<p>I think it is an honest and candid portrait of their college admissions experience -- and I'm so happy for Maia for getting into her first choice. None of us have any idea how she will do in college. Right now it is a tabula rosa -- and she gets to write whatever she wants on it.</p>
<p>We all know a brilliant student who didn't last past the first year at a stellar institution and we all know some average student who went on to do amazing things. </p>
<p>Congratulations, Maia.</p>
<p>Bluebayou, the student has a 3.25 unweighted, 3.8 weighted. We know nothing about the profile of the private school she attended -- it might not be the typical easy-A grade-inflated environment that many of our kids are fortunate enough to attend. </p>
<p>The current minimum GPA for admission to UC is 2.8 (it will go up to 3.0 NEXT year). So this kid's GPA probably puts her mid-range for UC applicants. </p>
<p>Sorry, but as a UC graduate, I really don't see the "struggle mightily" thing. If she wanted to be a math major, yes -- but she has already done well in college-level Russian courses. I see a kid who was seriously disenchanted with in high school and has looked outside for challenge. There's no reason to doubt that she can do well in her intended major.</p>
<p>Here's another columnist, a little earlier in the process (mom of 15 year old boy):
Giving up your life for the Ivy League
<a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-klein26mar26,0,4858074.story%5B/url%5D">http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-klein26mar26,0,4858074.story</a></p>
<p>Basic idea: Mom & son meet with guidance counselor, are urged to follow grinding path of APs & ECs to meet prestige college expectations. Mom wonders whether it is worth giving up balance & sanity in son's life? or is it better to aim for more reasonable goals?</p>
<hr>
<p>Wonder what Maia would advise?</p>
<p>I see a naive girl and a naive mother in this story, and not entitlement. But I also think that we (I include myself) on this board have an obseesion with college admissions that tends to blind us to just how uninformed most people are about real chances for admission to a selective school like UCLA.</p>
<p>There are still many people out there who think one can work their way through UCLA by painting houses or waiting tables too...it is naive, but very common. This is what I see in the article.</p>
<p>I don't see a sense of "entitlement" in the story at all. I see a mother who is simply writing about the "trials" of the application system for an A/B student who has some special gifts -- her strengths in the Russian language. </p>
<p>She is certainly qualified to go to a UC school (gee, what about diversity -- or does that mean diversity stops at 4.5 GPA). The girl went to a private school for 3 years so her B's are probably A's at a public school. </p>
<p>This is a girl who "is going places" ..... mark my words.</p>
<p>And what does the "by-line" explain?</p>
<p>I didn't see entitlement so much as a sense of whininess: other kids do better because they take the SAT more times, or take 2000dollar prep courses, or have private tutors, or can take more APs....on and on. Not, my kid is a pretty good but not stellar student. ACtually, lots of students have better records with none of those things.</p>
<p>She sounds like a middle of the road student fortunate to go to a very good state school. Good for her!</p>
<p>I didn't see any sense of entitlement in the times article. Instead I found it ironic some people here have unfounded sense of entitlement for UCs.</p>
<p>Go check UC's admission stats, a large chunck of admitees are students like the author's daughter, including students getting into LA and Berkeley. It is especially true for those un-impacted majors. UC's undergraduates are just like that, luckily they got some really outstanding students because of nonacademic reasons. One of my friends is teaching at UCSB told me the state is wasting money on some of the students there.</p>
<p>Why should this girl need to step up a notch when others do not, if they have similar caliber in eyes of adcoms, even though not in yours?</p>
<p>by-line = NRO = detached from reality pretty much globally</p>
<p>And I would be wary about assuming that her private school B's = public school A's. </p>
<p>Garland, but why do folks whine? "Because this shouldn't be happening to <em>me</em> (or my daughter, etc.)."</p>
<p>Here comes ad hominem attack. Did you find the article making some sense if you try to ignore the GPA stuff?</p>
<p>I found the article's title (and by extension, the topic title) offensive. But I do love it when a "whoa is me, poor me, wa wa wa" story has a happy ending.</p>
<p>OK, someone is going to ask what is offensive about the topic title. On first read, I thought it was a slander against UC San Diego, ie the name of the college is either UCSD OR Porstitute College. After reading the article I see that the title is simply a quote from the daughter, which the mother thought was very cute and would make a provacative title for her essay.... but really, what is the point of denigrating the oldest profession?</p>
<p>Just a comment about the capriciousness of UC aps: My nephew just got into UCSD and rejected from Santa BArbara!</p>
<p>Thedad: I think the "why me-ness" is not exactly entitlement, but it's a quibble. We got the same vibes from the column, overall.</p>
<p>One thing that I picked up from the article: the mother thought that her D had enough credits to graduate from high school and should not be stay there. I am glad that she heeded advice to let her daughter complete the four years of high school. Whether or not the private school was after her tuition money, it was good advice. Meeting high school graduation requirements is not the same thing as being well prepared for college.</p>
<p>As to "tone" - Calmom, I think your view of UC admissions is way off target. This girl's grades and SAT's are below average for every UC's entering freshman class - including Riverside, which, barring something else to go on, is the only UC I would expect to accept her with the test scores and grades listed. So to express bewilderment at not being accepted into UCSB, because it has an admissions rate of 53%, is kind of - well, odd. It's not too hard to figure out where a student stands in terms of the average applicant to the different UC schools; if your grades and test scores are well below the school's average then you shouldn't be too surprised to find yourself in the 47% who aren't offered admission - and this student's grades and test scores are well below those averages for UCSB - and Davis, and Irvine, and Santa Cruz, for that matter. (Forget about UCSD, UCLA and Berkeley.) UCSB's 2005 admittee's averages were 3.99 GPA; 1260 SAT I score; the writer's daughter's GPA was never clearly specified, but seemed to be around 3.5, with an 1100 SAT I.<br>
On the other hand, I disagree with the posters who think the girl will struggle at UCSD. Given her SAT II scores, she's obviously pretty bright. That, and a little hard work, is all it really should take. I have to assume that it was her interest and background in Russian classes which got her into UCSD - they have an admissions formula which she doesn't come close to satisfying based on the rest of the information given.</p>
<p>eloise:</p>
<p>not necessarily capricious...UCSD (and Davis) goes on a straight point system, for the whole app pool, whereas the other UCs are more holistic in thier review, particularly Cal and UCLA. However, Santa Barbara's holistic review used to rank apps by individual HS (believing performance against your peers more important than against the total app pool, but it then downplayed test scores); not sure if it still does, but at the time, it was the only UC to do so.</p>
<p>I frankly see no connection between the story and NRO. That story could have just as easily been written by an NPR contributor. If 'whining' or 'entitlement' is your issue, I guarantee you can find that on both sides of the aisle.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Her old private school informed us at the end of 10th grade that it wouldn't let her graduate at the end of 11th grade, even though she had more than enough credits. The private school counselor had warned grimly, "Maia's not exactly setting the world on fire with her grades." It wasn't just that the school wanted that extra year of tuition money, oh no she really needed to raise her college admission chances with another year of Advance Placement classes. Instead of listening to that advice, we moved her to our big, urban neighborhood public school for senior year.
[/quote]
I thought the article suggested that she moved from 10th grade at the private school to 12th grade at the public -- did anyone else think that?</p>
<p>Overall, I think the author was pretty clueless about college admissions as it exists today, and clearly didn't think it was important for her daughter to maximize her options during high school. I think she was fortunate to get into UCSD.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>This girl's grades and SAT's are below average for every UC's entering freshman class - including Riverside, which, barring something else to go on, is the only UC I would expect to accept her with the test scores and grades listed. <<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Or UC Merced.</p>
<p>Reading the original article did not trigger many emotions on my part, except for questioning the tasteless title. At first, I believed that there was a bit of entitlement, a bit of naivet</p>
<p>Xiggi:</p>
<p>LOL! For the record, though, she did score 500 on the SAT Math, presumably on the second try and after the Sat prep.</p>
<p>Sjmom:</p>
<p>I did pick up on that (see #33). The idea that a student who could only score 500 on the SAT math at the second try should be allowed to graduate early is mind-boggling.</p>