<p>.son had great standardized test scores SAT and ACT which is required in this state -no studying at all, he just tests well, decent but not stellar GPA, reasonably difficult curriculum (AP but no college classes at local college), minimal EC (juggling, art but no major awards because he never competes) and got into an ivy for engineering (ED mind you and with financial aid really needed)…so was it because he is midwest? a juggler? who knows… I think it was perhaps he got very good recommendations and he did work hard on essays. No job experience to talk about either…It is only since he got accepted he has actually started to rack up some awards and recognition in areas he is interested in (I agree with Steveteacher1, ,there is more to life than studying for standardized tests)</p>
<p>Steveteacher, I wonder if you’ve had a look at the William Deresewicz piece, “Disadvantages of an Elite Education”, which is stirring up some controversy over in another Parents’ thread?
(<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/684900-its-worth-read-disadvantages-elite-education.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/684900-its-worth-read-disadvantages-elite-education.html</a>)</p>
<p>If it’s a “busy-work” assignment, it has no business being assigned IMHO. Ugh.</p>
<p>Assuming grades and scores were within accepted ranges:
For 1. Female seeking admission to male dominated program
For 2. Male seeking ED to female dominated school
For 3. Female seeking EA admission to female dominated school offering geographic diversity.</p>
<p>Apologies to all, I did not intend to stir up controversy. This is our first college app season, and I’m new to CC, so apparently I misused the word “hook.” I’m still not sure what it means, but I guess it doesn’t mean what I think it does. I also didn’t start this thread to hear that my D is a slacker who’s probably deficient in either grades or scores or both, and is lucky she got admitted anywhere at all. She may not be among the ultra-hyper-superstars who populate CC, but she has done very well in a rigorous program, has very good scores, and is a well-balanced and passionate person as demonstrated by the depth and variety of her ECs (which again are probably not up to CC standards, but are pretty impressive in my eyes). I am thrilled about her college, and I think she will do very well there.</p>
<p>tk21796: You’ve got the right college. I also suspect that her spiritual factors played a role in her admission. D also observed that the relatively high admission rate is probably due to self-selection among applicants; it definitely appeals to a specific personality type.</p>
<p>D2 had scores at top end of accepted students and was a recruited athlete. Guess those were her hooks. 
And oh, yeah…not checking FA!</p>
<p>LasMa, </p>
<p>I’m not looking up your dd’s stats but, based on what you wrote, there’s no hook which means your daughter probably did have the stats and grades for the school. Hooks help you. Getting admitted without one probably means the numbers were strong.</p>
<p>So would someone define “hook”?</p>
<p>Don’t know if hook or aniti-hook, but kid winner in 2 national writing contests. The tech schools questioned him on “why a tech school” with 800’s Vs and these awards. Five years later, these awards were brought up at interviews.</p>
<p>My son had a hook – Classics. He took a college course the summer before 9th grade in roman history, got college credit for a teaching seminar in foreign languages before 10th grade, was a two-time state officer in a nationally known Classics organization, started and ran his school’s chapter of that organization, won numerous academic school, state and national awards in Latin, had a strong SATII in Latin and a 5 on both Latin APs, took an extra seminar class in Laitn senior year, and tutored in Latin. He was applying as a classics major. That’s a hook. By contrast, having a lot of community service hours or being on the swim team is not a hook. What makes something “hooky” is if it’s somewhat unique and what you’ve accomplished is both in depth and at a high level. This isn’t bragging, I have one hooked kid, one unhooked. My daughter does not have a hook, she’s “just” a regular terrific person.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The only applicants who have genuine hooks are recruited athletes, URMS, and developmental admits (kids whose parents have contributed or have committed to contribute big, big money). The child of a bona fide celebrity – a current or past POTUS, a sitting U.S. senator, Steven Spielberg, and Bill Gates are a few examples – may also have a hook, regardless of his/her parents’ developmental prospects. The same goes for an applicant who is a celebrity in his/her own right (like actress Emma Watson in the current admissions cycle). </p>
<p>Everything else is, at best, a tip – far less potent than a hook.</p>
<p>Oh well, then nevermind. But what I thought was a hook did get my son into the same school as Spielberg’s kid, does that count?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Brown, I grant you, is a tougher admit than any Midwestern school. Go to the Harvard and Yale boards, and you’ll see several reports of students admitted to those schools and rejected by Brown. But Middlebury harder to get into than U of C or WUSTL or Carleton? Nope. Cattle no longer roam the streets of Chicago.</p>
<p>Totally counts, BurnThis. ;)</p>
<p>Or a hook is something like being a state champ oboe player applying to a school that is losing all three of the oboe players in their orchestra. Or the school has decided to start a fencing team and you are a fencing champ. So you have a “hook” for that specific school that particular year.</p>
<p>Ha! Don’t get me started on the Middlebury cow-tipping jokes.</p>
<p>But wjb, we must be looking at different data.
This year, Middlebury had nearly 7000 applications for 600 spots. Their overall acceptance rate was 22%, much lower than Chicago’s. Do you think their applicant pool was, by the numbers, much weaker? I do not. Among this year’s accepted students, there are 869 SAT 800’s. Not to mention 507 team captains and 3 circus performers, if that matters.</p>
<p>Personally, I’m not sure it does matter. Chicago perennially attracts some truly exceptional kids. Some of them probably could not get into Middlebury. Not because they aren’t truly exceptional, but because they could not care less about team sports or about SAT prep courses, and because Middlebury is less likely to take a chance on that kind of kid.</p>
<p>^^And vive la difference!</p>
<p>I figured for S1 that his legacy status and accomplishments in computer science (in a year when Harvard was just creating a separate Engineering school was probably a tip. While at MIT and Caltech he was good enough to be deferred EA, but not ultimately accepted. But who knows, maybe they just didn’t like his essay or were looking for more well-roundedness. From his class no one got into MIT, but one of his good friends (who had the advantage of being a girl), who had a slightly higher GPA got into Caltech. Actually she was waitlisted at MIT.</p>
<p>Um, how about “academics” as a hook?</p>
<p>tk – I don’t want to parse admissions statistics or speculate about applicant quality at Midwestern school A vs. Eastern school B. I do acknowledge that Middlebury and U of C attract very different types of applicants, that a kid who got into M might not get into U of C, and that a kid who got into U of C might not get into M. This just shows that numbers don’t determine admissibility.</p>
<p>My issue was, and is, with your sweeping statement that
</p>
<p>I stand by my position that this is not the case. For schools as selective as those you name, it’s just not that simple.</p>
<p>EngProf- A hook makes the applicant uniquely desirable. With so many 2400 SAT/36 ACT/4.5 GPA students out there, it is hard to have an academic hook unless the applicant is a best selling published author, has published original research, etc.</p>