<p>^^^and we can be pretty sure that was an SCEA admit. </p>
<p>Amazing that the high school makes this available. Some of these students could be identified, between knowing roughly where in the alphabet their last name sits, where they’re attending, and what high school they attended.</p>
<p>^^^ That assumes the numbers are assigned alphabetically and not randomly.</p>
<p>Can’t help myself, here’s a quirky list: student applied to Cal State Fullerton, Chapman College, and Carleton. Accepted at all 3, attending Carleton. </p>
<p>Sorry for the off-topic detour, I’ll be quiet now.</p>
<p>^^^ Admissions strategy - only apply to school that begin with the letter “c”.</p>
<p>bovertine, thanks for this list and Debbie thanks for bringing it up again since I didnt look at it the first time.</p>
<p>This list contains fascinating information and is a huge time sink for me this morning. Stats for acceptance to top 20s were definitely up there across the board, including top GPAs and high test scores. I spent too much time looking for the low GPA & high test score kids who matched my Ss profile, but there were none that matched closely. I may be off base, but Im holding on to the belief that the top test scores will get someones attention and may be the thumb on the scale that will help Ss odds. However, as has been discussed before, this combination sometimes leads colleges to think the kids a slacker.</p>
<p>I just read something yesterday about how applying EA or ED may not be the best strategy if you think the senior year first semesters grades might help. For example, straight As in five AP classes for the first half of senior year could mitigate concerns about that 3.6 GPA. Now, how likely is it that S will get straight As after three years of B+ grades . . . .?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Same here. It was fascinating yet frustrating to spend so much time looking for my son in that list, to no avail. If it is representative of high school seniors in general, then high-test-score/low-GPA kids must be something less than about 0.2%.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>May be more true than you think ;).</p>
<p>Other than the Yale case mentioned earlier, I found 65,155,226,374 very interesting. They all have GPAs in line with this thread, but got into either Cornell or CMU. Is it possible these are all students with hooks?</p>
<p>I also found an alarming case. Student 484, who had a 3.12 UW and very high test scores, was rejected by all the schools.</p>
<p>I can’t help but feel there is some kind of grade inflation here. There is at least a student with 3.7+ GPA on almost every page, but you don’t see 700+ across the SAT’s on every page.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE=Dad II]
Is this your thinking or your son’s thinking? If it is your thinking, I say you missed quite a few of them - Harvard, Princeton, CalTech, Duke, etc. Why are you leaving these schools out? Are they not good enough?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I can’t figure out if you’re a jerk or just have really bad communication skills, but either way, I won’t be responding to your questions.</p>
<p>I don’t know if there is grade inflation here, if there is I wish it would rub off on my kid.</p>
<p>It is a pretty good school- not Gold Medal but rated around 89 on here</p>
<p>[Gold</a> Medal Schools - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/high-schools/2007/11/29/gold-medal-schools.html]Gold”>http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/high-schools/2007/11/29/gold-medal-schools.html)</p>
<p>“I also found an alarming case. Student 484, who had a 3.12 UW and very high test scores, was rejected by all the schools.”
Perhaps that is a “classic” example of a really smart, yet lazy student. Top colleges have shown time and time again that they don’t want very smart students who have not indicated [by their grades] a willingness to work hard. Maybe there were other issues, like a less than stellar recommendation form the counselor. Maybe the student aimed too high given his GPA? Who knows?</p>
<p>OUCH! Gotta be more than the GPA. I didn’t think his/her list was that far out.</p>
<p>I’m going to insist on 2 safeties for my D.</p>
<p>(Oops. I just noticed the word “confidential” at the bottom of each page.)</p>
<p>Colleges have to look at test scores because they help them determine which schools might be inflating grades, and might not be as rigorous as other schools. They also have to look at grades because some people (myself included) just simply have a knack for MC exams. I can get 95% on tests I’m sure I would flunk if they were not MC.</p>
<p>I say, if you can afford it, and you’re kid has the time, why not just apply to a hail mary or two. As long as you have plenty of matches and safeties, and your kid (and you) truly know that it would be a miracle to be accepted. I thought the whole thing about reaches was you didn’t expect toget accepted there.</p>
<p>^^ Yeah, I noticed #484 since his stats were similar to those of my son. I dont know about the California colleges, but the other schools on his list were not exactly safeties. Curiously, he had no leadership, community service or even clubs listed. Id like to know the story behind this one.</p>
<p>I think that admissions may also look at students with consistent As and Bs differently than those with more erratic grades.</p>
<p>S1’s list was nearly all C and M schools – Chicago, Cornell, Caltech, CMU, Mudd, MIT, Maryland, Michigan – H and S were the outliers. S1 dropped S after excellent EA results.</p>
<p>Bovertine, I have an athlete (intending to play D-III, not recruited) who has gotten very positive reactions from coaches with his grades and scores, esp. when they hear what his courseload is like.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>College Board data does suggest this. Mark Perry blogged about this a few months ago. [CARPE</a> DIEM: Rising Grades, Falling Test Scores for HS Seniors](<a href=“http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/06/rising-grades-falling-test-scores-for.html]CARPE”>CARPE DIEM: Rising Grades, Falling Test Scores for HS Seniors)</p>
<p>Does anyone have enough time on their hands to do a little data analysis and calculate where the Top 5%, Top 10% cutoffs would be?</p>
<p>"Bovertine, I have an athlete (intending to play D-III, not recruited) who has gotten very positive reactions from coaches with his grades and scores, esp. when they hear what his courseload is like. "</p>
<p>That sounds good - good luck. I know very little about admissions, but I’m sure it helps having a coach in your corner.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Let’s not forget that colleges and universities are businesses, non-profits, but still businesses. The CommonAp has made it ludicrously easy to apply to a huge number of schools. The increase in apps increases a school’s individual prestige. There aren’t any more seats, but the additional apps create the perception of desirability; that it causes a sense of desperation in the applicant is certainly not the school’s concern. </p>
<p>Also don’t overlook the money involved. Fall of 2008, 27,400 applied to Harvard with the vast majority paying $65 for the privilege. 27,400 X $65 = $1,781,000! Even if 25% of the applicants got waivers that’s still over $1.3 MILLION in revenue. That’s certainly not enough to keep the doors open but if 10,000 of those applicants have no reasonable chance of acceptance, well fair Harvard has just pocketed $650,000 off of the collective delusions of some applicants (or their parents), with its only real expense being the cost of a few more rejection letters. </p>
<p>Why wouldn’t they encourage people to apply? </p>
<p>“You’re a 3.6/2000? Well, we like to look at the overall candidate, not just reduce you to a set of numbers”.</p>
<p>Basic game theory says that it’s in their best interest to accept a few unhooked 3.5/1900s. So long as we, the parent/applicant, can point to someone getting in with those stats, we can convince ourselves we have a chance, that we will be the exception. </p>
<p>“Why not give it a shot? What’s $65 versus your child’s future? Step right up, no need to push, plenty of apps for everybody”.</p>
<p>P.T. Barnum was right, “There’s a sucker born every minute and two more born to take him”.</p>
<p>Cynical and mercenary? Me? Guilty as charged.</p>
<p>PayFor, looks like that student seriously misjudged on UC safeties. Irvine and Davis were safeties in previous years, but not last year. Santa Cruz, Riverside, and Merced are the UC safeties. </p>
<p>The stats reinforce the message of T20+ schools being reaches in the context of this thread, but seeing where kids gets in still remains quirky. We have no idea what’s really going on, what hooks or ECs or essays etc etc etc the successful students had.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’d love to be there to hear the Dean of Admission explain this to his staff. “Be sure to take a few undeserving kids to keep them apps coming!” LOL.</p>