<p>Princeton is the most exclusive and least selective:</p>
<p>[Princeton</a> University Rejects All Its Applicants! - CBS MoneyWatch.com](<a href=“MoneyWatch: Financial news, world finance and market news, your money, product recalls updated daily - CBS News”>MoneyWatch: Financial news, world finance and market news, your money, product recalls updated daily - CBS News)</p>
<p>" Our kids’ suburban school has URMs whose lives have a whole lot more in common with their non-URM classmates than with URMs in the inner city. But the universities realize they score exactly the same on the diversity dashboard they display as those who do live drastically different lives and who bring real diversity to their peers at college, and this is evident every year when the the admission scorecard comes out."</p>
<p>Well, then don’t look at other people’s scorecards, then. I’m serious. Isn’t it just a little embarrassing that you’re ticking up who got into where and pretending that you know why?</p>
<p>My S’s school indicated in the admissions letter that they have enrolled the most AA and Hisp in x number of years, making up whatever percent of the freshman class. Clearly it’s an institutional priority, as is admitting athletes and making some alums happy by admitting their kids. So? If you’re oh-so-bothered by a school having a diversity initiative, the solution is simple. Don’t apply. But don’t crave what they offer – oh the prestige! – and pretend to be bothered by how they get there. Because if you were all truly THAT put off by diversity initiatives, you’d vote with your feet and not apply.</p>
<p>Race is an artificial construct. Unfortunately until the rest of humanity agrees with me and we can start seeing “human beings” instead of “blacks” and “chinese” and “whites” schools will continue to use race as a factor in admissions.</p>
<p>Once we stop sorting humans into these little boxes, then we can finally use economic factors to help all disadvantaged humans. </p>
<p>I think it’s getting better as the years go on, but as a society we have a long way to go!</p>
<p>Op-read this from UC system and you will understand what you are up against:</p>
<p><a href=“Publications | Center for Studies in Higher Education”>Publications | Center for Studies in Higher Education;
<p>20more - here’s my advice for what it’s worth:</p>
<p>Be wise instead of smart. Yes I agree, it isn’t fair that you and your friends did not get accepted into schools that you were more than qualified to attend. Life is like that. But take advantage of the opportunities you have. </p>
<p>The college you go to is a means and and not an end. Go find a passion. Find an interesting area of research or take on one of the huge problems our world is facing now and use your considerable abilities to solve it. Or work to get into a position where you can influence who gets into schools, or better yet start your own university that favors Asians. In otherwords, do something really interesting with your life.</p>
<p>You have so much more control over your destiny than the adcoms at a couple of universities.</p>
<p>Ah … Their list, however, was not ivy ivy ivy ivy ivy. Of the roughly 18 schools on their combined list, I think only 4 were top 20 (one being a top 20 u and the other 3 being top 20 LACs). Their general sweet spot was in the 20-40 range. It just so happened that they both swung at reach schools in ED and made it. If they hadn’t made their ED schools, their second choices were LACs that are in the 30s and I would have been more than happy with that. No ivies were ever on the list. So nice try, but sorry.</p>
<p>Nice advice, Mema.<br>
And really, you’ve got to question how “smart” someone is if the totality of their world is just ivies. The person with real smarts would zig where everyone else zags, would apply to that little Midwestern LAC instead of following the boring old party line that only a handful of schools are worth considering.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And I’ll ignore your continued intellectual dishonesty, and say this:</p>
<p>Open houses have nothing to do with it, despite the many I have gone to and all that you have gone to, because the number of URM’s who even apply (let alone get accepted) pales overwhelmingly relative to the number of anglo whites and Asians (of all nat’l origins) who apply. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ah yes, the objective complications of data :eek: vs. the subjective non-verifiable judgment of “racism.” Nice. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am honest. I actually welcome (said it awhile ago on CC) that I would have no problem with elimination of personal origins on the apps (combined with elimination of ethnically identifiable last names), & instead assigning numbers to applicants. I actually introduced that as a challenge to some of my Asian student debaters on CC, but…well, ya know, no one wanted to agree that was a good idea. Why? Possibly because some people have waaayy too much invested in the “racism” rationalization.</p>
<p>Actually, a better idea for all those throwing out the comfortable “racism” excuse is that they can stop being dishonest in pretending that you have seen even one complete file that competed with the OP’s file which you also did not see.</p>
<p>Here’s another honest idea: How about admitting to a certain level of arrogance, combined with racism, in assuming that URM’s “must” be less worthy of admission to an Ivy than any Asian applicant could possibly be.</p>
<p>The fact that generally there is a preference among Ivies for inclusionary (diversity) admission over reducing the Ivy population merely to Anglos & Asians does not mean that therefore URM admittees are individually or collectively less qualified than the latter, looking at the entire file, that is, and not focusing on a particular non-ranked element such as test scores.</p>
<p>Let’s see:
ORG- female
URG- male
ORM- asian, white
URM- native american, african american, hispanic
Are these the openly declared categories that need to be re-adjusted now in use? Please edit if this is wrong.</p>
<p>Key word is “represented”. So that implies that these are represented in a way that is too much or too little in the pool of applications compared to what distribution of representation that college desires in a class.
Or is it that the percentages in the pool do not match those in the general population?
Or both??</p>
<p>Other categories that are likely considered in getting at least some but not too many:
international
US geographical region/state
private school vs public vs homeschool
religion incl fervence (non vs practice vs orthodox/conservative)
sexual preference
?political orientation?</p>
<p>The whole focus of the UC AA efforts was to get URM’s (ethnic) to be C(orrectly)RM’s. </p>
<p>What is the CR of any of these groups? What is the right balance? And is this the right way to parse the population???</p>
<p>Is this just to provide a better educational experience via diversity? Or to change the world? Or to be fair? Or to balance out some prior imbalance of educational opportunity?</p>
<p>Probably all or some!</p>
<p>Anyway, I guess what I find offensive is all the assumptions we (myself incl, incl the AdComms) make about one thing meaning another: if a student is Asian, they often do not contribute as much to the community and take piano or violin and are great at Math and Sci; if a student has a Hispanic last name, they must be very different or less-privileged; that an African American is always disadvantaged to other races ; if a student is well-off or goes to a private school, they should do more than those with fewer resources, and are probably spoiled; top athletes are less intelligent or less studious than non-athletes… on and on.</p>
<p>I find all the categorizing worrisome because so many assumptions are implicit in the process. Including how many is the right amount? Is this individual really in this group or this group? etc. etc.
But I am not sure how else they can build an interesting class and provide opportunities to those with less who show potential nonetheless.</p>
<p>So, in spite all of this serious discussion and flaming, I am not sure how clear we all are about what are think and do here. </p>
<p>Judging. Guessing. Concluding. Parsing. Categorizing. Comparing.
It’s what we do in the face of complexity.
And it is how we see the world. And it starts with how our situation is and how we see it.</p>
<p>Anyway, i bit into this long AA thread, probably a bad idea. It is inherently impossible to fix or convince.
We are naturally biased.
I just wish there was more self-awareness and perhaps honesty. I know it is hard.
We are naturally trying to find patterns- that is how humans succeed in existing in nature. But it is hard to see it when we do it.</p>
<p>If your order of elite preference is HYMP and you get rejected by all of those schools, you end up going to Oberlin.
Rejected at MS? Pack your bags for Smith.
Sad news from SPY? Don’t worry, we know you got on Yale’s wait list.
No luck at PYS? Time for the beer major at Big State U.?</p>
<p>… Initials can be fun and I’m obviously in need of a Northwestern-Amherst-Penn.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Made me laugh, Illyria!</p>
<p>Not only is epiphany right, but there is a continued belief that the 3.96 / 2400 kid is “more deserving” than the 3.7 / 2250 kid. Look, if Fancy U admits White Kid A with 3.7 / 2250 instead of White Kid B 3.96 / 2400 … White Kid B wasn’t “owed” that spot, wasn’t more deserving of it, and didn’t have it “stolen” by White Kid A. So I fail to understand if Fancy U then admits Black Kid C 3.7 / 2250, why White Kid B thinks his rightfully-due spot was stolen by Black Kid C. </p>
<p>The OP and his friends clearly thought that their 3.96’s and their perfect scores made them special, deserving, and more worthy of a whole host of other kids - such that when those spots didn’t materialize, they were “stolen” or unfairly given elsewhere. That just isn’t the case and hasn’t ever been the case. Regardless of race.</p>
<p>If someone does nt have a specific choice of school and want to go to the most prestigious school - this is the recognized order - HYPS and then a late M. I know at least one kid who was disappointed about not getting into Harvard and did get into Princeton and ended up going to Yale when the waitlist cleared - while giving up 25k at Rice and other reasonable size scholarships at Chicago and JH. His parents justified it by stating that the prestige of Yale was well worth the cost. I do know it is a sample of one but that is where I got HYPS order from the first time while I always assumed it is HPYS based on the normal rankings.</p>
<p>Going back to JYM’s post about his neighbor’s D and the Asians at her school - If OP and his friends played the game right and goal was to get into an Ivy, they should have probably submitted ED somewhere. One of my local school has two Asian males going to Columbia that way. Both these kids are supposedly at the top of the class but decided to apply to an ED school (I dont know if they figured regular pool is a crapshoot for Asian males?).</p>
<p>As to the actual main content of this thread. Given the limited information provided by OP, a conclusion of discrimination based on ethnic origin is certainly not warranted. Certainly, given the history of our nation, it would be a possible explanation to be investigated. As has been pointed out by others, however (without paging back, I believe it was epiphany who expressed it especially well), much data not in evidence here would be needed to substantiate that explanation. </p>
<p>What if the same scenario had been presented with(out) ethnic reference? Just a group of four friends from the same school with closely matched test scores, grades, etc.? Perhaps we should look first to a possible similarity in style within the group which failed to find favor with the various admissions committees (again, this has been referenced by others on this thread). Could the “packaging” be too much alike?</p>
<p>After reading an article on the Harvard admission site:</p>
<p>[Harvard</a> College Admissions § Applying: Taking Time Off](<a href=“http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu/apply/time_off/index.html]Harvard”>http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu/apply/time_off/index.html)</p>
<p>I am also wondering if the universities could be concerned about the effects of the packaging on students. The article certainly seems to indicate a great deal of concern. Could such a concern be leading the universities to reject, a bit more often, students who seem to be following the packaged path too closely, in favor of a few more students who follow the proverbial different drummer?</p>
<p>Does not this possibility of social colleagues making the same mistaken presentation deserve at least as much credibility as the explanation of racism or discriminatory practices?</p>
<p>And one last possibility that might be explored. Students from the same school. If essays and such sound too much alike, might colleges — sadly, mistakenly, tragically — suspect plagiarism and discard all the falsely suspected applications?</p>
<p>Well, we cannot win, can we? If our kids don’t attend top schools, we are jealous and sour grapes, yet if they do, we are prestige mongers who want the door slammed shut after our kids are admitted. </p>
<p>This thread has degraded to a useless point; please stop.</p>
<p>Yeah, I read that article, and it made me Laugh Out Loud. This, from the same group of people who send cautionary notices about seniors letting their grades slip.</p>
<p>“We caused this problem, and we would like you to fix it, without effecting us in any way.” Thank you for your consideration. Please take some time off AFTER you finish up those AP’s with straight A’s. We’re worried you are getting burnt out, and we will rescind your acceptance unless you maintain your hgh academic achievement. In closing, you have a problem. Fix it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think we have reached a point where admissions application should only take SSN and nothing else to personally identify the student. Colleges should only compare the stats, ECs, Essay and personal statements.</p>
<p>It will still allow top colleges to assemble a diverse class based on ECs, stats, financial situation and personal struggles but eliminating any racial connotation.</p>
<p>For candidates that don’t have SSN can use College Board assigned number for SAT1 or ACT identifiable number.</p>
<p>That will put a stop to these threads.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>When DD got rejected from Harvard we did think that it was due to a compelling reason to admit. In the last 2 years it had never occurred to us that a URM might have taken her place. Even now I don’t have any reason to believe so. </p>
<p>But the OP case is different as he got shut out from all the colleges. </p>
<p>Would you say the same thing if your DD was rejected across the board instead of just getting rejected at Harvard? </p>
<p>Think of it before bashing OP. </p>
<p>Just because your DD got in and OP didn’t that doesn’t give you a right to dismiss OP as weak candidate unless you know for sure.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t you think if they thought so they won’t have applied to all the other colleges where they got in.
Since they applied to plethora of colleges actually show that they were fearful and their fear actually became reality.</p>
<p>POIH, for the umpteenth time, I have NEVER said a kid (or his friends), who is hurt by a rejection to a top school is wrong, hense I did not “bash”. I simply asked questions, failing that provided a CLEAR manner and outline by which the top schools take a holistic review of the applications, and asked that the kid not lower himself by playing the race card (instead look at what he did not do if he could in fact do it).</p>
<p>As to both your daughter and mine being rejected by Harvard . . . well, my DD is cool with it because she can see that Harvard knew she would do better at a different school, and she is correct in her assessment, as was Harvard.</p>
<p>Any other questions? Good. Class dismissed.</p>