@theloniusmonk I should clarify. If you have a perfect score the perfect score pool will have a better chance of admission than the overall rate, but there will typically only be 400 places for your pool, statistically speaking. You are not really competing for one of 1700 places, or even one of 800 places.
I am not saying that’s their policy. It’s just how the numbers are year after year. It would be how I rate my chances if I were a perfect score student- am I one of the top 400 or so applicants within that pool, not am I one of the top 2000 that get admitted. (I am using “top” in a loose and subjective sense.)
There are many parents who feel that their kids are brilliant and hardworking and what more can you ask? I’m one of them. However, 3.6 million students are projected to graduate from high schools this year, which means if you kid is in the top 1% (sounds very impressive), he or she is one of 36,000 others, and there are fewer than 10,000 spots in HYPSM. And if you go to top 5%, still brilliant and hardworking, it starts to look hopeless.
True, the most blatant favoritism for the well connected has been reduced (not eliminated), with a greater share of admission based on merit.
However, it is also a trend that the upper and upper edge of upper middle classes have gotten better at hoarding merit and opportunity, and many of the most selective private schools have admission practices and definitions of merit that tend to result in more upper class admits. So increasingly merit based college admissions still leaves the most selective private schools very top heavy in the students’ SES class background.
Yes, they are still top heavy. Historically, though, not as much as they were. Programs like Questbridge and the admissions and FA policies of selective schools favoring diversity are attempts to began to address that, IMO.
Well, my very accomplished Questbridge student this year had the same results as everybody else (non QB’ers) – which were, across the board, one acceptance to either a private or one very good public, and a parade of rejections from The Slaughterhouse that is now UC admissions. And again, this is a First for me, because previously my QB students were always admitted to one top-level private (JHU, Brown, etc.) in addition to several UC campuses. That can now be considered a different era.
ucbalumnus I totally agree. One of the shifts is that the private high schools are more nimble and able to react to this change. My daughters very large public very academically competitive high school isn’t able to adjust to the offerings as the local private high schools. ALL of the parent workshops are given WAY too late and based on old norms. It does no good for a high school parent or kid to learn during the junior year about how coding, science fairs, robotics is valued if they expect a spot in a competitive summer camp that will get you into that coveted engineering program. Too Late!! Parents must start very very early and expose their kids outside the classroom just to get a leg up on the standard 4.0 student. And, at least at my daughters high school, the counselors take a "just let your kids dabble in different things to find their passion approach. Unfortunately colleges aren’t looking for students who dabble. They are looking for sustained interest with growing leadership in targeted experiences. All the kids I know that are gimmes at elite schools have a resume that started in 4th or 5th grade. Not that dissimilar to kids wanting that spot on a sports team when they are great on their high school team but the best kids compete off campus on the traveling club teams. Just like in sports, developing talent and skills and competing is starting earlier and earlier. If you are a parent and get your kids involved in these programs your labeled a tiger mom, if you let your kids just be kids, are you giving up on your child being able to attend 4 years at one of these high profile universities… I don’t know what the answer is. These new expectations are trickling down earlier and earlier as the spots at “elite” universities shrink.
At a friend’s MIDDLE school, they eliminated one of the math levels which means more borderline students will be directed to the lower level thereby making it impossible to complete anything high than pre-calculus by graduation. This is at a school that has standard calc, Calc AB and BC. I imagine there are many first time parents that don’t realize how this early decision by teachers can derail their child’s math track.
@19parent you are really talking about a very small percentage of people and an even smaller percentage of colleges. Quite possibly, a lot of those people are here on CC. Those who buy into the frenzy you describe are the ones who perpetuate the system. And there will always be extremely driven and motivated youth who will want to do this on their own, without a tiger parent. Outside the world of CC, I suspect far more parents are more likely not to be entering their kids in the rat race.
Every kid can attend a university. They shouldn’t all be striving for HYP. There are many paths to success and going to tippy top schools is only one path. The vast majority of students will lead happy and successful lives regardless of where they go to college.
One thing I have heard a lot lately is when one is accepted by a top school but rejected by a slightly lower rank school and call the latter school’s admission system broken or failed. Or accuse them of uield protection. One should really take the responsibility and think why this is the case instead of blaming the school. Different school may look for something different to build the class. On the other hand, it may be something in the student’s application that led to the rejection.
I’ve said this for a while, but an American kid who is top 1 percent in everything (including 5’s on AP tests) these days, in the RD round, only has as likelies schools on the level of UW-Madison and NCF (which I still consider near-Ivies) as well as McGill/Toronto/maybe Waterloo in Canada, Edinburgh, St. A’s, Durham, Warwick, KCL maybe UCL in the UK (which isn’t bad at all as I consider them to be on the same level as UT-Austin, W&M, UNC, NYU, UW-Madison, and UMich/UCLA).
A decent chance at UCLA, Cal, UMich, NYU, UVa.
Also a good shot at Kelley@IU, engineering and CS at Purdue, maybe engineering and CS at UCSD or UT-Austin.
Lots of good/great opportunities at those schools. Between them, enough for almost all goals/interests, I daresay (if you can pay).
Agree with @PurpleTitan. This is pretty much how it played out in the RD round at my child’s school this year - accurate with respect to the specific colleges/universities mentioned.
Yes! This is exactly how our school functions. There are so many things I only learned in the last few weeks reading these boards. In retrospect, I probably would not have done much differently. I think the dabbling approach worked out well in our case, but I would have liked to have known how the world had changed. I would have liked to have known about some of the other opportunities out there. Not every student needs to go to a top 10 school. I am a firm believer in that. However, for high achieving kids who are dreaming of those schools, they should at least be made aware of how the landscape has changed and what it really takes now. The end of Jr. year is far to late.
By the way, what about the kids who want the top 10 in a non-stem field? Are there well worn paths and select ECs for them as well?
I attended almost all school meetings about college admission, standardized tests, and financial aids since my older daughter was in early sophomore year in HS. Yes, those meetings were intended for junior and above but they announced them to all students. It does take some time for planning. I also read a lot of books about college admission and finance before my older one started junior year. Parents need to be more proactive rather than waiting for spoon fed.
When the most selective colleges are only accepting 4.3%, 6%, 8% (insert your incredibly low percentage here even at schools in the 20-30%) of applicants, barring being a heavily recruited athlete, famous person, or child of a president, it floors me that any applicant or parent of an applicant would assume they/their child would fall into the lot of the anointed instead of the much, much, much higher likelihood of receiving a rejection. Sure, go ahead and apply and hope for the best but look at the numbers and be realistic. I don’t understand how so many posters are shocked by this given the statistics and the quantity of capable applicants.
Just found this thread. Very informative. I didn’t do any of this agonizing with my first child (applied only to a state school and got in. He is happy there). Second child is very different. She wants to go to an ultra elite small liberal college. Eeekkk! I used to think that she would be a “shoo in” for these schools. I was so naive…
But the good news if she is looking at LACs is that there are a good number below the top tier that are just as rigorous in their own way or in certain subjects (judging by percentage getting a PhD in those subjects).
If you live in FL, DEFINITELY look at NCF. I think they are a hidden gem.
@19parent Completely agree with what you said. I hadn’t made the connection, but you are right, it is just like sports! We used to think of those parents as “sports crazed”, and now, academics is like that too! It really is too bad, it robs kids of the opportunities to explore.