<p>To anyone going to USAFA and USMA, I was rejected from both of those schools and USNA was my third choice, so everything happens for a reason.</p>
<p>Congrats to all those who made the USNA waitlist!</p>
<p>HailMary-</p>
<p>That would be too good to be true. Any news?</p>
<p>No, nothing. We did call to report the award, and were told he is still a "very viable candidate". I guess we will have to hear something before long if he is to come off the list.My S is firming up his other plans but his heart is not in it.</p>
<p>We had a mid in our area that got his call from the wait list about two weeks prior to I Day. </p>
<p>Had he not gotten the call, he had already made plans to show up on I Day to let them know he was available if anyone changed their minds.</p>
<p>hailmary:</p>
<p>Keep the faith. Sounds like your son may be one of those who gets a late call. There are still more than four weeks until I-day. There will be a number of people who get cold feet and back out.</p>
<p>Rumors are that the acceptance rate this year is very high.</p>
<p>^^^ Bummer for those still in limbo. I have a candidate who looked like a lock, and he only got the word in early May that it wasn't going to happen. I keep hoping for him that he might get a late call.</p>
<p>The good news is that he got a surprise Army ROTC scholarship for VMI last night at the awards ceremony. I was very happy for him and his family.</p>
<p>USNA Dad&Grad, can you PM me his name? He's going to be one of my Brother Rats next year! :)</p>
<p>I think there are a LOT of valid points in RPIbound's post. It would be interesting to see the stats on the number of alumni's kids that are admitted - and take a look at their SAT/ACT scores, recommendations, and other admissions factors. All things being equal - I imagine being an alumni's kid, unfortunately, tips the scale more in their favor than not. Obviously this student was qualified enough to receive 2 nominations from state representatives - and obviously met all the requirements of admissions. There should be a balance between athletes, math-letes, and other talented students accepted into our service academies. That's what makes for balanced and successful communities. The value that I've heard placed on a service academy education is more like $350,000.00 per student. Point made and well taken is that it IS taxpayer $$ - and, unlike scholarships/grants/awards at other colleges universities, the 'students' at service academies (or their parents) don't have to claim that as income. I think this student appears to have a pretty solid head on their shoulders - too bad Uncle Sam puts more weight on the sports students play in high school and not their potential to contribute to strategic thinking!!!</p>
<p>Apparently, the process works differently in your state than mine. The senators and representatives always 'over nominate' - like over-booking. Just because you get a nomination does not mean you get an appointment. However, from what I understand, a presidential nomination or something called a 'superintendent's nomination' takes priority over senator and representative's nominations. It is not as cut and dried or 'federally regulated' as you would think - there's a lot of room for political maneuvering of kids who DON'T stack up competitively with those who work their way through the competitive process and follow the rules. But, that's life. It's no different in this process of admission for service academies - probably worse - and in the viciously competitive admissions environment for the Class of 2008 across the board - at public and private institutions - the political maneuvering was probably out-of-sight this year. I don't believe you need to personally attack a student who was voicing some valid and understandable opinions. Berating someone personally as having a 'weakness' because they voice an intelligent opinion is pretty weak in itself.</p>
<p>Babble-on, please explain what you mean by over nominate. Are you saying they are sending more than 10 for their 1 slot? Or are you stating that the source nominated someone who was not qualified just to hand in 10 names? The presidential noms are not limited, but the slots are, there are only 100. </p>
<p>As far as legacies and military children having a leg up. Well legacies get extra points every university. I am not opposed to it at all. The SA's are not like a typical university, many of the parents know what needs to be accomplished to get an appt, thus higher chance that they have the WCS. Many of them are kids of AD parents, these cadets have spent their entire life living the military aspect and yet, have decided tat they want this for themselves as an adult. These are children who have first hand knowledge of moving every 2-3 yrs, attending 9 different schools and still being the top of their class, living months at a time without a parent who maybe on a yr remote or serving in Iraq. That is alot of strss for an adult, let alone a child. If you were sitting on the SA board, with two kids who have the identical WCS, which child do you select for the appt. the one who is outstanding, but has never lived the life or the one who is outstanding and has lived the life? There are only so many appt. to go around.</p>
<p>Finally, there is going to be a wide range of academic skills for every student, but you should never compare them, since we do not have a national education system. I am positive that No VA is more competitive in academics than the town we live in in NC (avg SAT 1370 vs 1100). Also remember some cadets will get in through prep school and some through AD service, which may imply that their SAT/GPA out of HS was lower.</p>
<p>RE: legacies @ the SAs ... your points are well noted bullet. It should be noted as well that perhaps even more critical and helpful are SA siblings. They can help one's cause, and in case of USNA, I believe that siblings even receive early consideration and when appropriate, notification. These offsprung provide reliable evidence that parents/guardians may genuinely "get" the type of commitment and experience required and are presumably supportive of the process.</p>
<p>Now, should your prior siblings be screw-ups, well ... good luck! :eek:</p>
<p>Pima - you make some excellent points - it is important to remember though - being a legacy will not make up for deficiencies in your application.</p>
<p>Both the OP and Babble-on demonstrate a disconnect and misunderstanding of the admissions process. It is kind of odd that these were their first two and only posts. Oh where to begin??????????????</p>
<p>.....and RPIbound vanished from this forum after his/her 2 posts on 4/26. Not sure if that is good/bad or they got the info they needed and decided to move on!!!!!</p>
<p>I just checked the senator and representative nomimations for my part of my state. Between 2 senators and 1 representative, there were a total of 160 nominations. That's not counting the students who live in this same area who got Presidential nominations or anyone who got a 'superintendent's' nomination. I'm doing the math - and the only thing I can figure out is that they nominate any student who they feel will be successful because there's bound to be drop-outs. Getting a nomination does not equal getting an appointment. Also, legacies at private/public universities financed by students and parents is one thing - creating legacies based on taxpayer dollars is quite another! Also the proposition that successful service academy students are genetically bred is preposterous. Propagating lineage in any branch of the service based on that type of notion seems to me to breed a vein of weakness into the competitive process where the best and brightest should rise to the top - but where privilege is extended because your dad might be a high-ranking official or a war hero or something - i.e., each generation gets progressively weaker because the standards are relaxed over time and that's the down side of the politics of accommodating this kind of nepotism. The reasons why kids aren't accepted can be justified any which way - but when talented, smart (based on SAT and ACT scores), squared-away nominated kids don't make the cut (which I know has been the circumstance with many kids that I know), it's so obvious.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Now, should your prior siblings be screw-ups, well ... good luck!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So true in everything in life! I always felt bad for my younger ones, b/c each one of my kids are different so I made sure they never had duplicate teachers. (All of them are good kids and never a problem, but I didn't want teachers to expect that they were all the same...DS1 is TAG and into history, DD is artistic, DS2 is mathematically inclined)</p>
<p>Back to the subject...</p>
<p>I do understand Babbleon and RPI...they were just venting b/c IMHO they didn't understand how someone with 2 noms from an MOC didn't get in, and someone with maybe just a Pres. did, and felt it was a legacy, or that the USNA was placing more on athletics and less on academics. </p>
<p>Sometimes, it takes a while for people to get passed licking their wounds. I am concerned with thought that they might never get passed it and how they will act when they become an AD officer in 4 yrs. </p>
<p>Hate to be philosophical, but the true mark of a great officer is how they will overcome a difficult/painful obstacle.</p>
<p>I wish RPI great luck in his future and only hope that he realizes the old joke...do you know what they call a USNA grad? Ensign....do you know what they call a ROTC grad? Ensign.</p>
<p>I am not inferring that a USNA grad has not been given an excellent and deserving advantage, I am just inferring that it is what you do as an Ensign that will make the difference. If RPI or any other ROTC grad that was not accepted by the USNA holds a grudge towards them it will be very difficult for them to be a team player. That is my only point</p>
<p>Babble-on - I am not sure if you have read any of the other threads on this forum or not but you have again demonstrated that you do not understand the process - </p>
<p>
[quote]
I just checked the senator and representative nomimations for my part of my state. Between 2 senators and 1 representative, there were a total of 160 nominations.
[/quote]
[quote]
The reasons why kids aren't accepted can be justified any which way - but when talented, smart (based on SAT and ACT scores), squared-away nominated kids don't make the cut (which I know has been the circumstance with many kids that I know), it's so obvious.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In the former - All Congressmen must abide by the law - US Code Title X.
Here is the reference for you:
US</a> CODE--TITLE 10--ARMED FORCES</p>
<p>I don't know what you are referencing with your 160 nominations but an MOC may not give an unlimited number of nominations. They submit a slate of 10 nominees for each open slot available - ONE candidate from that slate of 10 nominees will receive an appointment (as long as one is deemed qualified).
Sometimes a congressman has more than one vacancy to fill and they submit two slates of 10 for each vacancy and can give more than one nomination in a single year.</p>
<p>So, yes you are quite correct that a nomination does not equal an appointment. This is a point I have tried to make clear to candidates and parents. In fact several nominations does not always translate into an appointment. I don't think anyone on this forum has ever implied that getting a nomination = getting an appointment. It is just one step in the process.</p>
<p>As far as the latter - It is far from obvious. There are more talented, squared-away nominated kids than there are spaces available.
Not every talented, squared-away, nominated kid will receive an appointment.</p>
<p>But guess what? The coolest thing about the service academies is that if you don't make it the first go - you can try again. You can go to college, take ROTC, stay fit and give it another go. Try that with applying to Harvard.</p>
<p>Babble-on: I find that your posts don't describe the SA application/nomination accurately.</p>
<p>"I just checked the senator and representative nomimations for my part of my state. Between 2 senators and 1 representative, there were a total of 160 nominations. That's not counting the students who live in this same area who got Presidential nominations or anyone who got a 'superintendent's' nomination."</p>
<p>-I believe that you mean that there were a total of 160 nominations total to ALL of the SAs for your 2 Senators and 1 US Rep. Each MOC is allowed 5 people WHO ARE ALLOTTED TO THEM at each SA at a time. That works out to an average of 1.25 slots to fill per year to each of the 4 SAs that require nominations. Since each MOC is allowed 10 nominations per open slot, per SA, per year, each year you would expect AT LEAST: 3 MOCs * 4 SAs * 1 slot * 10 noms = 120 nominations (unless there aren't enough quality candidates), with a MAXIMUM of 3 MOCs * 4 SAs * 2 slots * 10 noms = 240 nominations (if every MOC has 2 slots - unlikely). From my viewpoint, 160 looks just about right. I put "who are allotted to them" in all caps (above), because as a previous poster pointed out, once one nominee is allotted to their MOC, the rest of that MOC's nominees go into the "national pool." People are offered appointments from the pool based on their "whole candidate score," so more than 1-2 people per year from a single MOC's district may receive appointments to a single SA if that district is very competitive.</p>
<p>-Your earlier comparison of MOC nominations to "overbooking" of airlines is not without merit. Every MOC is allowed up to 10 nominations per open slot, to allow for "fallout" due to scholastic and medical disqualifications, and to allow for addition of candidates to the national pool.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>How could it be that a person with excellent grades and test scores might not be offered and appointment? The truth is that grades (actually class rank) and test scores are only one facet of the "whole candidate score." Great grades/rank from a less competitive school or in less difficult classes won't stack up against someone from a more competitive school. Great grades without having additional time demands (ECAs, sports) don't demonstrate the type of time management needed to succeed at a SA. And the list goes on...</p></li>
<li><p>You are incorrect in stating that a Presidential nomination outweighs a MOC nomination. Every MOC is guaranteed that one FULLY-QUALIFIED candidate from their slate of nominees will receive an appointment. As I understand it, Presidential nominees go into the national pool (unless that person also has a MOC nomination).</p></li>
</ul>
<p>-Why should someone with a parent or sibling receive any extra consideration for receiving a SA appointment? Several academic studies have been done to look for factors that contribute to achieving success at the SAs, because the SAs want to select applicants who can survive the academics AND other SA stresses. One factor that significantly correlated to success was having an immediate family member who had attended a SA. It has nothing to do with "genetics," but it takes a special level of committment to make it through 4 years of "free" (ROTFLMAO) education, and having another family member who has been there/done that allows a young person to make a more informed decision.</p>
<p>The truth is that many wonderful candidates who apply to the SAs each year don't make it in. Many re-apply the next year. Many others receive ROTC scholarships, or find other ways to enter service. I applaud you and RPIbound and others who have not received appointments this year for your attempts to attend a SA, and I wish you good luck as you move on.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Here is a study where USAFA legacies have a 10% higher graduation rate than the Corps at large. All the other academies can post similiar results. </p>
<p>Legacy</a> Status as a Signal in College Admissions - Storming Media</p>
<p>Besides, WCF points for legacies are less than 1% of the total points necessary for acceptance. Hardly enough to make or break most applications.</p>
<p>
[quote]
However, from what I understand, a presidential nomination or something called a 'superintendent's nomination' takes priority over senator and representative's nominations.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Not sure how you understand this. Go to the posted link above - each academy can appoint a maximum of 100 candidates with a presidential nomination. Far more than that number apply - which is why it is important for those who qualify for a presidential to also apply for a congressional nomination.
Not all presidential nominees are legacies - you can have an enlisted parent or a parent who went through OCS or ROTC.</p>
<p>The superintendent may nominate only 50 candidates for appointment. From what I hear - far less than that number get a superintendent's apppointment each year.</p>
<p>
[quote]
the political maneuvering was probably out-of-sight this year. I don't believe you need to personally attack a student who was voicing some valid and understandable opinions. Berating someone personally as having a 'weakness' because they voice an intelligent opinion is pretty weak in itself.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>First of all - the political maneuvering that you suggest is a pretty strong accusation. Some things on the surface may not seem fair but become clearer as more knowledge is attained.
It is important to get all the facts and learn as much as you can about the process before attacking it.</p>
<p>I didn't see any personal attacks in the above thread - RPIbound came across as whining and willing to blame the system or political maneuvering for his lack of an appointment. While I understand disappointment (my daughter applied twice to USMA before getting her appointment) - it is common for high quality kids to get turned down. RPIBound doesn't tell us the whole story - he didn't mention athletics or exceptional leadership. </p>
<p>Again, the Academies use a wholistic approach to admissions - it is not all stat based. They are looking for a scholar/leader/athlete model in a strong candidate. If you are weak in one area then you have to be really, really strong in others to make up for it. Sometimes on the surface it looks like high quality candidates are turned down for lower quality candidates.<br>
Indeed, some very high quality candidates are turned down - some who even got into Harvard. That, however, is a judgement that is difficult to make on a forum such as this as none of us are sitting in the board room examining each candidate package.
Finally, the Service academies are America's academies. They are bound by law to accept a cross section of Americans from all Congressional districts in the country - that does lend itself to some disctrict being much more competitive than others - fair or not - those are the rules.</p>