why would admissionsofficers from Ivies reject even the best students

Applying to College
21

<p>I was making the point that it is one thing to help a minority, but it is another thing to purposely try to hold back a minority just because too many of them are qualifying for your program. It sound disingenuous to me for Stanford to be saying that asians are not being kept out based only on their lack of EC's. I'm pretty sure the lawyers are involved in it by now, and that is the type of thing that lawyers can say with straight faces. I could be wrong.</p>

<p>There are a lot of asians in California. Stanford would have less asians if they were in Indiana. Without getting specific, I believe the UC schools don't follow the national racial composition formulas either.</p>

22

<p>I think it is sad that schools are biased against Asians, but a college administrator actually told me if they let in all the Asians with the top scores they would lose a lot of alumni money.
Also, I agree that the Ivies and highly selective schools are looking for well rounded classes. Sometimes that can simply be that there are already a lot of excellent violinists applying, but they need a great cellist, scores and grades all being equal. It's really the roll of the dice.</p>

23

<p>I am certainly not against affirmative action. I do NOT see it as a way of righting past wrongs, but I do see it as something necessary to keep an intolerable situation from occurring.</p>

<p>However, it is a zero sum game. You can not give to somebody without having to take away from somebody else.</p>

24

<p>There is one thing about affirmative action that bothers me. The term affirmative action certainly implies to me that somebody is getting some advantage. Otherwise, why call it affirmative action? On CC, there are so many posts about how colleges want URM's because of diversity. This is certainly true, BUT these posters act as if being an URM does not give them any advantage in terms of their stats. In addition, URM's sometimes give advice about what you need to get in as if they are not getting an advantage. There was a post last week (I won't mention names) where a non-URM was talking about how hard it was to get into an ivy. Somebody reassures the non-URM that he had just been accepted ED to an ivy even though his scores were way below normal (scores not specified), and all you have to do in order to get accepted is work hard, convince them of how serious you are, and form a personal relationship with your regional rep. I see "form a personal relationship with your regional rep" and check on the poster who I find out is a Native American. I imagine the regional rep is calling this guy at least once a week. Meanwhile, the non-URM is thanking the poster for the reassurances and saying how he feels so much better about his chances now that he knows how low his test scores can be, because he is sure that his EC's will make up for the low scores.</p>

25

<p>I would love to go to school with some Native Americans. If they get in with lower scores but are still capable of doing the work -- fine by me. Personally, I would probably learn more from a true Native American (assuming they have the culture to go along with their blood line) than I would with someone with super high STATS.</p>

<p>I know I going to get hammered for that remark. :(</p>

26

<p>
[QUOTE]

There is one thing about affirmative action that bothers me. The term affirmative action certainly implies to me that somebody is getting some advantage. Otherwise, why call it affirmative action? On CC, there are so many posts about how colleges want URM's because of diversity. This is certainly true, BUT these posters act as if being an URM does not give them any advantage in terms of their stats. In addition, URM's sometimes give advice about what you need to get in as if they are not getting an advantage. There was a post last week (I won't mention names) where a non-URM was talking about how hard it was to get into an ivy. Somebody reassures the non-URM that he had just been accepted ED to an ivy even though his scores were way below normal (scores not specified), and all you have to do in order to get accepted is work hard, convince them of how serious you are, and form a personal relationship with your regional rep. I see "form a personal relationship with your regional rep" and check on the poster who I find out is a Native American. I imagine the regional rep is calling this guy at least once a week. Meanwhile, the non-URM is thanking the poster for the reassurances and saying how he feels so much better about his chances now that he knows how low his test scores can be, because he is sure that his EC's will make up for the low scores.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>I think you're misunderstanding Affirmative Action. I'm not a fan of it myself, but the regional reps don't actively pursue URM's. True, some URM's might not understand the impact of AA, but it is diminishing anyways. There are enough high-achieving blacks, hispanics, and so forth, that it is really unnecessary to give a huge 'boost' to underqualified applicants.</p>

27

<p>Sonatax: Whoa, I can see that you haven't read "The Gatekeepers" by Steinberg or "Admissions Confidential" by Toors. Actually, the comments about the Native American are very close to something in "The Gatekeepers". The adcom from Wesleyan traveled to a small, inaccessible reservation in order to recruit two Native Americans. The adcom was constantly on this these guys trying to talk them into Wesleyan. Also, there was a black girl with high scores who was going to a private school where the adcom was communicating constantly with the GC at the school to make sure that she was still considering Wesleyan. Out of thousands of applicants, the adcoms were watching some people very closely. On a more general note, what about the "diversity weekends" that colleges have, and the free plane tickets for URM's to come visit the school. I am certainly not saying that all URM's are recruited that way. I am most certainly not saying that they shouldn't be courted. My post was just to say that some URM's should make it clear somehow when they are posting that a candidate does have to have something more than a 1350 and "really good EC's" to get into an ivy. </p>

<p>If you said that it is really unnecessary to give a huge boost to URM's in order for college to met their diversity "requirements", then lets get rid of AA and separate admission rounds altogether.</p>

<p>Also, I would not say that the URM's who are accepted because of AA are "unqualified". Actually, I would personally think that nearly all of the applicants who are denied/waitlisted are probably qualified to attend. On the other hand, there is a problem being discussed in the news about how URM's from poor public schools and lower test scores have trouble adjusting to an elite school if they are accepted.</p>

28

<p>"There are enough high-achieving blacks, hispanics, and so forth, that it is really unnecessary to give a huge 'boost' to underqualified applicants."</p>

<p>What people are missing is that the top colleges are not accepting underqualified applicants. Those colleges are in the great position of being able to pick and choose among qualified applicants in order to create well rounded classes with a mix of URMS, pure scholars, talented musicians, artists, community service people, people from farms, inner cities, huge cities, rich families, legacies, and people from a variety of countries. </p>

<p>The colleges want to create classes allowing students to learn from a diversity of peers. The colleges also want to produce alums who will have a positive impact on all aspects of the world.</p>

<p>At Harvard, for instance, about 85% of the 20,000 or so applicants qualify for admission, but only one in 10 can be admitted because of space reasons. Most of the people whom Harvard rejects are well qualified for admission. </p>

<p>In the eyes of Harvard's adcoms, however, a URM, nationally ranked athlete, oboe prodigy, wealthy legacy or student from rural Idaho with a 2110 SAT may be seen as more desireable than a 2400 , valedictorian, classical piano playing upper middle class student from NYC. That's because Harvard could almost fill its class with students like the NYC one while the other students are rarer, and thus add more to the campus diversity. All of the students mentioned, however, had the qualifications to thrive at Harvard if they were admitted.</p>

<p>There are countries such as France where universities strictly are places to get academic knowledge. Students don't tend to live on campus, but live with their families or in apartments. There aren't ECs on campus for students to participate in. In a county like France, the scores on tests is what determines who gets into universities. That system works for them because their universities aren't expected to provide the socialization that most US universities view as a large part of their missions.</p>

29

<p>I agree with Northstarmom. In my own more cynical way, however, I think another reason that colleges want to have diversity, beyond the good effect on the campus atmosphere, is that there are a lot of people watching the numbers to make sure that they appear politically correct. As I said though, it isn't whether or not people are qualified, but rather which qualified people are admitted.</p>

<p>I don't really expect people to identify themselves on CC as being URM's when they are accepted somewhere. It would be pretty hard to say "I was accepted to Princeton with a 1420 and I'm black." However, it is hard to tell sometimes what a person's hook may have been when they just say "I was accepted to Princeton with a 1420". I don't have a solution to that.</p>

30

<p>URM's may not contribute to the university in terms of culture in the same way that international students might. However, I do think that URM's in the campus environment certainly contribute different points of view, certainly different from patriotboy. </p>

<p>My point of view, once again different from a lot of URM's, is that the value of diversity and political correctness is somewhat overrated. To me, it seems to be weakening the country instead of making it stronger. The main reason for affirmative action to me is so that 1) the flagship colleges do represent society as a whole, and 2) the different racial groups can learn to better live together. Of course, it may not even be helping there. The URM racial groups generally self segregate once they are in college, and getting a few more URM's into Harvard can't be having a major effect when compared to the condition of the inner-city public school systems.</p>

31

<p>
[QUOTE]
There are enough high-achieving blacks, hispanics, and so forth, that it is really unnecessary to give a huge 'boost' to underqualified applicants.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>Do you know how many cross admits there are to elite institutions?</p>

<p>To add to what Northstarmom said, their is a small group of "qualified" black applicants for elite institutions to pick from if you are juding by SATs, APs, & Workload.</p>

<p>Lets roll back to the SAT stats. The SAT range for verbal at HYPSM are:</p>

<p>Harvard: 700-790
Yale: 700-780
Princeton: 680-770
Stanford: 680-770</p>

<h2>MIT: 680-770</h2>

<p>Under the SAT scoring system, most non-minority students hoping to qualify for admission to any of the nation's 25 highest-ranked universities and 25 highest-ranked liberal arts colleges need to score at least 700 on each portion of the SAT. </p>

<p>For 2005, 78,025 students scored 700 or above on the verbal SAT. However, only 1,205 black students scored 700 or above on the SAT verbal. </p>

<p>Also in 2005, over 100,00 students scored 700 or above on the math SAT. Only 1,132 African Americans scored 700 above on the math SAT.</p>

<p>Along with these stats, the JBHE estimates that there are only 1,000 collegebound African Americans with scores of 1400 or above. </p>

<hr>

<p>Now when you speak of their being plentiful qualified blacks students according to non-minority standards...there are 25 elite universities and 25 LACs that reported that SAT 700's are standard for admitted students.</p>

<p>You're speaking of 1,000 black candidates with 1400+ streched across all of those schools. Going back to the original list. The number of blacks in 2005's freshmen class:</p>

<p>Harvard: 153 black freshmen (9.3% of class)
Yale: 122 black freshmen (9.2% of class)
Princeton: 116 black freshmen (9.4% of class)
Stanford: 156 black freshmen (9.5% of class)
MIT: 55 black fresmen (5.5% of class)</p>

<p>602 blacks enrolled at HYPSM Class of 2009, even if you want to assume that the majority of 1400 scoring students enrolled at HYPSYM, you're still discounting 193 black freshmen at UPenn, 175 at Cornell, 114 at Columbia, 97 at Brown, and the 83 black freshmen at Dartmouth. Your'e speaking of over 1,200 black freshmen at the Ivies + Stanford alone. </p>

<p>We haven't even touched on the rest of the top 25 schools, like Georgetown, Duke, UofChicago, Rice... nor have we touched on the elite LACs like Amherst, Williams, Swarthmore, Vassar, Pomona & Wesleyan, which have generally 50-75 black freshmen apiece.</p>

<h2>At 50 institutions where the average candidate has atleast one score above 700, there are over 5,000 black students enrolled. Approx. 4,000 of them at the nation's top 25 universities. </h2>

<p>Now, going back, didn't only 1,000 score 1400s, only about 1,100 black applicants have one 700+ score on the SATs. And that to assume that none of these 1,000 attended a school outside of the top 25 national universities.</p>

<p>If you get anything above, it is to note that in order to ensure a sufficient amount of African American students at the elite universities, meaning over 1%, there is a need to increase the acceptance of African Americans.</p>

<p>At MIT, to be able maintain a 5% black populations, they had to accept African Americans at a rate of 31% (versus the regular 18%). Why...there are so few black applicant within the 25%-75% SAT range, and the number is even worse for SAT.</p>

<p>Ifyou think of it this way, when Amherst, Swarthmore, Cornell, MIT, WUSTL, & Williams host their diversity weekends, they are courting about 2/5 of that qualified group of 1,100 black applicants. These universities really have to fight for the enrollment of high achieving African American candidates, courting them and accepting them at higher rates.</p>

<p>Statistically, for any of these elite institutions to have above 1% of an enrolling black freshmen class,they have to accept black students below the 75% tile. If these admissions were racially blind, as CalTech declared to the JBHE, then most universities would be like CalTech, <1% black. In 2005, only one African American enrolled (0.4%) in CalTech's freshmen class. - Cre8tive1</p>

32

<p>Cre8tive1: That is the most comprehensive post I have ever seen on CC. I'm not sure what to make of it. Since the lower SAT scores for blacks is socio-economic in origin, it would imply that the socio-economic condition of blacks in the US is much worse than I thought. </p>

<p>My main contention on this thread is that it is misleading to non-URM's when a URM reports that they were just accepted ED to an ivy with a 1400 and the hook is not clear. Of course I am NOT suggesting that URM's should feel that they need to mention the hook. Maybe the non-URM's should just be better informed and not feel that they can be admitted with a 1400 because they have really, really good EC's. (My main concern is that too many people apply to the ivies because of brand-consciousness.) I would add that somebody getting a 1350 at a public school with an average of 850 is more impressive to me than somebody getting a 1500 at a private school with an average of 1300.</p>

33

<p>"My main contention on this thread is that it is misleading to non-URM's when a URM reports that they were just accepted ED to an ivy with a 1400 and the hook is not clear."</p>

<p>We don't know if the URM was accepted because they were URM. No one ever knows exactly why they were accepted. Students who say that they were accepted because of great essays, great interviews, wonderful reccs, etc. are just blowing smoke. They have no clue. Adcoms don't announce their reasons for accepting students, and what students think are hooks often are not.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, there are nonURMs that are accepted to top colleges with sub 1400 scores and without things that many here would consider hooks. A link to one is below. </p>

<p>One last thing: When it comes to the very top colleges, they could fill their classes with students with scores close or at 2400, valedictorain status, etc., but those colleges don't want to do that because they want well rounded classes who can contribute to all aspects of campus life. THere's a reason that places like Harvard have hundreds of very active campus organizations: They accept students with the track records that show that they will do such things just for fun -- not just for resume dressing.</p>

<p>Anyway, check out this white male, knight_miler, who got into Harvard EA with relatively low scores. He says he had an EC hook. Did that get him in? Only adcoms know. (Incidentally, he also said he was NOT a recruited athlete).</p>

<p>Decision: Accepted</p>

<p>Stats:
SAT I: 620 CR, 630 M , 660 W
SAT IIs: 630 MathII, 610 US History, 650 Lit
GPA: ~4.4 (have gotten all A's in every class in high school with 14 APs (including present classes))
Rank: Valedictorian (1 out of 288?) #2 is like a 3.8!!
Other stats: Many National Latin Awards (including Gold on NLE and bronze on Medusa), Numerous student of the Year awards from Governor's School program, many track and cross country awards and medals, MVP,etc. 2 Certamen state titles (3rd place).</p>

<p>5s on AP US, AP Calc AB, 4 on AB Calc BC, AP Gov't, AP Euro, AP Environmental</p>

<p>EC- Cross Country (Captain), Indoor Track (Captain), Outdoor Track (Captain), Envirothon (Co-Captain), Latin Club, Certamen (5 year captain starting in eighth grade), Academic Team, National Honor Society (Vice-President), Virginia Math League, Major Volunteer Work with a Community Center (300 hours?)</p>

<p>Subjective:
Essays: Good--->Great, but not perfect. Showed my determination and ability to progress against certain doom.
Teacher Recs: One was amazing and extremely well written (nearly perfect), the other was shining--- but poorly written.
Counselor Rec: Amazing!
Hook (if any): Conducted a 4 year research project on early foreign language introduction (Latin)/language accquistion/teaching methods. Created a lesson plan for a elementary Latin program---- Presented my findings to the school board (they accepted my proposal) ---and I will be working with the school board this summer to officially design the program in my county.
I also overcame a hip condition to become one of the best distance runners in my area and at the state level. (But I am NOT a recruited athlete)
Location/Person:
State or Country: Virginia
School Type: Really crappy public high school for half the day, prestigious, nationally recognized Governor's School for the other half of the day
Ethnicity: White, middle-class
Gender: Male
Perceived Strengths/Weaknesses: Strengths: extremely well-rounded, many many awards (even if they are not national), perfect GPA, overcame potential disability to become the best, strong research project, Nearly perfect interview ---Weaknesses: SATs (need I say anymore, I am a BAD test taker-- but who cares if I can't do geometry if I can get a 5 on the AP Calc Exam)
Why you think you were accepted/deferred/denied: Above
Other Factors:
General Comments/Congratulations/Venting/Commiserations,etc: CONGRATS to all those accepted! I can't wait to meet you all!</p>

<p>I hope my acceptance goes to show that colleges do look beyond relatively low SATs scores. I don't think SATs show actual intelligence in a lot of cases (other than those people who flat out get 800s without even studying ), rather time to study and resources to prep classes/courses... I didn't have the time to study for SATs at all and I expressed this in my interview! (but I wouldn't suggest that anyone else say this in an interview,,, it was just appropriate in my case and interview situation)"
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?p=1623772#post1623772%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?p=1623772#post1623772&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

34

<p>kevster-
its ok to want to go to harvard - clearly its an excellent school and many people want to go there. but PLEASE don't think that you will be able to "figure out" the secret to getting in. </p>

<p>the advise you've gotten here is great. but it isn't the "answer." there is no answer. even if one can look back at those accepted and try to identify some "key" to why they got in, the truth is that you could look at the pool of those rejected and find many who seem to have that same "key." a school like harvard simply has too many amazing applicants for someone on the outside to be able to predict ahead of time what will make some of those applicants rise to the top.</p>

<p>if you think pursuing the type of community program that has been discussed will be a worthwhile experience for you and better your community, then by all means go ahead and do it. but don't do it because you think that will be what will get you in to harvard. my guess is that colleges see a ton of applicants who suddenly are inspired their junior year (i don't know what year you are in) to do something "great." </p>

<p>be yourself - if that means you don't get into harvard, its ok - there are a ton of wonderful schools out there. don't focus on what will make you fit into a school you think you want -- chances are wth the ivies you can't do that any way. focus on finding a school that fits who you are - there are a lot of wonderful, academically challenging, non-ivy schools out there.</p>

35

<p>Northstarmom: I'm not disagreeing that SAT's are not everything or that there are other hooks other than being an URM. The example that you posted is certainly interesting. Even the adcoms pretty much say that you can forget ivies with a 1250. On the other hand, the applicant does provide enough information that you can see that something special is going on. Just the part about overcoming a hip problem (surgery?) to become the captain of the cross country track team is an indication of some greatness going on. It is NOT some hooked candidate (URM, legacy, athlete, or whatever) just posting that they got into Yale in ED with a 1400 or lower, and then acting like they had no big advantage.</p>

<p>I might also suggest that there are enough people with outstanding EC's and other unique personal qualities that they don't have to take people with low SAT scores in order to obtain those kinds of people.</p>

<p>It sometimes seems that some people simultaneously say that affirmative action is totally necessary because without it there would be no minorities in colleges because of discrimination at the same time that they also say that affirmative action is totally unnecessary because URM's are so valued because of diversity that everyone would have gotten in anyway even without affirmative action.</p>

36

<p>" On the other hand, the applicant does provide enough information that you can see that something special is going on. Just the part about overcoming a hip problem (surgery?) to become the captain of the cross country track team is an indication of some greatness going on. It is NOT some hooked candidate (URM, legacy, athlete, or whatever) just posting that they got into Yale in ED with a 1400 or lower, and then acting like they had no big advantage."</p>

<p>The difference between the info that was posted about the relatively low scoring white male who got in and the URMs and many others who have posted is that Knight_miler posted enough details about his ECs that we could see exactly what he did.</p>

<p>Most students who post on CC don't do that. They post things like "300 hours of community service, " or "great ECs, " or "president of XYZ clubs." They don't explain what they created and accomplished.</p>

<p>Indeed, most college applicants don't seem to understand that how elite colleges evaluate ECs is not by the amount of hours one put in but by the impact of one's leadership, projects that one developed or tried to develop, things that Knight_runner deliniated.</p>

<p>This also is why the interviews, recommendations and essays are so important and why students may not be able to tell whether they did well or not on such things.</p>

<p>This also is why one can't assume that someone got into an elite because they were a URM. You don't know the whole story.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, I have seen URMs not get into places like Harvard despite scores above 1500, high class rank, rigorous courses. They lacked the kind of real EC achievements and interest that Knight_runner mentioned.</p>

<p>And to me, what was most interesting about what he posted was this: Conducted a 4 year research project on early foreign language introduction (Latin)/language accquistion/teaching methods. " Created a lesson plan for a elementary Latin program---- Presented my findings to the school board (they accepted my proposal) ---and I will be working with the school board this summer to officially design the program in my county."</p>

<p>That took an extraordinary amount of intellectual passion, creativity and leadership skills, and his going so far beyond what most h.s. students do in their ECs indicates he'd be a very strong contributor to any campus's community. It's also not the kind of EC that one can fake. At the same time, it's not one that most peers would notice because they'd think the interest was weird and boring. I imagine his peers are saying, "Why did Harvard take him over (insert name of higher SAT-scoring student), who's obviously the better candidate."</p>

37

<p>Can anyone honestly say that they would have rather seen an applicant with near perfect SAT scores and common ECs get in over this guy?</p>

38

<p>quote: "1) the flagship colleges do represent society as a whole"</p>

<p>as a reason for AA, the only one i've heard yet.</p>

<p>Um, how bout we accept felons and dumb people?? They're a part of society, they matter to. You think they don't deserve a HYPISM education??? </p>

<p>Oh, right, ivies are for SMART people, to further their education... THATS WHY THEY LOOK AT SAT SCORES!!! :) oh now i understand the procedure. Hmmm... how did Shaquille get into Yale with a 1000??? how odd... oh.. now they want him to be photographed for the college poster... hm... yeah...</p>

39

<p>worldshopper: I think your logic is off a little bit. You are arguing from the specific to the general. Just because the described candidate probably deserved to be accepted into an elite school even though he had low test scores, it does not logically follow that other people with low test scores deserve to be accepted into elite schools. I doubt if every hooked candidate has a hook that is as interesting as this candidate. In fact, the hook for at least some URM's doesn't seem to extend beyond their skin color. </p>

<p>I think the JBHE article makes it clear that URM's have statistically lower test scores. If you accept the premise that test scores are a predictor of success in college, then the question is how low can the scores go before they become too much of a drawback to an individual's success even if they are admitted. I could make my own estimate of this, but who really cares.</p>

<p>The comments about test scores apply also to other favored groups such as legacies, athletes, development cases and VIP's. Except for athletes, though, nobody seems to be concerned about lower test scores for anyone other than URM's. I think the two main points are that if lower URM test scores are not accepted, then the elite colleges become racially unbalanced; and that there is value in having different viewpoints in the campus community. </p>

<p>The other approach that might be used is to try to discredit the SAT test. This might be done by claiming a "white" bias in the test. I can NOT see where there can possibly be a bias in the Math portion. There could be a bias in the CR portion but asians probably have a statistically higher chance of having parents who are not native English speakers an they don't seem to be disadvantaged by the test. Another way to discredit the SAT is to suggest that it is not a predictor of success in college/life, and this is possible.</p>

<p>(It is interesting to me that the poster said that he accepted the fact that he tested badly and that he made it clear in his app that he was too busy to study for the SAT. That seems to be a bit of a red flag about something. I'm sure he could have done better at the SAT if he had tried. Maybe he took it cold and only one time the way that people used to back in the 1970's.) </p>

<p>(Saying that URM's bring "diversity" and "cultural differences" to the college campuses is true, but those words seem a bit overblown for me personally. I would leave those types of words to discussions about international students, and not to URM's. To me, URM's bring "differing points of view".)</p>

40

<p>" If you accept the premise that test scores are a predictor of success in college, then the question is how low can the scores go before they become too much of a drawback to an individual's success even if they are admitted."</p>

<p>But, truth is that the best predictor of college success is h.s. gpa. The SAT I is a very weak predictor of college success.</p>