kids would do amazing things at Princeton.
It wasn’t so much Fitzgerald was a “Princeton man” that allowed him “entree into the salons in Paris and elsewhere” and becoming a regular (with his wife Zelda) in what Hemingway called “A Moveable Feast.” as his celebrity status he gained from a huge debut publication success that he enjoyed with This Side of Paradise. He wrote the first draft of this novel, initially entitled “Romantic Egoist,” while socializing and getting drunk at this Cottage Club, one of the eating clubs at Princeton he was a member of.
We have a large number of family members who attended and/or graduated from Ivy League Schools…a generation ago…so admitted in the 70’s or before. ALL of them say they would not be accepted today.
The younger generation (nieces and nephews) attended Yale, Dartmouth, Georgetown, Wellesley…admitted in 2000 or later. But even they say…admission would be unlikely if they applied today.
Way to make me feel even more inadequate having gotten rejected by several Ivies in the 1980’s and my kid getting into several recently. I know he is smarter than me, he knows he is smarter than me, my spouse definitely knows the entire family is smarter than me, but it hurts having a faceless community remind me😀
