I didn’t say that he specifically didn’t get in because the school is prioritizing diversity. I’m just saying any white student applying to Williams has a tough time. See the numbers I posted? Easier if ORMs were 50% of accepted students. Not saying any percentage is the right one. It’s just math. Fewer spots for any student like him at a school like Williams.
Congratulations @MAandMEmom !!
@homerdog You certainly implied it by stating, “what I am saying is that Williams has made a big push to be diverse. Which is great. I love that. So does S19. But when they’ve started accepting only 200 white boys, it’s insanely competitive. Other LACs that aren’t as diverse have more spots for someone like him. So, he can do his best and apply to very diverse schools but it’s just harder to get in.”
I said it’s harder to get in. Didn’t say it’s harder for HIM to get in. I’m done.
Wow, when I checked after dinner, I thought maybe a bunch of schools had released tonight. Lotta activity!
I do get frustrated with some of the site’s themes at times. While I skipped some posts and smh at some, I was interested to see some of the different school demographics. Growing up in the northeast, but now living in the south, I’m out of touch. Also a bit jealous of the Naviance folks.
@dfbdfb shared a site with engineering stats by school including gender ratios. If you want to talk about something else not changing much in 20+ years… But that’s why in many cases, the acceptance rate and merit $$ for a female in STEM is different from a male STEM. The CC parents of some boys get so upset, but the boys are still the majority, most on cc have multiple offers, and I’m fairly confident that industry will make up for it in salary down the road. Doesn’t change the fact that at some schools, yes it is a harder competition-wise for the boys. Saying that doesn’t make my D less qualified. Hearing it in certain words might make me wonder if someone else is implying it.
I don’t condone the assumption that certain hooked candidates are less worthy, but that doesn’t mean advantage is not a thing and a school is trying to build a class that they’ve defined. You’ll never get me to believe that the overall college deck is stacked against the upper class male, but there are alternating advantages to different groups and talents (athletics, ED, geography). It’s not necessarily evil either IMO.
When I saw the Williams reference yesterday, having lived with a couple alums years and years ago, I was more than a little surprised, even skeptical. I found the 2018 release more detailed than 2019’s. Gotta say, I’m impressed with that level of commitment. Not saying quota, but if they go that high to ensure a diverse class based on past stats, good for them. Still, it’s helpful math for all those applying (granted they don’t share the same level of detail about the applicant pool, just the admitted #s). Understand the data going in, use it. There are so many school options, and there are great strategies and insights in hundreds of pages of just this thread.
@homerdog, if your kid wants diversity and a LAC experience, there are LAC alternatives to the WASP-type LACs, though, and they’re likely to be more diverse anyway—so, for example, public LACs, HBCU LACs (though most of those are struggling financially), and many of the “second tier” LACs—and they aren’t as difficult to get into, no matter the race or ethnicity of the applicant, in part because the WASP-tier LACs suck so much of the attention out of the room.
@4MyKidz Congratulations!!
@jjulesjenks Congratulations to you too!
Congratulations @MAandMEmom !!
Also, it occurs to me, speaking as a college professor: There have been a few exceptions, but the vast majority of athletes I’ve had in my classes have been wonderful students (including the “money” sport athletes). We have this stereotype of the dumb jock, but consider that you have people who are incredibly focused and goal-driven, and able to tune out distractions. Yeah, that generally makes for good academics.
I did my PhD at UIUC, and I was a TA (intro Bio for mostly “pre-med” students) for a variety of students athletes. They were all at least solid students (UIUC required a B average for all athletes), and they were also usually the most polite and nicest students in my lab sections.
One of my wife’s favorite students when she was a TA in CS was a rugby player. Large guy, and also a top student and one of the nicest guys she taught.
There are athletes that fit the stereotype, especially when universities put more emphasis on athletes winning games than on their education. But these are only a minority of the athletes in a minority of all sports.
Athletes will not often admit it, but most are huge geeks when it comes to their chosen sport, and often other sports.
“I think the football player who says he was accepted to Brown with an ACT of 19 is blowing smoke.”
I strongly suspect based on published stats that the student with a supposed 19 ACT and claims of being recruited to Brown is embellishing to agitate. The last year that Brown printed test score range breakdowns indicated that less than 3% of the entire class scored lower than a 26. So a 19 is not impossible but improbable. FYI they cited 26 as the lowest data point with no further differentiation below.
Alternatively @homerdog may seemingly have found the dumbest kid (worst test taker) at Brown.
Well said!!
Universities in large cities are very diverse as my student attends Temple University and has never looked back. She did not want to be in what she called a “bubble” anymore and is thrilled with all things Temple. The urban environment has some challenges to navigate but she developed a thick skin and loves the school. It is all about the “fit.”
MODERTOR’S NOTE: A reminder that debates are not permitted on CC. If you find yourself going back and forth with another user for more than a couple of posts, you need to rein it in. Thank you.
@MaineLonghorn I strongly disagree 
Joke intended…
@MWolf the comment about the rugby player reminds me. An ex-colleague’s son got admitted to Penn for the class of 2021. His stats were at the 25th percentile, no hooks, but he comes from a country that has low representation everywhere here (friend of mine on an ivy adcom told us D19 would definitely get a second look there just based on country of origin) …and is a rugby player. Not recruited athlete though. They were totally expecting a rejection.
@Nocreativity1 Thanks, that made me giggle, especially given your user name.
Deep breaths everyone! It’s Friday and we are in the home stretch.
One thing I appreciate about CC is the education in just how low the odds of acceptance are at the most selective schools. The information about financing college is also terrific (although it would be even better if it could be delivered to new parents!). I think the amount of pressure, perfectionism, shock, disappointment and burnout in our high school kids is not healthy, and could be ameliorated by educating more people. If everyone in all the different populations of college applicants understood the odds and options, we could avoid a lot of mistakes and stress.
I know I’m preaching to the choir because the people on CC tend to be researchers who have figured out how few seats there are at the tippy top schools compared to the vast number of amazing applicants from around the world. Plus, there are different “buckets” which the schools aim to fill in order to achieve their dream class, so the published acceptance percentages can be misleading. I think the majority of CC posters (and everyone I’ve run across here) is supportive of schools expanding their types of buckets to be more inclusive and diverse. Note: All the buckets are tiny compared to the applications pouring in, so it’s natural to have a feeling of scarce resources.
I’m optimistic that with understanding, more people will discover the availability of a huge variety of educational paths and innovative ways to reach their goals. If I look for it, CC can introduce me to a school every day that could be a great place for my next two kids.
@3SailAway Your bucket analogy is the same way I think of it. Take gender, which is hopefully less of a hot button topic than race or ethnicity. It’s pretty clear that the top LAC’s are striving for gender balance which is why the acceptance rate for women is sometimes significantly lower than for men. That’s just stating a fact, not saying that unqualified men are being let in or that a man “stole my daughter’s place.”. (Same when the reverse is true for STEM centered schools that have a higher acceptance rate for women.) When my D15 applied to Pomona, I knew her application was going to be in the bucket of “highly qualified but unhooked females” not the presumably smaller bucket of “highly qualified female athletes for each team sport” or “highly qualified international females.”
The bucket analogy is just a way to think about the process. And while I don’t know the actual details of how they achieve the desired class composition, it’s clearly strategic and intentional, especially given how they all brag about the results when they announce the characteristics of the admitted class. They must have a system that sets off alarm bells if the class is starting to look like it will be 65/35 female/male as opposed to something closer to 50/50. Recognizing that this is true is not the same as making claims of unfairness. It’s just part of being well informed so that you make a realistic assessment of the chances for admission and put together a realistic list of schools. It’s also why we let D15 apply ED (which was admittedly a privileged thing to do) because we figured that during the ED1 round, the bucket of “highly qualified but unhooked females” would be smaller than in the RD round.
@Corinthian You are exactly right!