Kind of odd question about admissions

Christcorp
Fri, 25 Apr 2008 09:58:41 +0000

The service academies are unique in their selection compared to traditional schools. Words like quotas, affirmative action, etc… don’t mean quite the same thing that they do for a traditional school. The service academies do aim for diversity, as does almost all schools, but again service academies do this differently.

I guess the easiest way to SEE this in action is selections vs nominations. The service academies are federal and as such are required to take a minimum of “X” amount of applicants from each state. Assuming the applicants meet certain minimum requirements, so many will be available from each state. This is obviously a form of quotas, diversity, and affirmative action. But you can obviously see that it’s different than the traditional thought and definition of these words. So the first thing to realize is that the service academies don’t lower standards to ensure certain applicants are selected. So know that if you have been selected to the academy, that you have in fact met their strict standards and deserve the appointment.

The biggest problem that people see with the selection process is that because it’s federal and EVERY STATE is allowed so many slots, that applicants from a larger populated state like California would have a much more difficult time getting selected compared to a state like Montana or Wyoming. I.e. A district in California where a representative is allowed their “X” amount of cadets nominated or currently enrolled, could have a district population of a million people, with possibly 100 applicants. An area, in say Wyoming, only has 1 district, 1 representative, and a total population of 550,000 people and say 27 applicants. Numerically, the person in Wyoming has a better chance. But selection numbers are federally mandated and that’s why so many are available for each representative, and that nominations can also come from senators. People can also get nominations from the President, Vice President, and some other areas. In ALL CASES however, a nomination doesn’t mean anything if you don’t qualify. If you don’t qualify, then you won’t get a letter of assurance requiring a nomination. That’s why Reps and senators provide a list of 10 nominees. Because not everyone on their list may qualify for an appointment. Your rep or senator doesn’t usually know the results of your CFA score, medical exam, application, etc…

But again, realize that in the case of the military academy, that 9000-10000 people will apply and become prospects; 6000 will become competitive and become applicants. Approximately 2800 will be even more competitive and become candidates. 1700 will actually be offered an appointment. And 1300-1400 will actually walk in the door and get on the bus in June.

Unfortunately, there will ALWAYS be that person who is the #1 NON-SELECTED. That #1701 of those they offered an appointment to. Now, is it possible that that #1 non-selected could have a higher overall score than a person selected from another state who did get selected? Yes, it is possible, but that too is still very unlikely. Reason being, is that even in that small state such as Wyoming that only had 27 initial applicants with, only maybe 3-4 got selected. Couple from the Rep, maybe 1 from a senator’s list, and maybe 1 from a presidential nominee. So, even though each state has so many available slots, there is enough competition in each state, that the academies still take the best of the best. And usually the best 3-4 in Wyoming that are selected, are equal academically and in total score to the 30-40 that were selected and given an appointment from California. And the 20 or so given an appointment from Texas.

And, of all complaints from those not selected or ignorant of the process, concerning “quotas” or “Slots”, the biggest is aimed at those candidates and selected applicants who are also athletes. There is a misconception that if you are a recruited athlete at the academy, that your scores were lower and the standards aren’t the same as the rest of the cadets. This too is false. So, if anything, athletes have more of a stereotype of being accepted than an applicant who happens to be a woman, black, hispanic, etc… But, for those who look at the stats, you will see that approximately 25% of all cadets walking in the door in June happen to be recruited athletes. A lot of this happens to just be coincidental with the nature of the military. They naturally attract very athletic individuals. That’s why they make you do the CFA. By nature, the military is physical and athletic. But let me assure you that any athlete accepted and offered an appointment, also needed an appointment from a rep, senator, presidential, etc… They still needed the SAT/ACT/GPA/Ranking, etc… that everyone else needed. They went through the same applications and approval process. Trust me, there are a lot of recruited athletes who have a gpa of 3.9, class rank in the top 10, took AP/IB classes, etc… just like everyone else who applied for an appointment.

Finally, to help explain athletes and everyone else accepted, realize that your SCORE SHEET is made up of many areas. Sat/ACT, GPA, Ranking, leadership, Volunteer, Extra Curriculum, Sports, Interviews, Nominations, Recommendations, application questionnaire, etc… all contribute to the FINAL SCORE!!! Everyone has the same score sheet. yes, an athlete will probably get a higher score in that particular area of the score sheet; but the non-athlete may have higher scores in the leadership area because they went to boy/girl state, boy/girl scouts, jrrotc, etc… Anyway, this explanation is provided to hopefully educate those reading who think somehow that some people are given appointments and didn’t deserve them. Not one candidate/cadet arriving at the academy on June 26th; whether female, male, black, white, hispanic, athlete, musician, mathematician, Floridian, Texan, or from Nebraska received their appointment and nomination without being qualified and meeting the difficult standards asked of them.