<p>
That’s pretty nasty tpg. Is that how you feel about the yong man you are talking about? Is he in that 20% that don’t deserve much credit?</p>
<p>I quote-
</p>
<p>"BBD, I think you aren’t aware how different the values are in places other than where you live. You assume that because a lot of people <em>around you</em> are all into ivies and that’s where their kids attend that it’s that way everywhere else. Not. Now that the kidlet’s off to school a little travel and seeing some fresh sights might do you some good. </p>
<p>I think at this point I’m not going to continue conversing with you because I think you “don’t fight fair”, and I’m not looking for a fight anyway"</p>
<p>I dont know what i posted that indicated that I thought everyone wanted an Ivy. I dont think everyone does. Not everyone where I live does. heck, my kid had a friend whose parents didnt pay any attention AT ALL to where she went to college. that friend is now at community college. I HOPE someone tells her that if she keeps her grades up there, she can transfer to one of our state flagships or directionals. My circle of acquaintance is far wider than you imagine, and I would appreciate you not making assumptions about it. That, plus attacking my posts without quoting them is unfair fighting.</p>
<p>"Oh, even the splitting of Ivies into “upper” and “lower” is, in itself, just thoroughly obnoxious. Why can’t people grasp the concept of “it’s all good”? "</p>
<p>Oh for crying out loud. Somebody was discussing the silliness of entitlement given the SELECTIVITY of the schools. While they do NOT rank in an automatic way, as some parents and kids seem to think, it is NOT incorrect that they differ in selectivity. Knowing that is in fact useful to those who ARE applying to them. It was in THAT context that I said that - what I meant to indicate was that the Ivy she applied to was less selective than HYPMS - that was all. </p>
<p>Take deep breadth. Relax. Some people can think some things are better than others, that you think or KNOW are not. The world won’t end.</p>
<p>Bovertine - For anyone to say 100% of a class is attending their first choice of college, in my opinion, wrong unless the 100% applied ED and got in.</p>
<p>Most students and parents have a priority list -1st, 2nd, 3rd in their like to list. It could be that the kid wanted University of Alabama but the parents said go to NU since it is more prestigious but only because the parents wanted the kid to go to Chicago but he did not get in. Isn’t that the whole point of reaches, matches and safeties? Otherwise, why not apply to bunch of safeties/matches and pick one? Why bother with this concept of a reach school?</p>
<p>OTOH, I will ignore 20% number (It is just a SWAG number and could be 1 for all I care but I can’t imagine it to be zero) if you can tell me what percentage of students always end up attending the college they and their parents preferred most on the date of filing their applications?</p>
<p>It COULD be someone wanted to go to NYU and had to go to Harvard instead, cause Harvard has better fin aid than NYU (which it in fact does).</p>
<p>BBD, I thought the mention of a puddy cat would have made it clear which post, but since it apparently did not, I’ll put the quote here.</p>
<p>Paragraph from your post (I’ve added the bold):
</p>
<p>Seems like you’re trying to make a jab…</p>
<p>Is there any kid who applied to more than one school who didn’t more or less rank them? It might be better not to do so, but it’s pretty much contrary to human nature. If I were applying for ten jobs, I think I would probably know which one was my sixth choice. And sure, I’d rather have my first choice than my sixth choice.</p>
<p>And nobody on this thread has suggested for one second that parents should express this disappointment in front of their children–I think mostly to the contrary, in fact. But it’s not surprising that somebody might come on CC to ask, “How come my high-achieving kid didn’t get into his first few choices, despite so many people encouraging him to apply?” But when they ask that, you get a range of answers:
- Maybe your kid was a robot, or lacked personality.
- Maybe there was another kid who was more desirable to the colleges.
- You are a snob for even asking this question.
- You should have known better than to place any emotional weight onto getting into those top choices.
- Hey, that sucks–too bad.</p>
<p>Personally, I favor the fifth choice.</p>
<p>:"and bugged you about why you didnt have a cat, or even why you didnt WANT a cat, then you might be more incline to say “its just a stupid cat, get over yourself”</p>
<p>That metaphor was to indicate that even folks who didnt want a cat (IE an Ivy) might find cat whining, or Ivy whining, annoying.</p>
<p>Of course not everyone lives around folks who obsess over cats, or over Ivies. IF they did live around such people, the gut reaction to someone on CC whining over Ivies (or over cats) might make more sense.</p>
<p>If someone lives where folks do NOT whine over Ivies (or over cats), than the reaction is rather LESS comprehensible. I was giving the folks reacting badly to the Ivy whines, the benefit of the doubt. </p>
<p>Im sorry that was not clear to you.</p>
<p>^^^
TPG, I basically agree with everything you wrote in 1205. In fact, I don’t think it’s possible to disagree. It also has nothing to do with my comment on your post about NU students. Obviously a certain percentage of students at almost any school are disappointed they did not get into their first choice. And their parents are disappointed, but generally they are disappointed at their peception of unfairness in the process, not in the performance of their son or daughter.</p>
<p>Maybe I don’t understand what this means -</p>
<p>
Give them too much credit for what? I don’t know what you mean by this. I give any kid who gets into NU a lot of credit for that significant accomplishment. </p>
<p>Please explain what you mean by this, becuase that’s what came across as nasty to me.</p>
<p>PS - I know almost nothing about NU except it is hard to get into and a lot of really smart kids go there. Also I know it has a very good journalism school, and an extremely selective integrated science program.</p>
<p>1208</p>
<p>precisely.</p>
<p>Bovertine - I was trying to address this paragraph. It probably sounded like I am maligning NU kids which is not what I meant to do (I am certain the kids are all great but there is no way one can guarantee this to be true for 2000 kids and all their parents).</p>
<p>“And getting back to NU - for the sake of my son and his new classmates, I hope such an entitled kid chose the other non-Ivy top 20, because I would prefer my son be surrounded with kids who are eager and enthused about the great opportunities in front of them, not idolizing colleges-not-gotten-into as though there is any meaningful difference.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>and many of the differences are subjectively perceived and subjectively (differentially) “needed” or “desired,” depending on the student. No particular college can be called objectively better for all students. </p>
<p>Further, the “level” of desirability does not become apparent, truly, until after enrollment.</p>
<p>There is the “afar” level of desirability and the intimate level. They may be equal, they may be slightly apart, they may be vastly apart. It cannot really be determined how “ideal” any particular U is for any particular student until the student experiences it. And the assumption of a seamless transition from Ivy to career may or may not pan out later, particularly in an unstable U.S. and global economy in which we find ourselves.</p>
<p>Even a student whose ‘love affair’ with hypothetical college X seems to sustain itself after arrival on campus, still needs to advantage all those opportunities and work extremely hard, regardless of which campus that is. No campus confers invisible gifts just by a student’s passive enrollment there. To ascribe a different “power” to such a campus sounds kind of like assigning mystical powers to it (to me, anyway). </p>
<p>Several years ago I met a lovely Mom of one of D1’s peers. She initially enrolled at Princeton. Thought she’d like it; it was a ‘family dream.’ (I think she was a legacy.) Couldn’t stand Princeton. She was & is a very artsy type; found the campus too stifling for her less inhibited needs. Transferred out and moved West instead to continue her education.</p>
<p>
True, just like at Harvard.</p>
<p>“Further, the “level” of desirability does not become apparent, truly, until after enrollment.”</p>
<p>heck given, that it will be effecting you in different ways throughout your life, from what you learned, to your resume, to what friends you made, you may not be able to judge that till the day of your death. </p>
<p>I just went to a Stuyvesant alum event. It was a wonderful, enriching, and yeah, mellow time. Made me even more happy that Id gone to Stuy than I was the day before ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, should the concept of a reach not be better understood by applicants? Why it is so that most people think that rejections in the 90 percent range will only apply to … others? </p>
<p>The whole point of safeties and low-matches is to find schools one would be HAPPY and ABLE to attend. High matches should be extremely realistic, and reaches should be understood to be the realm of … utopia.</p>
<p>However, no matter how many times one will underscore the need to build a realistic and doable application list from the BOTTOM up, the typical applicant who will end up complaining (or file ludicrous legal briefs) prefers to focus on the reaches first and work down into the abyss of selective schools with great reluctance. Safeties and low-matches are rarely more than an afterthought, and if that, an afterthought filled with rancor and despair. This is the attitude that annoys observers, especially when it surfaces AFTER the result come in. Rather die than attending your state school? Having to settle for Caltech or Duke because HYPS picked others? Failing to get all eight Ivy Trophies for the Kumon Mantel? Yep, that is endearing! </p>
<p>The problem is often exacerbated by parental pressures and faulty notions of entitlement. The expression of such problem often takes the face of claims of discrimination and injustice, especially when buildt on self-serving comparative “analyses.”</p>
<p>The reality is that, if the odds of landing one of the Shangri La spots were better understood in the first place, a lot less disappointment would surface, and would be easier to set aside. This does not mean that disappointments are scorned upon … they are human and natural. But this is the different from looking at the neighbor to find faults in the system and seeking to find justifications for claims of discrimination and the type of non-sense we have to read every Spring, especially when it is as repetitive and obnoxious as it usually is. </p>
<p>There is nothing wrong in being realistic, have moderate expectations, and be prepared to accept the results. With a reasonable list, the joys should overcome the sadness without delays. And that IS the story, be it an opinion or drivel.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Which is precisely why it is a parental responsibility not to participate in maintaining an illusion which has some degree of emotional “danger” to it, for the student. There are ways to do this gently and with wisdom. But the notion that the Ivy League is morally responsible for the emotional well-being of my child is not something that I think any adult should be supporting, even tacitly, even by subtle behavior or words.</p>
<p>Appreciated your kind PMs, and I’m glad some of you liked that gratitude link. 
I like the idea of working on solutions. Life here beckons. Take care!</p>
<p>"so much as “look at what my child is going to have to settle for, and it is SO UNFAIR.”</p>
<p>My dear departed father (born during WWI, his father’s bar business ruined by prohibition, went to high school during the Depression, had his house wiped out by one of the Johnstown floods, and was an infantry officer in Europe during WWII), prohibited my brother and I from using the word “fair.”</p>
<p>“The whole point of safeties and low-matches is to find schools one would be HAPPY and ABLE to attend. High matches should be extremely realistic, and reaches should be understood to be the realm of … utopia.”</p>
<p>Xiggi - You went to a private school and must know a lot of parents who are very well off. Do you know a single such parent who was excited with their kid getting into a safety or even a match?</p>
<p>Wise dad, Schmaltz. Thanks for sharing.
:)</p>