“That the “reaches” schools make down the SAT scale to achieve this are often (usually) at the low end of the graduating class in 4 years, if at all, doesn’t make it any easier.”
How do you know this to be true or is it just speculation? Many schools with challenging academics (think Bowdoin) are test optional because they don’t perceive a strong correlation.
For perspective, our midwest urban public school usually sends a bunch of kids to top 20 schools every year, and often there are 1-2 HPYS acceptances in the mix. Watching about 6 years of college admissions there, what I can see is that the kids with national level awards – Intel Finalists, winners of the national competition in an academic type event – who also have 35-36 ACT, are valedictorian and captain of sports teams – are the ones who get in to HPYS. The “average excellent” students with excellent scores, rank, gpa and more local accomplishments – captain of the team with various accolades but not a recruit, editor of the newspaper/yearbook, first chair in the school orchestra – do very well, but are rarely HPYS admits, at least in our school.
If this board, and this thread, can educate kids and families so that they don’t chase one more AP or an extra 2/100 on their gpa in the hope that will make a difference in admissions, then that would be a good outcome.
I believe that to be true both because it’s well documented, including through academic studies linked by others here, and because I’ve personally reviewed thousands of undergrad and professional transcripts over 25 hears in my capacity as an employer considering applications from “top ten” institutions. And to be clear, I personally frequently “reach” down the GPA scale to achieve diversity because it is important in my business and to me. Happy to “admit” this. My decisions are made with the benefit of a long interview, by me, a decision maker, and a series of other interviews by my colleagues. Obviously, colleges can’t do that (or can they?), but the process allows me to separate what’s on paper from reality.
“That the “reaches” schools make down the SAT scale to achieve this are often (usually) at the low end of the graduating class in 4 years, if at all, doesn’t make it any easier.”
The top schools are looking for kids that they can do best within their own environment. For those you thought were less qualified because of lower SAT level were probably the top 1-3 % in their own schools; otherwise, you don’t see the top schools post in their new class statistics such as that 95% of their income students are in the top 10 person of their class and 99% in leadership positions. You can’t compare students from the West and East costs where school districts were heavily invested in educations with students from middle - America where education resources are more scarce. You also can’t compare the students from wealth suburban area with students from rural towns or inner cities where test preparation resource and family wealth are more lacking. I think you miss some point that the top schools are trying to achieve — may be still have America a land of opportunity.
@milee30 --Yes good point, although we’re sort of having a tangent on tangent conversation now. I initially was responding to a person who was stating that the UCs read essays and LORs, and pointing out there was a filter used by some of the more selective UCs (the top 9%). The truth to which I refer is that you may end up not being in the running if you have a B at schools using that filter. There are always exceptions, but your average outstanding applicant (not as much of an oxymoron as it sounds) isn’t likely to be that exception. The “speak the truth” comment is out of context, but leads to a good point that each school does have a slightly different screening process and emphasis. But there are a number of UCs that use that check mark on the app that says “ELC” (the top 9% of the class) to weed through the apps. As an applicant, and parent, knowing these things to hers guide you in the process.
@OfficerMancuso: thank you for your well stated posts.
“The institution can talk about the sanctity of their process and their unique secret sauce in evaluating applicants, but come on. The school wouldn’t hire professors or invest in infrastructure they way they hire for UG admissions. The difference is stark.”
^So true.
As noted by another poster, transparency and honesty by the institutions are needed. The many ad hominem attacks on students or parents – typically based on the assertions of “incomplete information”, “lack of knowledge”, “misguided expectations” or “anecdotal data” can only be addressed with such transparency and honesty.
“The institution can talk about the sanctity of their process and their unique secret sauce in evaluating applicants, but come on. The school wouldn’t hire professors or invest in infrastructure they way they hire for UG admissions. The difference is stark.”
Ha! Even if the admissions were done by professors, many would still be complaining. See how I complained that my kid should have gotten there As but those stupid professors were not competent and not clear in their assignments, so she only got two B and one C… hahaha… It made me felt better.
Sorry that you’ve come to that conclusion based on my few sentences. I think I’ve been inarticulate or incomplete. I’m referring to studies that compare apples to apples regarding SAT/ACT/MCAT/LSAT scores and I’m conveying my own observations from thousands of files that include students whose hometowns are all over the country and the world. After the kids from the places lacking adequate resources get to Harvard College, or the GSB, or Boalt, they are in their new hometowns of Cambridge, Palo Alto or Berkeley in my world, competing with the other folks who are there. Then a comparison inevitably happens among students coming from that same place when their GPA is calculated and lined up next to others in their class, major, etc. While many top places don’t rank students, we get more than enough transcripts to do it ourselves. And I can review the classes and ECs for “rigor” and well-roundedness, leadership etc.
The reality is, many wonderful students, grown men and women well into their 20s by the time I meet them, have had the factors you are noting recognized and considered, and their worthiness recognized, twice. As I said, I still often find myself stretching and explaining why the 3.5 kid should get an offer when the 3.8 won’t. It very often comes down to me and my company wanting to have a workplace and service offering that reflects the makeup of this country and one that recognizes laudable corporate values. Some of our very best and brightest employees would not have been hired without a “hook,” as they say here. I’m glad they had one. Others with objectively better academic records who missed out have a point if they are disappointed, too. If my private company wanted to go in a different direction (same as a private university) that would be our prerogative. We’d inevitably be less diverse and less good because of it. No need to tell me what I’ve objectively observed or what I am thinking or missing here. I’ve been around and I’m from one of those underserved and underrepresented backgrounds. I’m also a realist.
…and not to put too fine a point on it, but I wanted to clarify, in case it’s not clear yet, that I think the private schools’ intentions and goals are completely laudable and in line with my own values. My main purpose in sharing our family’s recent experience was to commiserate while offering an anecdote that (in my view) confirms some of the suspicions about some of the randomness and relative lack of discipline and excellence (compared to other areas of great universities, certainly) in the very difficult admissions process when trying to decide among the very top students who are not filling a specific role. I really think the “we can’t go wrong” attitude is kind of the curse for high achieving, unhooked kids.
Just a small point from the Yale alumni association link about the book award @mwdad2018 posted - this caught my eye:
Really? Yale needs its book award to be perceived as more prestigious than those given by the alumni clubs of Harvard, Princeton, Penn and the others? They really care about that?
@GnocchiB even a movie star needs to be told they are “desirable” I guess.
It does seem folks are complaining more this year than before. Could just be in the context of all the movements out there, ppl speak up? Don’t know.
Even if you know now, it doesn’t help you “then” when the answer is “ you are lacking that thing I can’t tell you about, and you can’t get it anyway”.
The only real takeaways over the last few years:
-Perfect score and $3 gets you a large coffee at Starbucks. It will also get you a lot of $ at schools you may or may not want to go there, so it want all for nothing.
-A story of getting into any top school that is more than 3 years old is stale. Each years seems to be much more brutal than the last.
-you can’t control it. You can only control your reactions. Take the results with dignity and grace, remembering that you are lucky to have a positive result.
A few great kids got no result. And what strikes me about them all was their humility and grace hopping on everyone’s advice right and left instead of feeling sorry for themselves.
@mwdad2018, thank you for sharing your story. I think it would be helpful to others.
“3. Major EC accomplishment showing determination, hardwork, leadership, etc. (to make all-state in a sport in which in our state over 3,000 kids participate, (top 1%) while concurrently a NMF (top 1%), I assumed this to be a rare combination that would make him stand-out. (add another 10%)”
It’s a pretty rare combination and valuable at top academic schools who are recruiting him for that sport.
@mwdad2018 I think your logic was fine, even if it was “flawed” in the eyes of some. You have every reason to think your son stood a higher than average chance of getting accepted–and whatever hypothetical statistical ratio you wanted to use makes the point. There is a website where you can plug in your SATs and GPA (unweighted) and it shows how your score (or your kid’s score) compares to the applicant pool at a given school for that year. Of course it doesn’t take into account other factors, like ECs and number of APs and diversity, etc. The 3.93 (2Bs in her whole life-both in AP classes) and 1550 SATs my daughter had put her at higher than 89% of applicants for Yale and higher than 86% for Stanford. Well, let’s think about that. They take about 3-6% of their applicants. For fun, I plugged in a 4.0 and 1600 and that put the imaginary applicant at better than 95% of applicants. Still no guarantee. So yes, there are things beyond GPA and scores. But if 5% of the applicants have perfect scores, the other things you bring to the app had better be really impressive and unique. Someone mentioned that high scores and grades are more likely to accompany other strengths. Yes, that may be true for high vs marginal GPAs, but not perfect vs a few B’s. Some HS classes have so much homework and teachers have Draconian late work policies that balancing other activities may mean a few less than perfect grades. In the end, if the college didn’t value what your son brought to the table, which seems like a lot, then the school that DID value it is a better fit. Whether or not you thought he stood a high chance of acceptance at Yale or the equivalent is a non-issue and nothing to criticize. Sorry that the thread I started attracted negative commentary on your math skills.
I am a bit surprised that being all-state in a sport isn’t a helpful EC if you are not being recruited.
I thought with ECs, schools wants to see 1) commitment, passion, leadership, and 2) time management skills (someone doing serious work on an EC and taking rigorous coursework and doing well is better than someone just doing the latter). Someone who is all state in a sport and captain of their team, IMO, has shown it both.
Thank you for sharing your insight.
I will be curious if you have seen state-level awards as being correlated with acceptances at `lower-Ivys’ or equivalent.
Let us say, on top of top notch academics (ACT of 36, unweighted 4.0, tons of APs, 5s in AP exams).
Part of the problem is that admissions counselors sometimes suggest that there are kids whose academic crednetials are so outstanding that they are basically auto-admits. If I were not an extremely knowledgeable parent and I had a kid with perfect scores and grades, including many APs, I would certainly assume that my child would fall into that category. After all, if you are not aware of the proliferation of awards, research, students taking graduate level classes in high school, wouldn’t you assume that all A’s and perfect test scores would do it? Its not unreasonable to wonder what more could they be seeking beyond perfection?
@osuprof, I think a more helpful way to look at ECs (at least at tippy-tops) is to consider if
1: It contributes to the campus.
2: It will help produce a future leader in a field.
Ideally several of these.
Thanks … I always thoughts that a person accomplished in sports is more energetic and disciplined, and that will take them further in life (and by the way, my son does not do any sports …).
While we are at it, let me ask this: what do you think state-level awards (and first alternate for nationals) in debate will add to an engineering applicant for schools like lower-ivies and equivalent (NU, UPenn, Cornell). Academics are top-notch … Has other accomplishments like being AIME qualifier, regional championship in quiz competitions …
Very well said. I think that parents for a while have been aware of extraordinary achievement in athletics. But in my experience, most parents simply have no idea how advanced many elementary and high school students are today, especially in STEM fields. The internet has really opened up a world of opportunity for the most talented kids out there.
I firmly do not think that kids are any smarter as a group today than in years past (with some exceptions as related to the increased numbers of smart, hard-working Asian kids) - it’s just that the metrics used to identify the highest ability kids have changed dramatically.
In a world in which the average cumulative high school GPA is basically an A- and weighting systems are out of control, and in which thousands of kids score “perfect” (or near perfect) scores, the standard rules no longer apply. High school grade inflation - in particular - has done a real disservice to our high school students, and has made so many think they are really at the tippy-top in ability. This failure of high school GPA and test scores to distinguish among students at the higher ranges of ability has more than any other factor contributed to the insane arms’ race to impress college admissions officers with all sorts of meaningless attributes, as the top 2 or 3% now have a legitimate shot of presenting themselves as the top 0.2 or 0.3%. Or at least they think they do, and I am sure that in many cases they are right.
I know debate kids who got into Ivies with decent but not perfect stats but they qualified to compete at the World level. Not saying it takes that, but I’m sure it helped those students grab a spot.