<p>Viewer, I larded my remarks with enough caveats to suit anyone who was not looking for an opportunity to take offense. But I will add that my sample is A LOT bigger than six. </p>
<p>PG, it is not my intention to glorify those schools. Those just <em>happen</em> to be the schools where I have personally observed a particularly strong trend. But yeah, I think that they ARE looking for people who they think will be movers and shakers. So are other places, but perhaps not to that extent. As we all know, the movers and shakers of the future will eventually prove to come from a variety of schools and backgrounds.</p>
<p>Has anyone seen the reality TV show “Dance Moms”? (Bear with me, I’m going somewhere with this…) In the show, there are two dance studios that regularly compete against each other. One studio owner stocks her “pupils” with ringers she recruits from all over the country. She hasn’t actually taught them how to dance… they come to her already trained. She wins a lot. The other studio owner takes kids she trained from scratch into competitions and wins a lot too. Which studio would any of us want our <em>untrained</em> student to attend? The answer is obvious. So, if I had a work in progress kid who had a lot of potential but wasn’t already radiating that persona, I’d want him at a university that can actually cultivate that in him… that can and will take my rough diamond and cut and polish him until he glows too… I’d be concerned that he’d be dismissed/lost in a college that stocks itself with glowers to begin with.</p>
<p>I guess I’m just amazed and impressed at how much you know about what all the Ivies are looking for. I do know many, many kids that have gone to Ivies and none of your stereotypes ring true with me.</p>
<p>Consolation’s son is graduating from an Ivy and going to an Ivy for grad school. I don’t really “understand” why you are getting so offended. It seems really odd.</p>
<p>“None of my stereotypes”? I believe that I mentioned precisely ONE personality type that could be called a stereotype IF someone was looking for a reason to get huffy. Unless, of course, you regard being highly intelligent as a “stereotype.”</p>
<p>Glad to know that you are amazed and impressed, though. I guess I’m just more perceptive and analytical than you are. And modest, too. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>One poster says you can get an education comparable to HYP almost anywhere.</p>
<p>Other posters say an accelerated student who wants to pursue a particular course of study at MIT, can get a comparable education at HYPSCD and the rest of the top 20 schools.</p>
<p>Does this look like essentially the same argument to anyone else besides me?</p>
<p>But, it doesn’t describe my son. And, many of these personality types were found at at Brown and Dartmouth with his siblings. I just don’t think you can generalize with this.</p>
<p>Well, you can’t generalize with any of it, and yet we do. It’s just chatting about stuff. One thing can be said, if a kid is in a competitive high school, where there are multiple Ivy admissions every year, or multiple top school admissions, then the ones who go to the top ranked of the top ranked (God help us all on the hair splitting, but it’s like fantasy baseball around here, anyway) will have even more of the more we are discussing.</p>
<p>Also, different parts of the country will experience different things. For example, Harvard has a mission to accept more students from Massachusetts than elsewhere… Northwestern seeks out low income Chicago Public School stars, and I believe UChicago has begun some of this, in the last couple of years, too. These regional things play out, as well.</p>
<p>Um, no alh, post #1127, it doesn’t look like the same argument to me actually. I haven’t followed the recent posts closely enough to know the context, so I am not sure whether I am agreeing or disagreeing with those I usually agree with!</p>
<p>i happen to think quite the opposite. Perhaps, thiscomes from a different definition of being savvy and … Making errors. </p>
<p>I also happen to think, that if there were errors made – according to our own criteria-- we might have very different mitigating crutches, as I am sure I would have a different admitted pool.</p>
<p>The reality is that we do not know how to evaluate the adcoms. But their employers surely do. Considering how many candidates are lining up to attend a school, I’d have to say that most seem to think that it is attractive to join the group of students, despite the haphazard or crapshoot selection system. </p>
<p>And, last but not least, did you think that the adcoms at your progeny’s school made a mistake? Because, frankly, that is about all the valid case you can evaluate with a modicum of knowledge. All the other admissions and rejections are beyond our analysis reach. All in all, adcoms do know, and we speculate. Usually on the basis of prejudice and personal bias and preferences.</p>
<p>Thus, do you think your kid(s) should have attended a different school? Do you think some schools made mistakes in your case?</p>
<p>I’ve observed the same thing Consolation is describing. Let’s just say these personality traits are selected for and are enriched in the Harvard population. This doesn’t mean everybody has these traits, bu they seem to be preferred.</p>
<p>Their former president, Larry Summers, seem to echo this sentiment, though not in the same words. i think he said something about quiet people being selected against in admissions. Again, I don’t remember the exact words, so don’t have a field day with the word “quiet.”</p>
<p>All three of my kids are quiet, introverted types. My D and S1 did quite well “coming into their own” at Dartmouth and Brown. They were in with their element and are more comfortable now having gone through college than when they were in high school. S2 will be going to Harvard in the fall. I do have confidence that the adcoms knew his personality type when they accepted him. Hopefully, he will not be the outlier and will have the same growth experience that my other children had.</p>
<p>I actually don’t think that “self-promotion” per se is preferred in the Harvard matriculant… But that self-promotion, and what is perceived as over-confidence might co-segregate with extraordinary ability or ambition. </p>
<p>Ultimately I think H wants students with both or either–> as they would tend to predict for those “movers and shakers.” </p>
<p>I think if extreme ambition is not paired with at least a modicum of ability, then those students are probably those that are mocked here at CC for sour grapes, whining, etc., when they lose the Ivy game…</p>
<p>and extraordinary ability probably needs at least a little ambition to result in the type of achievement that will result in an Ivy admit - but those that are less flashy are probably those introverts whose classmates never understand why they get that elite admit because they fly under the radar.</p>
<p>Viewer, no one is suggesting your kid did not deserve to get into Harvard simply because he doesn’t fit the stereotype Consolation and others have described (which fits with my experience too). Personality is but one component of the decisionmaking process for adcoms. Without knowing more–much more–about your child there is no way to make a guess at why he made the cut. And as I am sure you know there is an element of luck to it, too. There are many more kids similar to your son who didn’t get in. Again–it’s about the mix for each class each year.</p>
<p>Oh, also, my opinion about “elite” schools - I think there probably is a difference, albeit small, between the “tippy top” and the “top.” But a couple of things - water generally finds its own level. If a student is totally shut out of all the “tippy top” there may be a reason. If the schools all made a mistake, it’s really not the end of the world because if that potential for “tippy topness” is there, there is a long life ahead to find your place. </p>
<p>For an athletic comparison I am thinking of Tom Brady who was a significantly lower draft pick than other QBs who went nowhere in the NFL (not even first round as I recall), and also was initially overlooked at UM… but took that as motivation to outperform his competitors. He’s done pretty well compared to many other #1 QB draft picks.</p>
<p>Sigh - it seems very-unPC to say that there may be difference between tippy top and top schools, but as I said, the difference is probably small … if we are equating it to snow or some other type of precipitation being “thick on the ground” - it may be the difference between 5 and 6 inches. You can still have a lot of fun with 5 inches of snow.</p>
<p>Also, statistically, not everyone can be a “tippy top.” And on a personal level - does everyone want to be “tippy top?” Sometimes extraordinarily successful people have lives that I am not sure I want.</p>
<p>Well, that’s exactly it in a nutshell. My problem with the Ivy or bust contingent is that they go - those schools (or some similar configuration) = 6 inches. All others = bone-dry. It’s just not the end of the world, or a meaningful difference, to go from 6 inches to 5. To 4 or 3, maybe. But a kid who selects his range well shouldn’t have to worry about that. But too many kids on CC select only 6’s and then a 3 or 2 as backup, and then it’s a big deal.</p>
<p>Books by insiders about college admissions describe a process where two readers initially evaluate an application. If they both agree to accept or reject, their suggestion is passed on to the head of admissions, who usually goes along. If they disagree, the whole admissions committee may review the application in a meeting.</p>
<p>If universities were serious about evaluating admissions officers, they would note who the readers are for each admitted student, develop a way to judge the success of admitted students, and look at whether the students recommended by some officers outperform others. Does anyone try to do this? I doubt it.</p>
<p>oh jeez. I know kids who you would describe as on the spectrum (social issues, feeling empathy, connecting with others, even eye contact) who are the least self-promoting folks on the planet who have done superbly at HYP. I know kids who are shy to the point of pathology who have risen to the top of the pack at HYP (at least according to such markers at PBK, graduating with honors, etc.)</p>
<p>I think you guys are drawing conclusions from a sample of 5 or 12 or 20 if you conclude that you have to be an overt extrovert to get into those places, much less to thrive. It’s fun to extrapolate from the kids we know but really- do you think Harvard doesn’t accept introverts? And don’t you think someone would have sued them by now for excluding folks with spectrum disorders by their systematic admissions criteria.</p>
<p>Well, when even the 6inches of snow schools are saying they have classes and classes worth of blizzards they are having to pass on, I really highly doubt that there is all that much meaningful difference in this day an age, even when you are at a top flagship honors program.</p>
<p>I’m sorry, I really don’t think they are lying when they say these things about having classes worth of students they are passing up. I think you have to really be a navel gazer to believe that there is all that much difference at this point.</p>