A parent's cautionary tale – SWF- Northeast need not apply?

Pizzagirl · April 7, 2014, 6:58pm

Athletes are different though - you need X number of people to make up the team – no more and no less.

You know one hook I don’t have a problem with (though it certainly wasn’t relevant to me or mine!) is developmental. I just found out a college acquaintance of mine just donated $40MM to our alma mater. (Her spouse owns a major sports franchise.) They have a child who is maybe 13 yo or so. You know, I think that should give them an automatic chit to let their child in. And maybe they should get a chit or two for a relative or friend. Seriously.

Periwinkle · April 7, 2014, 7:00pm

Are you sure you posed a hypothetical question? Seems to me it was rhetorical.

No, actually, I would not agree the higher score “deserves” admission “more.” I can think of many leading figures in history–Churchill, Einstein, etc., who would have posted lopsided scores, or who would have not scored well on the first attempt.

In a modern setting, if I were seated on a hypothetical admissions committee, I think the history of SAT tests would make a difference. A kid who walked in cold, received 800 cr, 800 m, 600 wr, and went on to do other things, is more interesting than a kid who assembled a 2300 over five SAT sittings.

Pizzagirl · April 7, 2014, 7:01pm

Some colleges make an explicit point of saying that they have a preference for students from their immediate geographic area – in the spirit of being a community leader / good member of the community / helping to educate (in particular) low-income students in their city. Harvard does this for Boston / Cambridge, Northwestern and U of Chicago do this for the city of Chicago, and so forth. Why don’t the Long Island kids complain about this? It’s “unfair,” after all, for them to put a thumb on the scale for hometown kids – it reduces the opportunities for kids from elsewhere. What’s the difference?

lookingforward · April 7, 2014, 7:03pm

Let’s agree Asian American kids are not boring. Many are focused- and, very important, many understand that “focus” includes knowing more than tennis and violin, some research, is what matters. They get the same attention every other app does. In the end, if a college takes 4-5x as many Asian Americans as their representation in the population, that’s good.

But the flip side is that sheer stats superiority (not talking As-Am kids now, but in general,) doesn’t mean a kid can’t come across as meh. Or limited in vision and energy.

cobrat · April 7, 2014, 7:05pm

PG,

Sometimes, being rebellious against a given local HS culture does show the student concerned is much more of an interesting risk taker…or at least, someone with a better sense of humor than his/her more stuffy and more self-proclaimed academic superiors. Not to mention, it’s a much more fun enjoyable way for some to get through high school than just ignoring it. Stop being such a party pooper. :D

<ol>
<li>They mainly cater to exceedingly strong hardcore STEM students. Also, unlike MIT…they don’t offer much in way of humanities/social science departments from BA/BS to PhD…much less ones comparable to those of other elite colleges. </li>
<li>Caltech has a reputation for an exceedingly hothouse competitive academic environment. While they do offer help, if one’s academic level isn’t at the very top, weaker students do tend to be left by the wayside and a critical mass of Profs aren’t going to lower the academic level in class to cater to those weaker students. </li>
</ol>

HYPS on the other hand, have much more relaxed reputations in comparison partially because the perceived spectrum of academic abilities is broader at those places than at Caltech or MIT. Most scions of wealthy families don’t have a strong desire nor the need to put themselves through what some would consider an exceedingly challenging academic crucible. Why would they want to inflict that on themselves when there are more enjoyable campuses with inviting amenities such as Final Clubs, Eating clubs, Secret Societies, a cornicupia of high-powered ECs, and Div I sports?

<ol>
<li> Widespread fear, prejudice, and even hatred for nerds among many American parents/students. :D</li>
</ol>

sally305 · April 7, 2014, 7:05pm

I’d even find a kid with a 2180 in one try more interesting than someone who had the luxury of time and resources to focus on score improvement.

sally305 · April 7, 2014, 7:16pm

They ARE complaining. But they are focusing on the race of said kids rather than where they’re from. It’s pretty obvious that “low-income” generally also means “URM,” especially when talking about inner-city kids.

cptofthehouse · April 7, 2014, 7:16pm

Pizzagirl, the LongIsland kids and parents do complain about this and everything else, LOL. I hear it all. The Long Island crowd as well as the OP are complaining that because there are so many kids in this geographic location with the qualifications to be picked, that they suffer under some adverse selection markers unless they have something else the school really wants. And, yes, it’s true. I doubt these schools would want a class that turns out to be all from the North East, so geographics do play a minor role in all of this as well, not to one’s advantage when one is from an area that is too well represented. We had someone from Brown’s admissions office out and out say, that it is a disadvantage.

I don’t think the Asian or any of these over represented categories are boring. It’s just that they are huge categories. Bigger than the other ones, so even if more picks come from there, more kids are not accepted. I don’t believe there is an Asian category. They are just mixed in there with any kids who do not qualify for URM designation at a particular school. In fact, at some schools that are so lily white that it is an issue to them, where there are very few Asians as well as others of color that Asians will end up in the URM pool.

calmom · April 7, 2014, 7:19pm

@Momzie (see [yet</a> another unnumbered post](<a href=“A parent's cautionary tale – SWF- Northeast need not apply? - #823 by Momzie - Parents Forum - College Confidential Forums”>A parent's cautionary tale – SWF- Northeast need not apply? - #823 by Momzie - Parents Forum - College Confidential Forums)): (“fell in love with rather obscure language” “it’s a shame if your child has a particular talent … not … nurtured in the environment where they wind up.”)

I understand your concern because my son wanted to study Japanese, but pretty much ended up at schools that did not offer the language – he did have the opportunity to take a single year but no more, and that was just the luck of a small LAC hiring a prof to teach the language – BUT I researched colleges very carefully when my daughter was applying to college, and there was no correspondence between elite level selectivity and languages offered. The bigger correspondence was size of school – very large public universities seemed to have the strongest language departments with the most offerings. I was looking at Russian language instruction, but generally schools that had strong Russian departments also tended to offer many other less common languages – and some of the school that I found with the strongest departments were the flagship universities in Washington, Wisconsin, and Ohio.

So yes, it does make a difference where a kid is admitted, Some of my daughter’s safety colleges did not offer Russian and her life would have taken a different path had she studied there… but that would have been a choice for her, not the result of a shut out. And some very fine, highly selective, private colleges were dropping their Russian departments.

lookingforward · April 7, 2014, 7:19pm

With all the talk about how H likes local kids, look at this: New England 17.3%, Middle Atlantic 22.7%, South 16.8%, Midwest 8.7%, Central 2.3%, Mountain 3.2%, Pacific 17.9%, International 11.1%. That’s admitted for '17.

I don’t know if an issue is that CC hasn’t caught up with reality, but “low SES kids” cuts across all labels, is not limited to Black or Hispanic.

awcntdb · April 7, 2014, 7:20pm

I have read the posts written over the last day or so.

It is interesting to see how many posters seem hell-bent on changing what other posters say. It advances nothing in debating specifics of important ideas, and it is intellectually frustrating. But, it is what it is, I guess.

<ol>
<li>No where in any of my posts did I say or ever advocate that certain students be accepted to top schools to make them happy. No where. And of course students need to learn to deal with rejection, but if one thinks the process used is not equitable, then the rejection seems fraudulent. </li>
</ol>

What I have said was we need a process / system where rejected students (whoever they are) do not think it was because of their ethnicity or race or a cultural stereotype (like being another boring asian math whiz). It is the process and the end result on how it affects students that I focus on - and it that means whether they are admitted or rejected.

<ol>
<li>What is clearly missing from the construct of many in this thread is BOTH admission and rejection decisions need to have legitimacy to the students for the proper downer of rejection and proper upper of admissions to take place. If any one aspect seems illegitimate, then the process is compromised and in the eyes of those using it. Many Asian students are not mad about being rejected; they are upset that it seems unfairly done. Why is this distinction so difficult for people to wrap their brains around is surprising. </li>
</ol>

Do not need to go far to see what I am focusing on.

In California, prior to the repeal of affirmative action race-based criteria, there was high contention about exactly how legitimate the admissions and rejections were. Once that repeal took place and more focus was put on SES and other factors, walla, a huge, huge drop in students feeling wronged by rejections. The legitimacy of the system was no longer in question as much.

That is the proper way - get rejected, feel sad, feel bummed, but not wronged because of your ethnicity or race.

Until students do not feel wronged by their ethnicity or race, then this contentious issue will continue and will do fundamental harm to students who will not forget that they felt wronged and slighted because of their ethnicity or race.

<ol>
<li>In respect to #2 above, I read many posts that these rejected students need to learn resilience and stop whining. </li>
</ol>

They were directly called whiners, and posters, like me, concerned about the process, were called whiners as well. Also, posters said colleges, after all, do not have to change their process to suit whiners.

I am not too sure people who think and say this realize they are being hypocritical, probably without even realizing it because they are so wedded to the ideology of the current process.

It is illogical to call one group whiners and the other groups advocates for the same perception issue and behavior.

3A. The asian and white students who view the college admissions system as unfair and working against them because of their ethnicity and race voice as much and rightfully say they feel being discriminated against for something they have no control and is innate to them. And, most importantly, they feel those stereotypes are being used to define them and their applications in not a good way, i.e., SWF from LI, boring asian math whiz etc.

And posters in this thread respond (paraphrased) that these students are, “…whiners who need to learn from adversity and develop resilience and just get over it. The colleges have good intentions and mean no harm to them at all, so stop assuming colleges do mean harm and move on with your life.”

Fair enough, as that is a very clear position to take, if you believe as much.

It is also fair enough the position is taken that the colleges do not have to respond to the students to make them happy about the process because the colleges can do what they want because they (the colleges) mean no harm.

3B. The Harvard black students, who put up the Instagram pictorial of statements they do not like that non-black students have said to them, view those statements as aggressive, stereotypical, and dismissive of them because of their ethnicity and race and rightfully voice they feel discriminated against for something they have no control over and is innate to them. And, most importantly, they feel those stereotypes are being used to define them and their interactions with other students in not a good.

I posit the Harvard students should be held to the exact same standard as in 3A above and that they are only, “…whiners who need to learn from adversity and develop resilience and just get over it. The non-black students have good intentions and mean no harm to them at all, so stop as assuming non-black students do mean harm and move on with your life.”

In fact, the Harvard students could be called uber-whiners. They are actually at Harvard and were not rejected, yet they are still whining.

Fair enough as well because it is clear position to take, if one believes as much.

It is also fair enough that the position is taken that the non-black students do not have to respond to the black students to make them happy because they (non-black students) can do what they want because they mean no harm.

So, there, in a nutshell, is an obvious logic problem with the whiners’ argument.

It is illogical when one group voices they feel discriminated against by something that they perceive is clearly happening to them are chastised as whiners, but then another group voices it feels discriminated against by something that they perceive is clearly happening to them and are heralded as brave advocates.

Well, actually it is only logical to behave differently to these two groups for the exact same premise and behavior if one believes one group is so weak-minded that they cannot see no one meant them harm, and worse, they are incapable of learning from adversity and developing resilience. So, they are allowed to lash out and complain. We then bump up their confidence by calling them advocates and leaders.

In short, the advocates need to be coddled because they need help, but the other group that complains are whiners. Why are they whiners? Because they are stronger-minded and are expected to behave better.

However, in my intellectual world (my brain), both examples 3A and 3B are the same. Either they both have legitimate complaints or they both have whiny complaints and are just too blind to see and appreciate the good intentions of others and that others meant them no harm.

All the mental and logic twisting will not change the fact that, as a society, we cannot have it both ways. We cannot teach fairness, equality and the like in the classroom and then turn around and be perceived as doing the opposite. Adults who do will lose the respect of students (already happening - adcoms are not trusted in how they take decisions like they use to be). The students who feel discriminated against in the college process is just the beginning of the negative repercussions. And if you think they will forgot feeling slighted by a process they perceive as illegitimate, think again.

@sorghum - There are two things I have found on forums that is part of the approach people use in discussion: 1) create straw men that have nothing to do with what you said, and 2) change what you say to match what they are thinking, so your specific argument is not even debated anymore, but some other point. You must be used it it by now with over 1600 posts, but, I agree, it places too much useless resistance in discussing serious issues. I call it trying to debate in the extreme.

calmom · April 7, 2014, 7:28pm

@Hunt

.

I wouldn’t.

If I was on an ad com and that was my choice – I’d be looking for apps with distinguishing characteristics. “Otherwise identical” wouldn’t be good enough.

But if forced to make the choice under that hypothetical, I’d vote for the 2290. Every time.

You do understand that those are the same score right? That the margin of error for each SAT test is 40 points?

blossom · April 7, 2014, 7:38pm

“Until students do not feel wronged by their ethnicity or race, then this contentious issue will continue and will do fundamental harm to students who will not forget that they felt wronged and slighted because of their ethnicity or race.”

if this is in fact the case, why would these kids want to attend these racially/ethnic discriminatory institutions in the first place? This is what I don’t understand. If these colleges are now filled with sub-par athletes, first gen students with low SAT scores, and other undesirables, why is the line to get admitted snaking around the building 12 people deep? Because of course back in the 1930’s, it was all “merit”.

cobrat · April 7, 2014, 7:42pm

I have the following issues with this:

<ol>
<li>Allowing for admission on the basis of signaling one’s high SES(multi-million dollar donations) and/or on the basis of parents’/family celebrity is effectively a form of bribery and a practice more reminiscent of old Aristocratic European practices of determining who gets plum positions in society and government. </li>
</ol>

Supposedly, Americans were supposed to have left such practices behind…even the British slowly tried doing so after seeing the negative effects of this as personified by Lord Cardigan who paid what was a huge fortune to gain the position of a military commander of a highly desirable socially exclusive military unit during the Crimean War…and was widely perceived as being a bungling aristocratic dilettante in light of his actual performance.

Incidentally, in 2000 the South Korean government proposed a similar idea to raise funds/profile of their top universities by reserving around 25% of seats for families who donated $2 million. Understandably, there was much outrage over that proposal. Especially considering such donors wouldn’t have to do anything else, including taking the national college entrance exam or even submitting HS transcripts.

<ol>
<li>It doesn’t necessarily do any favors for the beneficiary if he/she’s an exceedingly weak student. </li>
</ol>

A friend of my father’s a popular author well-known among those interested in Chinese lit. When word got around Columbia that his son was applying there for admission in the '70s, they immediately admitted him despite a mediocre at best HS record. Unfortunately, the son wasn’t able to handle the workload and committed suicide within a year. A sad tragedy all around.

picktails · April 7, 2014, 7:43pm

Yale specifically said at their info session “we want to make sure you are not taking the SAT as an extracurricular activity.” I am certain one of the reasons my daughter was accepted to 7 top 20 schools plus Penn is because she scored 2150 plus 2 subject tests over 700 with NO tutoring, and wrote about it. This matters when compared to the 2300 serial tester.

lookingforward · April 7, 2014, 7:46pm

Very few developmental admits (or those celebrities.) Not enough to worry about.

mathmom · April 7, 2014, 7:48pm

And back to those hypothetical SAT scores. Isn’t it possible that average Asian SAT scores are higher, because as a group they tend to prepare more for the SAT because their parents or they themselves think that more is better? It’s not that they have any more aptitude, it’s just that they done more prep for that particular piece of the application, one that is much less important than people think. I know in our house, no one ever considered taking the SAT more than twice - and they did minimal prep work each time. My kids scores reflected being avid readers since childhood, and living in a household where dinner conversation might be about black holes, interesting math problems or the latest in cancer research. They didn’t start kindergarten two years behind their peers in vocabulary - quite the reverse.

My younger son has thanked me for sending him to a racially, ethnically, and SES diverse high school. He wishes his college were more diverse.

momofmusician17 · April 7, 2014, 7:56pm

“not prez of stu govt and prom queen”

On a lighter note. Do people really put prom queen status on a college application! In our public school, they would have to be prescient because prom is way after college apps are due!

sally305 · April 7, 2014, 7:56pm

These students are not suffering ACTUAL HARM. They are still smart kids. They still have options in life. No one made them apply to these schools and there was no guarantee they would get in. And again–they cannot prove they were passed over BECAUSE OF their race.

These kids will continue to feel “wronged” because it is convenient for them to do so. It’s no different from the resentment directed at URM “welfare queens” even though the majority of welfare goes to white folks. People will believe what they want to believe.

Benley · April 7, 2014, 7:57pm

Some of you need to make up your mind. Are test scores important or trivial? Bragging that one’s 2100 is better than others’ 2300 is not helping make a point one way or the other. How about those 2300’s w one sitting and no tutoring? Surprise - there are plenty of them out there

A parent's cautionary tale – SWF- Northeast need not apply?

CONNECT WITH US