So how does a student from a HS without savvy GCs overcome that mundane rec letter? That truly is an area out of the control of the student.
My rant.
Holistic, at top colleges, only seems random because 1) most don’t know what their targets want and 2) at final table, (which first you need to get to,) there can be institutional needs. Guess I can add, too many get their advice from many people who are guessing, think they see some “reality,” but don’t, then insist. Or some media article by an outsider or some book by some person years out of admissions (IF they were even in it) who’s making the big bucks acting like an expert.
But not knowing what their targets like and want is, afaiac, the student’s issue, first and foremost. Ime, they’re neither thinking critically (a sought asset at tippy tops) nor beyond superficials- this program or major, that study abroad, and the biggie: what some media say are the top ranked. They listen to random strangers on various boards insist it’s unpredictable, a crapshoot, you need national or international awards, ECs don’t matter, just do what you like, that you have to write a sad sack essay, who misunderstand how one shows leadership, and on and on. (Or, what leadership truly is.)
To point to some hs kid who got many admits, as if she speaks with authority, is part of the thinking problem. What does she know?? And why are you trusting she does?
So, I repeatedly tell kids to research their targets. to try to match themselves beyond stats. And some next person insists it’s random or unpredictable and the misinfo cycle starts again.
Btw, no one polices the CDS. It can be inaccurate. And many misinterpret the difference between, say, highly considered and considered, assuming the former trump the latter, that if you have one, the next category doesn’t matter. Ahh, there’s the assuming, again.
Kids who only know how their own hs works (or, I might add, what they see in heir own college spheres and assume is universal,) are missing too much. And the irony is the tippy tops are looking for kids who are savvy, in their thinking, decision-making, how they pursue info, and more.
That’s not to say it can’t be scammed. But even that takes savvy.
[QUOTE=""]
and because they are under the mistaken belief that if they apply to more schools they might win the lottery. <<
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know if I agree with this. if we limited our reach schools to the 4 with the best numerical odds of admission, we would have gotten frozen out. as it happens, we also applied to 2 sub-10% acceptance rate schools and got accepted. selective admissions seem so unpredictable and inscrutable from our point of view, I think shotgunning is a legitimate approach.
So, you think throwing more at the wall and hoping one or two stick is the smart way to go? That it beats trying to know what your targets value, in as many ways as it takes, then matching yourself and using the understanding to try to make your best presentation?
So, can we get back to OP? He has much to learn and polishing to do on his resume, needs to hone his basic thinking, before we should tell him to throw a random dart at HYetc. If he takes this challenge, does it well, yes, go on and apply. If not, he’s shooting in the dark.
“Holistic, at top colleges”
Let’s get this holistic term out of the way, athletes are not holistic by any stretch of the definition, they’re focused on one thing and doing it so well to the exclusion of others. Once they hit campus, they’ll most likely have their own dorms, will not be participating in any clubs, volunteer (unless it’s part of their athletic commitment). They will have taken the sats/acts a few times to qualify, the coaches (even Harbaugh at Stanford) will push to get unqualified (wrt the university’s standards) athletes in.
“they’re neither thinking critically (a sought asset at tippy tops)”
They’re high schoolers and critical thinking typically develops during college, and the adcoms know this, how would they be able to find out who thinks critically from a 750-word essay, where they want to be amused (costco, papa john’s etc.). Colleges know that most h/s do not have these skills, since the core classes at the tippy tops teach that fall or spring freshman year. You could argue that they teach critical thinking in every class.
“To point to some hs kid who got many admits, as if she speaks with authority, is part of the thinking problem. What does she know?? And why are you trusting she does?”
I said it was anecdotal (meaning the data isn’t there to make it authoritative, so unscientific), I never said she was a trustworthy source on college admissions, just that someone I think represents the randomness of the process. If you didn’t know what anecdotal means, fair enough, if you did, then a pretty ignorant statement.
So typically a good decision maker will get 60 out of a 100 decisions right, (in some careers, you only need to be right 51% of the time to be successful). Now the adcoms do have the benefit of at least one more peer review so that would cut down on the number of mistakes, but surely mistakes will be made (recall they’re human).
Now again, unless you think these are flawless, perfect individuals, they will make 20 mistakes(maybe even more) out of 100 decisions, and with that error rate, showing more evidence of the randomness of the process.
@Materof2 unfortunately that is just part of the uneven playing field. However, I think the good news is that the vast majority of GC reports will be relatively dry and matter of fact. My kids went to a large public HS. There are 5 GC’s responsible for 2000+ students. Beginning of senior year, each student applying to college fills out a form questionnaire which asks them to list EC’s and interests. I suspect the GC report followed some form; I can’t imagine each GC spending hours drafting unique rec’s for 50-60 students (500/class; 300 attend college/5 GC’s) who they hardly know. I imagine our situation is much more typical than the families who send their children to the private and maybe “elite” public schools that have savvy GC’s.
We were fortunate though that our kids had developed very close relationships with some of their teachers. Who knows what they wrote and how effectively they communicated the positive attributes of our kids, but we have no complaint about the results. One is in a top LAC, the other in an Ivy. I guess teacher LoR’s are also somewhat out of the student’s control, but at least you can pick the writers and work to develop close relationships with certain teachers during HS.
[quote] So how does a student from a HS without savvy GCs overcome that mundane rec letter? That truly is an area out of the control of the student.
There are 5 GC’s responsible for 2000+ students. Beginning of senior year, each student applying to college fills out a form questionnaire which asks them to list EC’s and interests.
[/quote]
My kids’ HS had the student do a form, and they met one on one, for a few minutes. They also asked the parent to do a form. Both forms had some very open-ended questions that could be used to point out a kid’s strengths, unique abilities, unseen hardships, achievements outside of school, mitigating circumstances…you name it. It was important to take the time to really give a lot of detail, with anecdotes, after a LOT of thought. The GCs were so busy that they really leaned on those forms for rec content. (I know this in one case because she shared the letter after all acceptances were in).
It’s also possible to get to know a GC in some schools by emailing to discuss class scheduling or to set up an independent study or whatever else GCs get involved in at your school. Both of my kids knew their GC pretty well by senior year.