A Year Without EA - A Recap of the Harvard Admissions Year

[marite]

<p>mammall: You have not been reading carefully.</p>

<p>“A kid who is genuinely interested in attending this kind of school”</p>

<p>substitute with: kids who thought only of attending their state uni but are encouraged by HPUVA to consider applying to HPUVA; they take this encouragement seriously after finding out that they scored 700+ on the SAT. But they’re too late for ED/EA because they have not taken the SATIIs. RD gives them a chance to take the SATIIs and to send in their applications to HPUVA.</p>

<p>Unlike kids who attend top public high schools or prep schools, these kids have not had HYPS on their mental list since 9th grade, and their parents have not schemed to get them into the right daycare center so that they can attend the right k-12 schools.</p>

<p>Intelligence has nothing to do with it.</p>

[Bay]

<p>

It’s that they don’t realize they need the information until very late in the process, thus preventing them from applying early. They don’t realize they need the info because their environment does not lend itself to thinking about applying to top schools. As marite has continually tried to point out, many disadvantaged students do not realize they are competitive for HYP until they take the SAT or ACT, which can sometimes be as late as fall of senior year

</p>

<p>I get this line of argument. However, this presumes that the only factor of importance for a Harvard applicant is his/her SAT/ACT scores. Is it plausible that a student of any socio-economic background who brings only high SAT scores to the table is likely to be admitted? Most likely any real candidates will also have high GPAs, evidence of intellectual curiosity, disciplined work ethic, etc. They will be (or should be) the type of student who has had ideas of furthering their education before taking the SAT (obviously, that is why they took it).</p>

<p>I recall several postings on this site regarding Harvard’s position that they do not set a minimum SAT score, and that SAT scores are not one of the most important criteria. </p>

<p>No one, that I am aware of, has advocated for elimination of RD by Harvard. So all of these students can still apply and will likely be placed at an advantage anyway due to their disadvantaged backgrounds. But to eliminate the entire EA process because there are some students who are behind the eight ball is overkill, imo. And again, Harvard certainly can and should target this type of applicant for its “road show” much earlier than the fall of senior year, and include/emphasize testing requirements. Any student deserving of a seat in the class would surely take notice.</p>

[Bay]

<p>

Unlike kids who attend top public high schools or prep schools, these kids have not had HYPS on their mental list since 9th grade, and their parents have not schemed to get them into the right daycare center so that they can attend the right k-12 schools.

</p>

<p>BTW, I find this paragraph offensive. Neither my D nor her family ever had “HYPS on their mental list since 9th grade.” Nor did we “scheme” to get her into the “right daycare.” The idea that this is the way that non-socio-economically disadvantaged students get into Harvard is beyond insulting.</p>

[marite]

<p>It was not directed at you personally. Where did you get that idea?
But there are any number of students who have parents who have had Ivies in their sight since their kids were born.
And there is any number of students whose GCs told them about the kind of courses they should take if they wanted to be competitive for college (e.g. my kids’ GC told 9th graders they should sign up for certain math courses in order to be able to take AP-Calc which was claimed to be necessary for top colleges). In mediocre schools with one GC for 500 students, such kind of advice is singularly lacking.
The SAT is not the end all or be all. But if a student goes to a mediocre school and gets a sky high GPA, if that student is intelligent, s/he may be wondering how reliable that GPA is (and, so do HYPSM). But a high SAT score validates the GPA. That was the rationale for creating the SAT in the first place.</p>

<p>Anyway, I’ve repeated myself enough. If you like ED/EA, there are still plenty of schools that offer them.</p>

[Jen98]

<p>Marite was just trying to prove a point, and I think it was well proved. Many Harvard applicants really are always trying to get a little leg up, between studying how to do better on an SAT without actually learning content, molding their extracurricular life to what a college would like (just look at all such threads around here), and stacking AP upon AP to impress adcoms. Even by attending a PREP school, either students or their families must acknowledge that they’re preparing to be competent in top-tier applicant pools. Hyperbole need not always be explicit.</p>

<p>By the way, I personally know people who have done such “scheming” to get into Ivies, as drastic as moving states to gain a geographic hook. It’s not unheard of.</p>

[Weasel8488]

<p>

@Bay

I get this line of argument. However, this presumes that the only factor of importance for a Harvard applicant is his/her SAT/ACT scores. Is it plausible that a student of any socio-economic background who brings only high SAT scores to the table is likely to be admitted? Most likely any real candidates will also have high GPAs, evidence of intellectual curiosity, disciplined work ethic, etc.

</p>

<p>You are correct that successful applicants will need more than a high SAT; however, a high SAT may well be the first indication to the student that he has a shot at HYP. It may also be the case that the student is heavily involved in his community and exhibits the sort of personal qualities that HYP looks for, but the student has little chance of knowing how these qualities stack up against the national applicant pool. </p>

<p>

@Bay

BTW, I find this paragraph offensive. Neither my D nor her family ever had “HYPS on their mental list since 9th grade.” Nor did we “scheme” to get her into the “right daycare.” The idea that this is the way that non-socio-economically disadvantaged students get into Harvard is beyond insulting.

</p>

<p>It may not apply to you, but it applies to some. Many daycares in New York City require letters of recommendation precisely because they feed into St. Bernard’s, which feeds into Riverdale, which feeds into the Ivies. Apologies in advance if anyone doesn’t like my example. More generally, parents will go to great lengths to get their kids admitted to any of the prep schools listed below, and the “plotting” begins very early. </p>

<p>[WSJ</a> List of Top Feeder Schools](<a href=“http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-COLLEGE0711-sort.html]WSJ”>WSJ.com)</p>

[tokenadult]

<p>

It’s not a matter of kids being stupid. It’s a matter of them being capable of succeeding at the highest level without knowing it because they have no useful standard in their community against which they can compare themselves.

</p>

<p>This is a very good point from above in the thread. I’ll cite some information about what Harvard may be looking for recently. The source is </p>

<p>Avery, Christopher, Caroline Hoxby, Clement Jackson, Kaitlin Burek, Glenn Pope, and Mridula Raman. “Cost Should Be No Barrier: An Evaluation of the First Year of Harvard’s Financial Aid Initiative.” NBER Working Paper 12029, February 2006. </p>

<p>The working paper’s abstract says, </p>

<p>

Many apparently qualified students still do not apply, and many of these missing applicants come from high schools that have little or no tradition of sending applications to selective private colleges. Targeted outreach to such one offs – that is, students who are one of only a few qualified students from their school in recent years – may be a way for selective private colleges to increase their income diversity.

</p>

<p>Harvard is looking for students who are not in an environment favorable to preparation for Harvard application who nonetheless show ability to thrive at Harvard. That’s a smart admission plan, in my opinion, and I’m sure the paper that discusses this issue is read in other admission offices besides Harvard’s.</p>

[tokenadult]

<p>

Maybe what Harvard is trying to get are more kids who haven’t been reading the “how to get into an ivy” books?

</p>

<p>That’s very likely, actually.</p>

[Bay]

<p>

Many daycares in New York City require letters of recommendation precisely because they feed into St. Bernard’s, which feeds into Riverdale, which feeds into the Ivies

</p>

<p>If the Ivies are admitting these students, then obviously they possess the qualities the Ivies find desirable for their student bodies, otherwise they would not be admitted. My offense is taken by the terms “scheming” and “plotting” in reference to all graduates of so-called “top” public schools, which implies that those students were not qualified on their own merit, initiative and intelligence, rather they got in only because their parents orchestrated their lives in such a way that determined their Ivy-fates. This is most definitely not the case in our family, nor is it likely to be true for many or most admittees.</p>

[marite]

<p>Bay:</p>

<p>Okay. Not all students who attend top schools have parents who schemed to get them into the right daycare, etc… But some do.
Parents move into the right suburbs so their kids can get into the best public schools. Nothing wrong with this but it gives their kid an advantage over those who cannot move out of their neighborhood with its mediocre school.</p>

[Bescraze]

<p>

@jen98

Marite was just trying to prove a point, and I think it was well proved. Many Harvard applicants really are always trying to get a little leg up, between studying how to do better on an SAT without actually learning content, molding their extracurricular life to what a college would like (just look at all such threads around here), and stacking AP upon AP to impress adcoms. Even by attending a PREP school, either students or their families must acknowledge that they’re preparing to be competent in top-tier applicant pools. Hyperbole need not always be explicit.

</p>

<p>Why is this bad. Sure parents can scheme and a kid can as well, but without the intelligence, drive and results needed its all for nothing. To get into these schools you need to be extremely successful in school, on tests and in other areas—there really is only so much “scheming can do”. I attend a prep school…great if I want a shot at an IVy I need to be in the top 10-15% of my class…even highrt for HYP. THATS NOT EASY. Scheming is ok, its even good–it means you have a goal and you are going to try and attain it. Also weasell chill with the whole poor disenfranchised stuff, if a kid doesn’t know he is HYP material thats his problem and if it so happens that he misses the EA/ED deadline, who cares? He can apply RD. Its such bs to say o his environmental influences made him less prepared for these schools…if he is that intelligent and motivated he can figure it out for himself. Its not that hard.</p>

[whatever4]

<p>If “Its not that hard” … why would anyone need to go to a prep school?</p>

[whatever4]

<p>“Also weasell chill with the whole poor disenfranchised stuff, if a kid doesn’t know he is HYP material thats his problem and if it so happens that he misses the EA/ED deadline, who cares?”</p>

<p>Harvard, Princeton, and U of Virginia, obviously.</p>

[Jen98]

<p>Regarding post #111, I’m not saying it’s a bad thing. In fact, I’m just as guilty of it as the next person. I read the SAT books, I took the AP classes, and in my school, no one has been valedictorian in recent years without very purposeful scheming to see who can take the most hellish schedule without breaking the hallowed 4.0. That’s what I was trying to get across. It’s really not a bad thing, but to deny that it exists is ignorance. (And I’m not saying that anyone here is denying it, for the record.)</p>

[marite]

<p>Mammall:</p>

<p>I don’t have a romantic view, etc… It’s HPUVA who do. That’s why they’ve decided to go on the road instead of sorting out EA apps. They’ve had 30 years to figure out that EA advantages some kids. If you want to challenge their research, be my guest.</p>

<p>You attended public Uni? You are college educated and you won’t find me disparaging public unis. Your child is not disadvantaged. Your child went to a private school? Your child is not disadvantaged. If she was selected by her mediocre k-8 school to take the ACT in 8th grade, her school was supportive and cannot have been that mediocre. The truly mediocre schools would not even know that kids might take the ACT of SAT in 7th & 8th grade. Heck, even in our excellent k-8 school, no teacher ever suggested that students take the SAT in 7th or 8th grade, though I know many schools where they do.</p>

<p>I don’t know what kind of school your D’s old friends are attending. Our school has a high percentage of F/R lunch; it is not a top performing school by any means, but the students report feeling safe there. In the community next to mine, the school has metal detectors; doors are locked as soon as the students are in. And it’s not even in an inner-city, or the worse performing school in the area.</p>

[2boysima]

<p>From post 115: "Came home in 8th grade from our very mediocre largely reduced school lunch public system and told us she was selected to take the ACT. She’s always been pretty strong minded. I wrote the $30 check and drove her to the test site. "</p>

<p>In this one sentence, you’ve given 3 advantages your daughter had over many other kids (although…not necessarily the kids from your D’s old public school):</p>

<p>1) The school she attended in 8th grade was a little more than mediocre in one aspect: there was some program or person that identified kids in 8th grade to take the ACT. </p>

<p>2) You were able to write a $30.00 check. You had the money and likely didn’t have to go to a bank or post office to have a money order written. Your daughter didn’t have to go to her school to have paperwork filled out for a fee waiver…only to have the guidance dept tell her there was no reason for her to take the ACT in 8th grade.</p>

<p>3) You had transportation available to drive her to the test site.</p>

<p>No one on this thread has in any way suggested you and your daughter cheated in whatever advantages you acknowlege giving her. She is very fortunate to have had you as a parent.</p>

<p>My kids have had advantages, too. No cheating, but good fortune in having college educated parents and living in a suburb with an excellent school district. Also, worked very hard and “deserved” to be admitted to the schools applied to of HYPSM (and is one is attending one of them.)</p>

<p>But Harvard, Princeton and UVA don’t think enough of the kids, who don’t have the advantages our kids have had, have been applying to their schools. And they have pinpointed EA/ED as one of the reasons. </p>

<p>“The sad truth is vision and courage and ambition are just as important as intellect in achieving these admissions.”</p>

<p>Once again, I hope your daugher will have the opportunity to meet some of the students at Harvard whose lives have been filled with vision, courage and ambition…maybe not the vision in 8th or 9th grade that they could attend an Ivy league school, but the vision, courage and ambition that eventually got them to Harvard.</p>

[cc2]

<p>What Harvard did sound good (helping the disadvantaged and so) but it is bad for the country for the long run. If a lot of schools following what Harvard is doing, then it will encourage parents to put themself and their children in disadvantaged intentionally so the children can get into the colleges of their top choice. There are already some Harvard parents stop working to prevent their family income from going over 180,000 so they can get financail aid (other people’s money by the way). It’s will be very bad for the society and will end up hurting the poor.</p>

[2boysima]

<p>Looks like the original post 115 was deleted…</p>

[Weasel8488]

<p>

@cc2

If a lot of schools following what Harvard is doing, then it will encourage parents to put themself and their children in disadvantaged intentionally so the children can get into the colleges of their top choice. It’s will be very bad for the society and will end up hurting the poor.

</p>

<p>You might be overestimating the altruism of many parents. That being said, I’m not even sure it would be a bad thing. I can see how it could hurt poor students in the short run, but in the long run it has the potential to improve low quality schools. I’m not sure which outcome is more important. It’s pure speculation but an interesting thought experiment nonetheless.</p>

<p>

@Bescraze

Also weasell chill with the whole poor disenfranchised stuff, if a kid doesn’t know he is HYP material thats his problem and if it so happens that he misses the EA/ED deadline, who cares? He can apply RD. Its such bs to say o his environmental influences made him less prepared for these schools…if he is that intelligent and motivated he can figure it out for himself. Its not that hard.

</p>

<p>Yes it is very much his problem, but not in the sense of it being his fault. It’s his problem in the sense that it negatively affects his ability to attend HYP despite being capable of succeeding there. Who cares? Harvard, Princeton, and UVA. I also never said that environmental factors make students less prepared for elite schools. On the contrary, I said that they are very well prepared but that due to environmental factors they do not know it.</p>

<p>Could we try and refocus/reframe the debate? To Bescraze, Bay, and others, what is the main problem you have with the elimination of early action programs? Do you not like the idea of colleges recruiting low income kids? Do you feel like it’s hurting your chances of getting admitted?</p>

[Bay]

<p>

Bay, and others, what is the main problem you have with the elimination of early action programs? Do you not like the idea of colleges recruiting low income kids? Do you feel like it’s hurting your chances of getting admitted?

</p>

<p>Please. I find these intimations so offensive. I stated quite clearly several times that I support EA/ED because it results in a win/win for both parties and more importantly because eliminating it unneccesarily impacts the environment. I still don’t understand how Harvard with all of its billions cannot simply either start its road show/outreach earlier for the disadvantaged students, or eliminate the SAT IIs, if they are the big barrier. As someone else pointed out, apparently hardly any schools use the SAT IIs, and they seem to be doing fine without them. Please do not try to ascribe low-income discrimination claims or selfish motives to me. My D already attends H. I am a pragmatist and an environmentalist.</p>