Angry over the college admissions process

[CTTC]

I hope she meant "typos" (instead of "typo's"), too! Yikes!

[momofboston]

Gourmetmom - some of the schools I have been watching for the last couple of years (D11 and D13) have definitely changed their criteria and this year admissions seem to be all over the map. It seem to me kids with lower SATs but with paid work experience got in over kids with higher SATs and no work experience - with similar ECs/awards. I have seen three things that may have put kids with slightly lower stats on equal ground with kids with higher stats. Paid work experience, some type of international exposure, and tons of community service...300+ hours. This is what I have been concluding from some of the second level schools - ranked 25-50. And I have seen many of these schools reject kids with 2250+, 4.0 stats. Go figure.

[cptofthehouse]

I wrote this on another thread and I think this is applicable here too. Once it was the thing to apply to a reach, a couple of matches, or maybe just one, and a safety. You basically hoped for one of the matches to accept you. You knew you had the safety but it was usually a local school to which you would commute, maybe go at night partime while you worked. The Reach was a true lottery ticket and you just threw it in there, just to see.

Now I see kids applying to a lot of reaches. Which is fine. It does increase the odds, but then they and their parents are expecting a nice list of accepts from them. You are lucky if you get ONE accept from that list. Your attention should be on those matches,and you should have a nice safety so it doesn't much matter if you don't get into the match. Just because you meet the numbers on the match is not a guarantee by a long stretch that you will be accepted. If you need aid, it makes it even more of a crap shoot that you will get to go there. A match with a 50/50 accept rate means you have a half a chance of getting in there. As for the reaches,... those are truly chances and to get one to accept you is winning the lottery.

I have seen long face parents and kids that ONLY one Ivy accepted the student. That you can afford to apply to so many schools make quite a luxury and does up some of your chances, but the way everyone is now doing the same makes it a small chance. The anger that arises is often the smashing of expectations that should never have been where they were.

[jym626]

Small pet peeve. Statistically, applying to more schools does not increase the odds of getting into any one of them.

OK back to your regularly scheduled discussion.

[Pizzagirl]

One exception is Vanderbilt this year - a big push to pick kids with very high SATs, where a few years ago their criteria was more holistic. This is a trend, though, not an one year one thing, the next year, another - they're looking to up their ranking.

No one individual on here sees enough of a representative sample to correctly assess that Vanderbilt (or any other college) is "upping" their emphasis on SAT's or any other criteria. Everyone is basing his or her observations off a handful of kids they know, who are all generally in the same socioeconomic group, at the same or similar high schools, and are in similar parts of the country. Only the adcoms or other school officials have enough of a broad view to make those kinds of generalizations.

[bovertine]

Small pet peeve. Statistically, applying to more schools does not increase the odds of getting into any one of them.

It does not increase your chances at any single school. But if you apply to a group of schools it increases your chances of getting into one of those schools. How much it increases those chances in admissions is not easy to predict.

Applying to every Ivy League school is not going to increase your chances of getting into Harvard. But depending on your qualifications it will increase your chances of getting into one of them. If you are obviously unqualified it won't help, and if you are a superstar it won't matter much. But even superstars apply to more than one because they know it helps at least a little bit.

[jym626]

The "probablility of getting in" issue gets brought up a lot. Here's a good thread on the topic. Probability/Chance up if applying more Ivies schools?

[bovertine]

^^^
Good idea. Better than re-inventing the wheel for 1000 posts. Even though I did sort of get run over by a couple statistics brainiacs in that thread.

[lookingforward]

It seem to me kids with lower SATs but with paid work experience got in over kids with higher SATs and no work experience - with similar ECs/awards. I have seen three things that may have put kids with slightly lower stats on equal ground with kids with higher stats. Paid work experience, some type of international exposure, and tons of community service...300+ hours. MomofBoston, where do you get this info? How do you know and do you see essays and the rest of the writing that creates an impression for adcoms? LoRs?

Also, Bov: applying to all the Ivies yelds no probability. The app package could be crap except for stats. Most folks have no idea of the true criteria for admission and final factors that affect a yea or nay..

[bovertine]

Also, Bov: applying to all the Ivies yelds no probability.

I don't even know what this means.

The app package could be crap except for stats. Most folks have no idea of the true criteria for admission and final factors that affect a yea or nay..

It "could" be crap, it "could" also be exactly what one school is looking for but not another school. Since you don't know, you certainly don't hurt yourself significantly applying to more schools (aside from the time and application fee, which is something you have to consider). If it didn't matter everyone would just pick their favorite school and only apply there.

But I've already argued this too many times on other threads so believe whatever you want.

[Modadunn]

[quote][quote] I've tossed out plenty with typo's because ...

I think you mean typos :-).

I hope she meant "typos" (instead of "typo's"), too! Yikes!

Not sure it required a capitalized "yikes" with an exclamation point no less... but FWIW, I got a new computer and for some reason it auto-corrects now in CC. I find it disconcerting to be honest because if I hit the r instead of the t for it, it auto corrects to "is" for some reason. Also, if I want to type waitlist as one word, it makes it two and if I hypen, it makes it two words OR I have to go back and manually change the word to make it one word (which it highlights as misspelled). Of course, this leads me to believe that it is two words, although on CC it's just easier to make it one word. The point is: I've already gone to college, received a 2 BA's and started an MA before I found myself pregnant with S who is a Jr on this crazy ride we call college. So, I don't hold people too accountable for their spelling and grammar mistakes on a website; Intention usually trumps typos.

And the sample size any one of us can gather and then relate to all kids applying (and remember all other applicants would have to be the exact same too) in a certain year over the next year... you just can't know. It's impossible.

Obviously, some kids have better odds than others, and included in that is their particular make-up overall (Socio-economic, talent, interests, scores, etc), toss in varying needs of financial aid - even within a singular family over time - and you've got another whole can of worms to open.

Yes, it sucks when you get rejected from college. It's heartbreaking for us as parents when it involves our own or their friends. It's a one-shot deal, more or less. But I read a study recently about resiliency. And resiliency is the stuff life is made of. (And if you want to get really correct Resiliency is the stuff of which life is made.

But basically the gist of the study involved kids going into therapy around 25 or so who seemingly come from very stabile, loving families who were supportive throughout. But they never really let their kids suffer much in the way of disappointment. Therefore, they don't NEED to bounce back as often and therefore, just aren't very good at it. It wasn't all a about the gift of failure, but it definitely touched on that a lot. But weirder still.. it wasn't as if these kids were failing either. They just felt unsure of their own lives because they never have been left wanting for much of anything in life. We (Parents) indulge and save them from disappointment or cheer them up or commiserate vs saying, "sometimes this is just the way life is. Best thing you can do is not become jaded by what you imagine is "unfair" or somehow personal against you so you can go out there and do good things in life."

[cptofthehouse]

Some years ago, my neighbor's daughter applied to 20 something schools, all very selective. She was accepted to 3 of them, along with the state schools that are not in that 20 count. Surprising where she was accepted and not. Had she applied to 10, she would not have been accepted to any of her choices. What she did was apply to 10 schools she liked the most, and then did a round of 10 more. One of her acceptances was more selective than a number of schools where she was not accepted. The other two were also "out of order" in selectivity, but not as strikingly so. I've seen this enough times to say that, yes, the number of apps can help you. If you are in the running but not way up there, there is some statistical advantage.

However, with many schools, the demonstrated interest takes a hit when too many schools are in the picture.

[Modadunn]

I just want to add one thing to those parents whose children have won the brass ring by getting accepted everywhere... please don't let your child believe that because he earned a lot of great choices, he is now the smartest person in the room. I have heard lots of stories of kids who show up in college having been the best and the brightest their entire lives. Their parents never really pushed them outside their comfort zone (probably to save them from any sense of failure or level of incompetence). But then they get to this completive college and sit among two dozen other kids who were exactly like them in HS. But in the more immediate future, by telling them they were simply the best of the best and the college was divine in their wisdom, what are you saying about the kid who didn't get in? Just saying, try to keep it humble folks.

[Gourmetmom]

The admitted class of 2016 at Vanderbilt has a middle 50 percent SAT (CR + M): 1470 – 1590. That's pretty high - 25% are ABOVE 1590.

Class of 2016: highest academic profile in Vanderbilt history - Inside Vandy: Administration

The admitted class of 2014 had lower SATs: middle 50% SAT (CR+M): 1440 – 1540

These are accepted students - matriculated students stats may be much lower, but there is a clear trend towards accepting higher stat students.

[poetgrl]

I think those Vandy stats are meaningless unless we also know what level of STAT kids applied each year. I have the impression that Vandy is becoming a more desirable school over the past few years and could very well just be accepting the same percentage of kids from the top stats in whichever application pool they had for the year.

YMMV