<p>EarthWake … you provide an intriquing case for this. And illustrate perfectly the illusion or “mirage” of it all. Let me explain, recognizing that like your point, mine’s purely speculative and difficult or impossible to “prove” in the end.</p>
<p>My speculation is that your daughter is precisely the prototype who would boost the app numbers … and lessen the acceptance rate. No doubt she’d be an ace in the WFU deck, or that of virtually any other institution. She’s bright, diligent, and disciplined as a student, I’d project. But does not have the testing “gene” and probably never would. And she’s one who’ll go to OT at Wash U Med School and knock their sox off, have profs dying to write her a recommendation to a Ph.D. program or potential employer, and will eventually be one of the great shining stars of her profession, community, and world. I’d bet on it and her. Wouldn’t you?</p>
<p>But from one perspective, important to only 2 arenas on the face of the planet … academe/campuses and government (with the major exception of the military). In neither case is merit more valued than “diversity.” And truth be told, your eldest remains boringly undiverse, and portrays that she’d NOT be a Rhodes Scholar (based upon the mystical aptitude tests we’ve come to fear and hold in some undeserved heavenly status.) So, my point? </p>
<p>I’d forecast that like last year, next year would be no different for your wonderful offspring. In either case. The younger would be admitted, the elder would go to Michigan. For if they wished to accept her before, they easily could have. She’s obviously not cat scat. </p>
<p>So, while I concur with WFU’s “courageous” decision, and believe it will enhance their position in virtually every way, it will NOT aid the likes of your older child. She fails to fall into any of the right groups, and be sure that this is intended to address groups, not individuals. That’s the fallacy. It will not recognize unique achievements but rather merely validate and increase the decisions that currently are so painful and rare.</p>
<p>So again, why perceive it to be a wise move? Because of where it will lead in the longer run and bigger picture, i.e. forcing the hand, just as Davidson’s FA move has, of other quality places that remain too insecure/fearful to lead as WFU is doing, and have too much palm-greasing relationship with the SATers in Princeton. Insitutions must find ways to walk away, and regain the power from the bogus picture that’s been contrived by that bunch over the past 50 years. The SAT (and increasingly ACT) are power-brokers and hold some chits. This is an evolution vs. revolution strategy, allowing them to keep dating, even if one partner is anticipating a break-up. But I digress.</p>