<p>
</p>
<p>Then OP also have a right to fend his frustration about this policy because it was not his fault to be born with an ethnicity that is overrepresented at the college of his choice.</p>
<p>I agree with JYM626. In the last 5 years, applications to Harvard doubled (they claim it is because of their generous aid going all the way to people making 200k) but the admitted numbers have remained the same. So if we say a particular quota has 10 seats with 100 people vying for it in 2006, it has now become 200 people looking for the same 10 seats.</p>
<p>Cornell and UPenn though ivies, are not exactly comparable just because of their higher admission rates. Both have 2400 or more seats compared to 1600 at Harvard and much lower yield rates and so UPenn admits 3700+ people while Cornell admits 6500 people compared to Harvard’s measly 2100 (2014 numbers). </p>
<p>The atheletes’ quotas should nt be confused with URM quotas at Ivies. A coach decides who gets picked for their team and here the need for a specialty comes in. Volleyball coach from Harvard gave a likely to an Asian back in August after confirming that the academic standards are met, because she needed a specific specialty slot on her team filled. If the coach already had that skill filled, this kid would have had to apply in the common pool like everyone else (btw I know the family and also the other Ivy likelies she was given). There is a public school in Austin that has sent two swimmers to Harvard in the last three years (I believe both Caucasian).</p>
<p>Well said, Bovertine. I agree with all your points. But as has been said multiple times in many other threads, the applicants who apply to every Ivy and many of the top schools simply because these are the Ivys and the top schools are not doing their homework to find the best schools for them-- they are doing a combination of trying for the best financial opportunity (fine) and trophy/prestige hunting (not so fine). The schools the OP got into (including Vanderbilt, Chicago, Rice, Northwestern, Middlebury, Carleton) are wonderful schools. He has a right to be disappointed at his rejections, but he should be thrilled with his acceptances. If his OP had said he and his friends were amongst the large group shut out from the ivys, even if he mentioned in passing his wondering if ethnicity played a part, he would have , IMO, engendered far more sympathy. It was the tone of the OP that was so off-putting to me.</p>
<p>And POIH- the children of presidents, and other offspring of famous people, will surely have great luck in the application process. It has nothing to do with their race. It has to do with the fact that they are the offspring of famous people (and famous wealthy people who can donate to the school too). The URM group they belong to has nothing to do whith their race/ethnicity- their minority represented group is “offspring of wealthy famous people”.</p>
<p>
I would be curious to see if the increase in applications at various schools is more due to each student submtting applications to more schools, or to more unique students applying.</p>
<p>An interesting stat would be to pick out maybe 20 elite schools and track the number of total unique applicants to any of these schools over a period of a few years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The child of the President will have a bigger hook than wealthy URMs any day of the week. Are you saying that Chelsea Clinton being admitted to Stanford had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that she is the child of a POTUS and Senator? Caroline Kennedy _child of POTUS and legacy? Barbara Bush- child of POTUS and legacy?</p>
<p>
Sure-- and why exactly is it that this group is overrepresented?</p>
<p>@Bovertine - I am guessing each student submitting more apps due to common app. As Columbia proudly proclaimed, their numbers bumped up from 26k last year to 34k this year, solely because they joined common app and probably their much higher ranking from previous year (the previous year jump was attributed to Obama’s alumnus status?).
Princeton and Harvard always get a lot more foreign applicants due to their needblind admissions without a nationality check.</p>
<p>Thats correct too, texaspg-- the common and universal apps have made it very easy to apply to many many schools, and its getting ridiculous. Its a self-fulfilling prophecy.</p>
<p>And I was surprised to read this oearlier in this thread: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/12317816-post47.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/12317816-post47.html</a>
Didn’t you say in another thread just the other day, POIH, that if these students didn’t get into the top schools, they must have failed in some aspect of their application process? I am confused. Which is it?</p>
<p>My DD was waitlisted at Harvard, and the very nice letter said she had “qualifications which might well have led to admission in other years”. (She is fine about it - got into some other wonderful schools.)</p>
<p>I did to do the math based on the statistics they sent out - 60% of the accepted students were white, 16.8% from New England, half are female, which means they accepted around 100 white girls from New England, and that would include I imagine legacies, athletes, first in family to go to college, low income, etc., none of which describes my DD.</p>
<p>And how many of that 30,000 + candidate pool were white girls from New England? Quite a few, I bet. It’s a popular school to apply to around here.</p>
<p>The admit number is even lower for asians, and the candidate pool probably larger. Do the math. Fair or not. There are only 2158 spots.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Didn’t I stated on this thread too that when DD received the rejection from Harvard we never thought it has anything to do with ethnicity.</p>
<p>Congratulations Mema32. Not sure about the pool size but Harvard did admit a large number of waitlisted people last year at 94 so dont turn down that waitlist.</p>
<p>[Harvard</a> College Admissions § Applying: Statistics](<a href=“http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu/apply/statistics.html]Harvard”>http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu/apply/statistics.html)</p>
<p>Yet here you think the OP and his friends were rejected because of their ethnicity? Why the difference of opinion, POIH?</p>
<p>jym626: The two cases are not same. </p>
<p>There is a difference between getting into 3 out of 4 similar and shutting out of all colleges. If DD was shut out of HMSPY my opinion would have been different.</p>
<p>Op, hopefully this [long] post will help you and your friends to stop “hurting” about not being selected to any of the ivies. I think you, and many posting here, really do not have a full understand about the way the top schools, especially the ivies, make their selections.</p>
<p>Beyond the silly numbers and weak minded discussions of race, heritage and skin color, if you did ALL of these things written below, you STILL only have a single digit chance of getting into a top 10 school. If you did everything PERFECTLY, you are competing with people who ALSO did it perfectly.</p>
<p>We all know that the top schools get lots of applications (25,000 plus for only 1,200 seats). Worse, applicants are “self-selecting” in that ALL of the applicants have top stats. The Adcoms are looking for one thing, and one thing only: “Vetted” applicants.</p>
<p>A 4.0 means absolutely nothing unless the performance is backed up by SAT-IIs and AP exams that are also perfect. The SAT-IIs and AP exams are a third party validation of your excellence. A student with no validation is ignored. If your school does not offer AP courses, you ARE at a permanent disadvantage, so change schools. Can’t change schools? Do not apply to the top schools because they will toss ORMs, URMs, and all other un-vetted applicants into the same circular file. OP: This was your first strike. </p>
<p>Anything above a 2200 on the SAT-I meets the threshold. Come on guys, the same few types of questions are asked year in and year out. Because it is a STANDARDIZED test, the core question types are never modified. If you can’t beat this simple test, please do not apply. If you can beat the test, well, ok, one less thing to worry about. OP: You did well on your SAT-I, you got a single check mark for scoring over the threshold. That’s all, one check mark – if they continued reading your application at all, after strike one.</p>
<p>You wrote not less than four essays (3 on the common app and one for the supplemental). What was your story? Did your first essay blend into your second, and then your third and fourth? Those little documents MUST tell your UNIQUE and COMPELLING story! This is the hardest part for high scoring SAT-I folks because it comes from the opposite side of the brain. You did tell a consistent, warm, and moving story whereby you are the hero without ever saying so, didn’t you? After reading your four-part story, did the Adcom want to hang out with you and be your friend? If not, strike two.</p>
<p>You requested, and then submitted, not less than three letters of recommendation from your school’s faculty and administration. Did these letters add to and enrich the SAME story you told in your essays? These are the documents that VALIDATE your essays. If they do not, strike three.</p>
<p>What did you do beyond the classroom? Work, play music, sing, do sports, volunteer? What is fun to you? Remember, at this level of competition, you are competing with people who have top scores and grades . . . and ALSO . . . that do many things very WELL beyond the classroom that will enrich a top school’s campus. And, all of these things must be VETTED by your letters of recommendation. You did nothing of the sort? Strike four, if they are still counting.</p>
<p>What scholarships have you earned? None? You mean nobody put money up for you so that you can go to college? Not even national merit? Harvard will NOT go first! You must be VETTED at the local, state and preferably at the national level in order to have a shot. If none, then strike five, if they are still counting.</p>
<p>There is nothing to “hurt” about even if you did do all of the above, perfectly. If you did it perfectly, you have a single digit chance.</p>
<p>Op: Please tell us what you did and did not do perfectly, because a rejection is just the lack of a reason to admit.</p>
<p>POIH-
Do you think that attending an elite private and winning a big science award gave her an edge over the kids described in the OP’s post? These are additional variables , also separate from ethnicity, that help support an admission/deny decision.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There is a difference, although it may not be so significant. Looking at the acceptance threads, there is a clear trend towards accepting low income, first generation students. If that student is also a URM, all the better, but it can work in the favor of other racial groups. So, a high achieving and low income first generation white student can be selected over a high achieving and high income white student in many cases, especially if the student fills another institutional need (has a specific talent or area of interest).</p>
<p>It seems to come down to the fact that high achieving, but bland candidates don’t do particularly well at the most selective schools. I speculate that the OP and his friends’ applications did not stand out enough from the crowd to warrant an admission at schools that value the unique over the mainstream. What is “unique?” Achieving in adverse circumstances, URM, an unusual talent, underrepresented geographical location, whatever. In applying to highly selective colleges, students need to understand that in order to have the best possible chance, they must have something to set themselves apart, especially if the other components of their application which they cannot control are fairly pedestrian. Easier said than done, I realize.</p>
<p>jym626: If OP has complained about just HMSPY, I would not have supported his concerns.
But he was shut out from the 5 colleges (Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, and U. Penn) where he should have been a strong candidate.</p>
<p>“Looking at the acceptance threads, there is a clear trend towards accepting low income, first generation students.”</p>
<p>At H., Pell Grant students are less than 6% of the student body, and that number has declined in the past two decades. It is isn’t much higher at the others. If applying to Ivies, it is useful not to be poor. Especially if you are Kurdistani.</p>
<p>
what difference does it make which ivy he was denied admission to? Look at the admissions rates I posted above. Only 2 even have admit rates in the double digits. This was a ridiculously hard year, given the ridiculously high number of applications. As Gourmetmom eloquently said, they may have been high achieving but bland applicants, and simply didnt stand out. Not a judgement on their qualifications-- just a high probability, unless they had some incredible EC or award we havent heard about.</p>
<p>coolrunning-
Didnt you say your dd swept her admissions to these schools? What was her secret?</p>