<p>
Admission websites exist to encourage applications.</p>
<p>to OHMomof2,</p>
<p>Isn’t it easier to apply for H or art major and switch, instead of applying to engineering first? I got this advice from many moms.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not the two I posted. Rigor is more important than rank in both cases.</p>
<p>Edited to add, “rigor” doesn’t necessarily mean “AP” though that is a common measure used. At my own high school, certain classes were known to be most difficult and if you wanted to get into a good college you’d better take them. One was a history/literature combo course called “The Face of War”, there were a handful of others. None were marked “AP” or “IB”. My old HS has actually gone to an IB program in recent years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The old conventional wisdom at Columbia was the exact opposite :)</p>
<p>I don’t know. I do know that engineering requires a set of specific college courses and that it can be difficult to get them all done in four years, so I’d think applying as a transfer would make that even more difficult.</p>
<p>Coming to Pizzagirl’s #665:</p>
<p>First, #665 quoted californiaaa (I think): “Choosing between a graduate from a Tokyo University and University of Kalamazoo, I have to choose an international student, because he has far better exposure to current lab techniques, etc.”</p>
<p>Then it included the comment from PG:
“You can’t teach them? That’s not part of the job description? They have to come to you fully formed, or you’re not interested? Potential doesn’t matter?”</p>
<p>First, let me remark that there is no University of Kalamazoo, to the best of my knowledge. There is Kalamazoo College, and my university will happily accept some of their students into the grad program, because they’ve had a good track record with us.</p>
<p>But to the main point, and using School A (hypothetical University of Kalamazoo, hypothetically not very good) and School 1 (University of Tokyo, quite good) as examples: Neither of these students is “fully formed!” All either is really offering is “potential.” Of course, teaching graduate students is part of the job. However, the student has to have a realistic prospect of completing the degree program in a reasonable number of years, or no one will take them. </p>
<p>Even if a student has been admitted to a top grad school, the more popular research advisors (who don’t have unlimited spots in their groups) will tend to prefer the students with stronger track records.</p>
<p>As I have remarked on multiple threads, I support affirmative action; I support evaluating students in context; and I support remedial efforts at top undergrad schools, directed at students with high potential but weak backgrounds. I don’t see how this is threatened by admitting 2% or so of the admitted students on non-holistic grounds.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>At schools where intended major matters in frosh admissions, switching into the more-difficult-to-get-into major later after enrolling typically requires a high college GPA and/or another competitive admission process after taking the prerequisite courses for the target major. I.e. there is “no free lunch” in this case.</p>
<p>Differences in admissions-selectivity by major are typically due to capacity limitations – the department in question feels that it can only handle so many students, so it asks for enrollment limits to keep the number of students within its capacity.</p>
<p>If that poster is following advice (including from “other moms,”) to go for easier A’s and is somehow convinced AP (or equivalent) doesn’t matter, no wonder those kids have trouble getting top spots. This really calls for “Think!” and the advice to do some freaking research into what is stated by the colleges. </p>
<p>It’s not that hard to dig into what a top college wants- but not as easy as just claiming to know. These are the families that, while perhaps not economically challenged, are disadvantaged. One big cycle of skewed assumptions leading to trouble. Then anger at the trouble.</p>
<p>QM, it’s not hard to go have a convo with admissions. Just not between October and May.</p>
<p>Finally (sighs of relief from the forum!), on the issue of the student who is not admitted by Super Top University and instead goes to Really Extremely Good University: On other threads, I have mentioned my honors cal prof, John von Brand X, who remarked once to our class that, “At this level, it doesn’t really matter whether you are being taught by John von Brand X or by John von Neumann.” Although I am referring to the prof as “John von Brand X,” he was really extremely good, both in terms of teaching and in terms of research in mathematics, despite not being John von Neumann. I think he might have been gracious enough to remark that “later on, it would.” In any event, he told us that he once had the opportunity to discuss his thesis project with John von Neumann (the real one). Von Neumann mulled what he had heard for 5 or 10 minutes, and then said, “I think when you reach this point [specified], you will run into difficulties.” Ph.D. candidate John von Brand X reached that point about 2 years later, and did run into difficulties. Insurmountable difficulties, in fact. He had to change his thesis project.</p>
<p>The point is that I am talking about such an extremely small number of hyper-talented students that the difference between John von Brand X (a distinguished mathematician) and John von Neumann would actually matter to them as undergrads.</p>
<p>Now, I am not “dissing” Carnegie Mellon (a word that QMP advises me no one uses these days). I know only a very little about Carnegie Mellon outside of computer science, where I think it is arguably the top choice, and certainly a top choice. For the students that PG dismisses as “special snowflakes,” it is unlikely to make a difference whether the student goes there or to one of the drool-generating schools here on CC.</p>
<p>However, for these occasional snowflakes made of ice-9 . . .</p>
<p>QuantMech - I don’t disagree with you there at all (admitting a percentage on pure academics). I just think it is already happening, although there may be some anomalies and head-scratchers (and if QMson’s friend was sabotaged by a guidance counselor, it isn’t necessarily the college’s fault he wasn’t admitted).</p>
<p>Californiaa re: my three hypothetical applicants:</p>
<p>Which of three given students you would choose for your lab right now is not terribly relevant to the discussion, since the university isn’t just worrying about your lab. On that basis, no humanities kid, no matter how good his stats, should ever get into a top university, because he wouldn’t be a good fit for Californiaa’s lab. And the student doesn’t just have to have potential, he has to be good enough to step into the lab as an incoming freshman, because apparently, education doesn’t happen in college, especially for students who previously haven’t had great opportunities.</p>
<p>It is important that the school is selecting a certain number of students who will be excellent in STEM. My point is that an elite school is already admitting plenty of valedictorians with high SAT scores and state awards in Science Olympiad. Certainly, there should be enough to fill the physics and engineering department with students who would meet your approval. I have no idea where you teach, but if you aren’t satisfied with the kids you are getting, I wonder if a) your expectations are unrealistic or b) your school isn’t attracting those kids. I tend to suspect the MIT and Harvard math departments, for instance, are pretty pleased by the several IMO medalists they seem to get each year. Probably pleased enough that they won’t mind if the school passes over someone who got a 2400 on his SAT, a 5 on Calc BC, and an 800 in Math II-C.</p>
<p>lookingforward–I could have a conversation with admissions people at my university on essentially a walk-in basis, essentially any time, even in the height of admissions season (at least a brief one). But there’s no point in my doing that, because we already admit 100% of the truly top students who happen to apply to us.</p>
<p>I don’t think I have any “standing” to drop by admissions at MIT (or elsewhere) and ask to talk with an admissions staffer, let alone the Dean.<br>
Seriously, “You’re who? And you think what?”<br>
“Um, I was a post-doc here.”<br>
“Ok, great, can I give you directions to the building you’re looking for? They probably moved out of the main institute building.”</p>
<p>(Actually, admissions probably isn’t in the main institute building either.)</p>
<p>I am tired of this childish argument: If you don’t like your government then move to Canada.</p>
<p>I’m going to take issue with the contention that it’s hard to get an A in Calc BC. Really? The material just isn’t that hard to understand, and if you’re actually looking for the brilliant kids who should be auto-admits based on smarts, particularly in math and science, that Calc BC grade should be one of your discriminators. (Not for the ambitious future history prof who wants to push the envelope, but for someone interested in hard science? That’s an easy question to answer.)</p>
<p>
I knew one of these. He was the antithesis of well-rounded but had clear aptitude for and accomplishment in mathematics. He went to Harvard.</p>
<p>You don’t identify this kind of top talent by filtering for SAT scores, H.S. GPA, etc.
Wrong thread, eh?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>When people look at a website of a college that has, say, a 5% admissions rate and somehow think that they themselves are so special that their chances are appreciably and meaningfully higher, then they are underestimating the strength of the competition and they are not demonstrating plain old common sense. Sorry. What part of 5% is 5% is unclear here? Even if they think their own chances are 10% - so what? The opposite of 10% acceptance is 90% rejection. There is no one on the planet who should think they have a high chance of getting into colleges at this level. No one. </p>
<p>Californiaa, I sense that you are getting advice from some really misinformed sources. Of course it’s always better to have more rigor in your schedule than less. </p>
<p>And it really doesn’t occur to you that the reason college websites de-emphasize AP’s is that they fully understand that lots of promising students live in school districts that don’t offer AP’s and they don’t want to tell those students not to apply? Or are you just thinking about your own school district and because YOU have AP’s, everyone else does?</p>
<p>And it is not always possible to “back door” from arts into engineering, depending on the school.</p>
<p>I really think you’ve been fed some misinformation along the way here, along with some entitlement that your school is “owed” X number of Ivy admits.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, you don’t. But let’s go with an SAT analogy.
QM::The adcoms at QM’s school </p>
<p>as</p>
<p>X::The adcoms at MIT</p>
<p>Why, X is the set of professors at MIT! Go figure! They DO have that standing!</p>
<p>Many people assume, that I am bitter, because my D. is not admitted to Ivys. That’s not the case. My oldest is just starting HS, she was admitted to magnet, and she is a good student. Further, she has an opportunity to apply as an URM. Even further, she may prefer to apply to UK or Canadian university. </p>
<p>I am mad at the complexity of the process. It’s not a rocket science, it’s much harder. SAT is important … but it doesn’t guarantee anything.
GPA is important, but unweigted is more important.
AP classes are important, but it’s OK without them.
AO admits 100% of bright kids. On the other hand, Berkeley AO reader writes that SAT-AP-GPA perfect applicant was evaluated as “we get too many kids like this”. Further, she writes, that she was trained to value stressors in applicant’s life, rather than achievements. </p>
<p>It doesn’t look fair to me. Simply speaking, all admission process looks too muddy and too unfair. Besides, it costs quarter of a million, to experience diversity. :)</p>
<p>Pizzagirl , </p>
<p>everyone can take as many AP exams as he wishes. You don’t have to take AP classes at school. </p>
<p>I am tired of the argument that “some schools don’t have”. All schools that I looked at have a minimum of AP classes. If they don’t, they refer students to CC classes. When I was considering urban school for my D., principal told ne that my D. can take all classes she wants at CC and school will put credit on her report card. </p>
<p>Inner city schools are far more flexible and accommodating than suburban (personal experience).</p>
<p>to IJustDrive,</p>
<p>No it’s not hard to get A+ in Calculus BC. </p>
<p>Yet it is hard to get A+ in Calculus BS at a STEM magnet school, where all students are great. Further, it is hard to get all A+ on all AP classes that you are taking in a STEM magnet school, where all students are great. Further, it is even harder to be a member of 5 clubs, president, charity, EC, Olympiads, etc, and get all A+ on all AP classes that you are taking in a STEM magnet school. That’s my point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The process seems to appear unfair and nebulous to people who have YET to understand it. Your arguments, which are all over the place, confirm that you have yet to speak from experience. There is hope, that with the help of time, you will discover that the “system” works a lot better than you think, and that adcoms do quite a job in matching the right schools to the applicable students. </p>
<p>Success in the application process might also help reverse quite a few negative speculations. Probably will work for you as well!</p>