Lying about credentials is not limited to colleges. It happens in jobs as well, with some liars getting to very high level jobs before being discovered with an easily verifiable lie such as the absence of a claimed college degree (as opposed to writing about something in a way the looks more impressive or can be misleading but is not actually a lie).
https://www.businessinsider.com/successful-executives-who-have-lied-on-their-resumes-2015-7
This was a parent discussion. Why has it been moved from the Parent Site?
Stats are a category that favor students from middle and upper income families. Elementary and secondary schools in the US weren’t created equal, so the higher your family income the greater your advantage in college admissions.
Where are all those low income students going? Most of the ones I know attend their local cc. Community colleges will take middle class students too, you know.
“no matter how much any school have had tried to convince him to brag, fib or exaggerate…” What schools tried to convince him? Did they bribe him? Or send emails encouraging him to fib?
@CCtoAlaska that poster said literacy test before being allowed to enroll. I took that to mean before enrolling in the college.
Ironically, many here are assuming what it takes to get into a top college. It’s far from, eg, a sob story. We don’t even know when that kid whose mother died applied. Could’ve been 20 years ago.
So go ahead and try it. But it won’t get the supposed results. Or you could learn what does matter.
How do you know they’re not admitting underprivileged kids (who meet expectations?) Based on who enrolls? Different.
@Happytimes2001 that world that you describe does not exist except maybe at a very elite level and only because the schools have multi-billion dollar endowments. I worked with extreme poverty kids who were very high-achieving. They got loan-only packages. It’s a myth wealthier people tell themselves that lower-income minority students are getting all the aid in order to have a scapegoat and resent the poor. But it doesn’t reflect reality. Not any more, at least, if it ever did. Costs are out of control, period. For everyone. Blame whoever you want but don’t blame poor kids. It’s not their fault. Even 20 years ago I knew a young woman - hooked out the wazoo because she was an Ivy legacy, lower-income, intended math major, underrepresented minority, 1590 SAT (on the OLD one), 4.0 unweighted GPA at the best HS in the state, amazing ECs. She got in to some top schools but didn’t get a free ride anywhere except Howard. It’s just a myth. Her parents had to spend a lot on tuition. My nephew from the burbs with an extremely lackluster HS portfolio - middling SATs, no ECs except playing video games in his basement, OK grades - just got a $30K merit scholarship for basically doing nothing. I love him, he’s a smart and wonderful kid. But he was basically being rewarded for coming from a wealthy school district and nothing else.
@lookingforward many college accept students and then make them take tests in math and reading before they let them enroll in classes that count towards a degree. I was assuming that was what was meant. You don’t hear it for more selective schools because they have other proof. But it’s a normal thing to happen at state schools, community colleges, etc. I think what’s odd is administering one and then rescinded acceptance. Not a bad idea, though. A lot of young people get into college lacking literacy skills.
@CCtoAlaska Sorry your post just doesn’t match up with anything especially printed materials and college websites. There are lots of reports on college debt. It’s growing for all.
@Happytimes2001 that is my point. No one has any special advantage although being middle class is way more of a cushion than being low income when you’re paying the same tuition. I also firmly believe that all students entering college are low-income unless they have trust funds or are really special prodigies in a lucrative field. Just because you have wealthy parents doesn’t mean you have money.
But the idea that underrepresented students are pulling a scam when middle class kids are left out in the cold is just not the reality. College is crushing for everyone. For a family making $0-30,000 per year, the EFC is about $27K.
@CCtoAlaska Can’t really comment again without falling into the trap of debate. Agree to strongly disagree with you. based the reality of the millennials we all know and love and government stats.
Community colleges take a lot of middle class students where I live. Even upper middle class parents can’t afford to send 3 kids to college if they’re full pay.
My children received merit scholarships, and I can assure you they weren’t awarded for doing “nothing.” Your nephew had to meet some criteria for the scholarship. You should ask him about it, and then congratulate him. Your post seems to indicate you feel merit scholarships are easy for middle class kids to obtain, and that is not the case.
@Happytimes2001 because I worked trying to get students into decent situations and I finally quit because it felt like a giant fraud knowing they were just going into enormous debt. I just feel very strongly about it. I know it’s not easy for anyone, even families with good incomes. Everyone is disadvantaged in this system. Even with a healthy income, that income could disappear at any time and savings dwindled and you’ve spent so much on a degree. It’s really just unfair across the board but it disproportionately impacts poorer students, especially underrepresented students. The stats show that pretty neatly.
@CCtoAlaska I already responded. I think responding again would break the rules of debate :). Opinions are not facts and people perceive the same things differently (often based on their own experiences). It’s all good. I don’t need to convince you that I am right and you shouldn’t try to convince me either (again). You haven’t. At all. So I’m just going to say again, I respectfully don’t agree with much of what you have stated.
It honestly hurts to see that we should take away hooks and just do it based on stats or merits. I come from a low income family that can barely afford to put food on the table and I’m doing the best I can to get admitted to the best colleges I can so I can make a better life for myself and become a doctor and provide for my parents. I’m first generation and low income and that’s huge for me because I simply haven’t had the same opportunities other students have. My parents can’t afford prep books or classes. It’s the same way when colleges look to see that you’re taking the most advanced classes available to you. Some people simply don’t have the same opportunities and they shouldn’t be disadvantaged for that.
@spacebunsweetie You just wrote 2 days ago that you were accepted to UVA with a scholarship:
I was accepted into a biology major in the College of Arts and Sciences with a 3.85 W GPA and a 30 ACT. I don’t think my essays we’re great but my common app essay was pretty unique as I have a sort of unique hobby/passion. I do three EC’s that I’m heavily involved in and have won several awards in. I also volunteer at a science museum. Given the 15k Trustree.
You’ve also written that you’ve taken honors and AP classes. For extracurriculars, you wrote:
I was in NJHS and Board Game Club and I’m currently doing debate, TSA (technology student association) and Science Olympiad I’m doing an individual research project and I’m entering an essay contest I’ve been invited to a summer medical program at Johns Hopkins and the people to people organization I’ve done gymnastics for most of my life and currently do archery I also do a Novant health explorer program I was recognized for science achievement in 8th grade and I play the violin
It looks to me like you’ve had great opportunities which you took full advantage of. Good luck in college. I’m sure you’ll do well!
One of the reasons more schools are going test score optional is because of the strong correlation between higher family income and higher test scores. Obviously, a student with a stable home environment and educated parents has a much better chance of earning high grades than a student who does not have those advantages. To say that schools should rely on stats only is extremely short sighted.
Stats are only one small metric of many that can be used to assess what potential a human might possess and what they could achieve if given the opportunity.
Encouraging students to focus exclusively on high stats can also lead to higher stress and pressure. It can discourage risk taking and creative problem solving, and sometimes keeps students from taking classes that really engage and excite them because they are so focused on getting more and more GPA points.
There will always be a few who take advantage of any system, but I believe that most people choose not to. I am glad that schools look at the many varied factors that along with stats comprise the best students, even if they risk admitting a few who have mislead them.
Mind blown by @chercheur successfully fact-checking in the “they’re not fact-checking” thread. 
“One of the reasons more schools are going test score optional is because of the strong correlation between higher family income and higher test scores. Obviously, a student with a stable home environment and educated parents has a much better chance of earning high grades than a student who does not have those advantages. To say that schools should rely on stats only is extremely short sighted.”
As someone who grew up poor, I could not disagree more. Of all the elements of a successful application, test scores are one of the few that are almost completely within the student’s control, reflect the student’s ability and for which free resources are readily available.
Grades - depending on the school, there may not be quality courses available, students in rough schools may even be bullied or threatened if they are high achievers.
ECs - Not only do many ECs cost money, even the free ones depend on the student having parents who are willing and able to provide transportation and other associated necessities, supplies.
LORs and GC letters - again, smart kids in rough schools don’t always make themselves known. Add in the fact that the teachers may have little to no experience writing LORs with the buzzwords that selective colleges are looking for, and low income students in bad schools are at a huge disadvantage. The idea that a GC would know an individual student enough to know his/her mother had died is not how many public schools work.
That leaves test scores. A smart poor kid can get access to the many free test prep resources. From Khan academy to the prep books in the library, if a student wants to prep, s/he can. If anything, instead of ignoring test scores, the better route would be to reform the tests so they are less a measure of academic knowledge or fact memorization and more linked to raw intelligence, as the older SAT was. A more g-linked test would not only be less “prepable” but would identify those kids in bad schools and with no personal resources or parental support that were smart enough to be able to benefit from a high level college.
While I agree that it is the student himself or herself who makes the choice to lie or exaggerate (or perhaps the student’s parents who advise him or her to do so), I do recognize that the shift in college admissions since I was a high schooler a million years ago has contributed to the atmosphere where lying is much more likely to take place.
It seems that kids are being made to feel that being an excellent student who works hard, gets good grades, is involved in activities he/she finds meaningful, and writes well is not nearly enough to be admitted to highly selective schools anymore. At the age of 17, they are expected to have done something extraordinary or to have overcome some major hardship or have had a turning point in their lives (hello, common app essay prompts!). Is this really true of many or most kids this age? Like a poster early in the thread said about their daughter, my daughter also lamented the fact that her life had been relatively “boring” when trying to choose an essay topic.
The daughter of a good friend just got deferred from a school that I’m sure she would have gotten into easily if it were 25 years ago. What does that mean, that none of us were actually qualified to attend our academic institutions back then? Or that an environment has been created that now requires kids to do things that we never should have expected of them in the first place? Start a business? Get your research published? Did kids actually DO those things when we were in HS? I don’t think so. My husband’s sister went to a pretty elite university in the 1980s and was admitted to several others. My husband said, “She had straight As and good SATs, and she was the editor of the school newspaper. That’s it.” I’m guessing that today she would be a straight rejection.
I think it’s all gotten kind of out of hand. I understand that schools get way more applications than they have spots, and that they have to find a way to choose who gets in and who doesn’t. But I think this has created a situation where there is no ceiling. A student who has a 4.0 and a 1600 and volunteered at an animal shelter and played varsity volleyball and the piano has tonworry that they will be outdone by another kid with a 4.0 and a 1600 who BUILT and RAN an animal shelter, and created a charity to donate 100,000 volleyballs to underprivileged kids, and composed and performed a piano concerto at age 11 at Carnegie Hall. I was going to say that’s an exaggeration to make a point but I’m afraid it actually isn’t.
Schools need another way to decide who to accept from the mountain of stellar student applications they receive. Not sure what that would be now that the existence of the Common Application has driven up numbers so high.
Just my $.02! :))
See, they aren’t expected to have done something extraordinary or have a major hardship. Not at all. That idea not only screws with their heads, but it leads to the wong frame of reference.
But no, it’s not just what’s meaningful to a kid. You’re applying to top colleges, which have their wants. Not College of Me. Same as applying for a job, you need match them (not just you want them.)
And it’s not 25 years ago. Back then, Harvard had half the apps, ssme number of seats.
@mile30 You are completely correct. Poor kids (like you were and I was) have every opportunity to study for the SATs. There are so many online portals. Grades are also in their control. Are there many bad family situations, yes, does that mean kids should all throw in the towel and claim being disadvantaged? No. I worked from 14-18 in high school (about 20 hours per week), maintained excellent grades and got excellent SAT scores. I also got accepted to 6 Ivy league schools. Today, I doubt that would be the case. More candidates and I am not URM. But still there is a path for all who work hard.
Many people would have you believe that their hook is fair but no one else’s is. Yes, some public schools are ranked very low and provide low levels of education but there is something called the public library ( always has been). And top ranked schools want kids at the top of their class who can succeed. There are literally thousands of high schools in the US and tens of thousands of applications. The fallacy that high test scores belong to high income is based on the fact that many high income people hire tutors for their low scoring kids. Low income kids can self tutor with many options. Giving up is never an option, especially for those born in tough circumstances. And pretending that getting a leg up based on race/income status rather than achievement is just lying to yourself. When you get into a job do you think someone will care that your parents were poor when your report is late or not well done? They won’t. The culture of excuses doesn’t help anyone. In particular it hurts poor students most because it makes them victims of society and the “rich” rather than giving them the key and telling them to create their own path.