Just from viewing the Ivy League Admission Thread on CC it seems like there are quite a few kids who get into multiple Ivies and it seems like there are many, many kids who get into not a single Ivy.
Shouldn’t that mean that there are identifiable and predictable patterns in who will be admitted to an Ivy? And who will be rejected?
If that answer is yes, then the next question is why so many people who don’t match that pattern still bother to apply?
I am sure this has a clear and simple answer that someone here on CC will share with me!
Something else that makes the applicant stand out from others with top end academic credentials.
No defects.
However, much of that latter two are subjectively evaluated, so typical posted stats and credentials do not give a complete picture. What is valued also varies by school.
Here is an example of something that is generally opaque to the applicant and anyone else reading the applicant’s stats on these forums: recommendations. A teacher or counselor may like the student, but that does mean that s/he will write a recommendation that impresses the admissions readers.
Here are some example recommendations and what MIT thinks of them: http://mitadmissions.org/apply/prepare/writingrecs
I.e. does anyone know whether the teacher who really likes the student will write a recommendation like the one for David, or the one for Jen?
Recommendations and essay quality are the two big unknowns. Every student who posts in the chance me threads thinks they have at least above average essays. By definition, half of the essays will be considered below average, and a great percentage of essays will be forgettable.
Usually when a kid gets into multiple Ivies, that kid is particularly outstanding in some specific way-- and the applicantt knows what that is, as do all the teachers and the g.c. writing the recs. It could be all sorts of things… but the “formula” is that something can be said about that applicant that sets him/her apart from all others. Maybe it’s demonstrated leadership, maybe it’s athletic prowess, maybe it’s specific academic achievements, maybe it’s a parent who is a wealthy VIP- but it is very clear to the ad com what that kid offers.
I have read hundreds of horrifyingly bad essays over the years. When I interviewed for my alma mater, many kids proudly showed up with their essay for me to read after the interview. Ugh. Their applications had already been submitted so it would have been cruel to say, “this is abysmal”.
But abysmal. The alumni interviewers joked that a good essay couldn’t get you accepted- but a bad essay most assuredly could get you rejected.
Welcome to the world of single digit and low teen acceptance rates. This isn’t a “you’re a stellar student and president of three clubs, worked hard, have good test scores so you’re accepted” process. There are simply too many highly qualified applicants, and there are even more applicants who think they are highly qualified.
Pretty eye opening stuff from MIT about the kind of student they want to apply. After reading that, I’d be hard pressed to think of a single person I know that I could write such a glowing letter about… That would/should dicourage most kids right there…
@SlackerMomMD , and yet, amazingly, it does still happen. Harvardboy got accpeted this year for no great reason that anyone can think of. He is a very good but not stellar student. His test scores were good of course, but again, prob not stellar. He has lots of ECs, including class pres two years running. My D, his classmate, thinks that he got in simply because everyone likes him. He probsbly wrote a wonderful, genuine essay and had wonderful, genuine recs from his teachers. He is a lovely kid, so good for him.
@Lindagaf - I’m not saying that those qualifications are insufficient, I’m saying such a applicant or parent can’t count on gaining admission to a school with a sub 20% acceptance rate. Of course these schools will accept hundreds of kids fitting this description but they rejecting far more kids of this ilk.
I don’t like the term “lottery school” because I don’t think it’s nearly as random or opaque as many people say. In my limited experience, I also have observed that kids tend to get multiple or zero acceptances into these schools. And I also think those outcomes were unsurprising. I think some kids are just overly optimistic about their chance, perhaps encouraged by this label of “lottery” to think that their chance is as good as the next kid’s. I also think that some of the apparent randomness can easily be explained if we knew more about the other parts of the application. I’ve seen some kids posting on here with apparently qualifying credentials but also an attitude comes across clearly even in a page of their writing–and I have to believe that was evident in the essays, letters, and interviews.
I have felt frustrated occasionally when a student who does something wonderful outside of school, does not get recommendations concerning that activity. In some cases, when a student excels in something outside of school, the teacher and GC recommendations do not reflect a depth of knowledge about the student, and it really is essential to get a recommendation from outside of school, whether part of a supplement or not.
“I don’t like the term “lottery school” because I don’t think it’s nearly as random or opaque as many people say.”
I agree. I think the operative term shouldn’t be “random” so much as “subjective.” For admissions to be truly random, all applicants would need to have the same odds of being chosen, and the winners would be selected for no reason - like the winning numbers in a real lottery.
That’s clearly not the case in college admissions. Successful applicants are always chosen for some combination of reasons, some of which are not apparent to people outside the admissions committee, making them falsely APPEAR to be random.
That’s not to say that good fortune does not sometimes play a role. For example you could be a stellar bassoon player applying in the year when Ivy School X graduated its entire bassoon section of the symphony orchestra. That might help you get picked, but once again you’s be picked for a reason, not for no reason. More of a case of fortunate timing that was beyond your control rather than being a true “lottery.”
Can we stop using “Ivy” to describe the schools with the extraordinarily stringent admissions criteria that @ucbalumnus has so ably described?
Some of the Ivy League schools (such as my alma mater, Cornell) are not quite that difficult to get in to. And some schools that don’t belong to the Ivy League (such as MIT and Stanford) are.
“If that answer is yes, then the next question is why so many people who don’t match that pattern still bother to apply?”
People have very little insight into their own strength relative to others. The skill of looking in the mirror objectively is unrelated to other skills. This is why, for example, it’s unethical for doctors to treat themselves or their family members.
Look at American Idol or other talent contests. It’s not at all hard for the audience to tell who’s going to impress the judges in the early rounds. Thousands of delusional tone-deaf hopefuls show up anyway.