" i highly suspect it was because we were asking for a substantial amount of aid. In fact he had all that it took to be admitted but he was rejected outright"
Again, these colleges are need blind and how do you know he had “all it took.” It’s not just stats and ECs. A lot has to do with how you come across in your app/supp.
And the issue isn’t Scouts per se, yea or nay. It’s what the kid chooses to do with the groups. Becoming Eagle by painting a dozen park benches (real) is no “it.” You really think an AO says, “I don’t like Scouts, this kid’s a reject?”
And ORM, non-legacy, non-athletes can certainly get into Harvard and Stanford. But you don’t see the full picture by looking at the obvious bullets of your neighborhood kid or the bare bones of a chance me. You need to see what the kid does with the rest of the app. Or not. Imo, the confusion and misinfo on this thread is representative of the confusion at home, when filling out the app/supp.
I never heard anyone say, “I don’t like Scouts, this kid’s a reject.” I have heard someone on a committee mention a person’s Eagle Scout status with obvious approbation, only to hear another committee member say, “That’s a negative for me.” They weren’t eliminating the person, just stating in an extreme form that they weren’t offering any added consideration for becoming an Eagle Scout. The project had not even been mentioned to that point.
But as you say, those weren’t UG admissions. It is entirely possible not to like some group but remain impartial. In fact, to look for the silver lining. If the top colleges are looking for attributes, that’s more than the simple fact of membership in Scouts.
Try to consider what the CA and supps ask kids to answer, beyond ECs and stats.
@lookingforward, Stepping away from the specific issue of scouting, I would love to see examples of unhooked kids with ordinary ECs being accepted to these elite schools. I mean by that, kids who participated in their school clubs and volunteered in their community – didn’t win national awards, didn’t publish original research, etc. Are there examples of the kids that did the yearbook, flag team, the school play and helped as an aid in Sunday School? I would kill to see that application.
lookingforward, in your opinion, are the top colleges each looking for their own particular desirable attributes, as opposed to a kind of grab-bag of good qualities? Or is there an entire list of positive attributes, so that various sensible combinations of desirable attributes would work about equally well? (Just yielding a different personality type and a different approach to life, for different sets of attributes?) I am guessing that the first might be the case.
Personally, I think that patience tends to be an under-rated virtue.
I don’t think it’s a matter of a specific set of EC’s or awards, or what the essay says about the EC’s. I think it’s a matter of whether the application as a whole tells a cohesive story --or portrays a clear picture of who the applicant is; whether that appeals to the ad com; and whether that fits within the institutional priorities at the time the application is being reviewed.
I also think that adcoms are more likely to be impressed by EC’s that show some level of initiative, creativity, or leadership on the applicant’s part — partly because those are qualities that lead the student to do something different that might pique interest. There’s nothing wrong with being an Eagle Scout – but the elite schools see many of them, and scouting is a very long-established, structured activity that many students participate in from early childhood.
But why do you keep coming back to national awards, publishing original research, and other elements that just are not necessary? Few kids achieve those things, including those admitted to top colleges. Any kid who does is NO shoo in. Top adcoms read the whole app/supp. They look for certain attributes, drives, willingness to stretch, try new things, good will and more. You don’t generally get into a highly competitive college just…by…being…a…nice…kid.
You say “local and community activities are completely insufficient.” Or that the sorts of ECs I mentioned aren’t enough and then say CC posters are the source. (Have you looked at what the colleges say they look for?) Or that “building the right resume and engaging in the usual high school pursuits” seem to be in opposition. I previously said balance.
If you’re going to tell a top college you want a med future, do you think it’s fair for the college to say, ok, let’s see what experiences he/she pursued toward this? Not unlike ensuring this kid has the academic strengths. It’s “Show, not just tell.”
When one says, “some level of initiative, creativity, or leadership on the applicant’s part,” I’d add, “and relevant to what this applicant states he wants.”
The poblem with prosaic EC’s is that “prosaic” anything isn’t enough in a highly competitive field.
You need to put yourself in the situation of the person doing the selecting. Imagine you have an hour to read 20 applications and at the end of the hour you have to pick one – and only one – to admit. That’s what current admission stats are – roughly 1:20 gets admitted. (Maybe you have 2 hours to read the apps – I don’t know how much time the readers have with each app-- but the exercise is the same whether it is 1 hour or 3).
OK – you are NOT expressing a negative opinion of those high school activities when you put 19 of the apps in the reject stack. You are just doing your job --and your job was to select the one most impressive application you have in that stack- keeping institutional goals and priorities in mind. There just happens to be a very high likelihood that the one application you picked had something that differentiated it from the rest of the stack, and that’s likely something other than math club or year book.
But it might not be a big award or something that would typically be thought about as an EC. And maybe the kids featured in this article
But if it is Harvard or Stanford, then by definition it is going to be something that makes that application special. It’s the nature of being in a competitive environment.
From @blossom : “I am about as politically liberal a person as you could find and I honestly have never heard anyone- even in my “knee jerk liberal circles” criticize a kid who was a scout. Taking a yoga class doesn’t mean you buy in to the spiritual beliefs of the leaders of that faith; joining scouts doesn’t make you a participant in a para military operation.”
I agree here. I live in Jackie Speier’s congressional district. I know people (and I’m sort of one of them, except my sons didn’t ever ask to join or care about it) who have agonized a bit for themselves about whether to let their sons get into scouting or not, but none of us have criticized a kid who was in it. I’m personally impressed with the kids who do the Eagle Scout projects, even though I didn’t agree with the BSA position on gay kids and gay scout masters before they finally joined the 21st century a couple of years ago.
You can be president of the math club, especially if your interests are stem. If you want stem, in fact, you should be in math-sci activities. Not exclusively, but as part of your experience. Say it again: math club is fine.
It’s not about being different as much as presenting yourself as the right candidate. Show, not just tell. If they want to see energies, don’t be a wallflower, with the excuse, “It’s me, that’s who I am.” If they like initiative, that’s not founding some do-nothing club, just because. What can differentiate a kid is how he pursues his supposed goals, the vision and awareness of ways to do so, as well as other interests. And more.
Anyway, I feel that it’s very simple:
Control what you can control and do your best to be the best at reaching your goals, whatever they are. And be prepared to let everything fall where they may. I don’t think there’s any need to feel sad just because some schools don’t take some type of kid you wished would be able to go to those schools (they may; they may not).
As for the level of stress, yes, too much is bad. But many of the goals kids seem to want to reach are stressful. Being a doctor is stressful. IB is stressful. Ideally, you have a passion that makes you learn capabilities in an area that let’s you reach your goals. If not, then find yourself later. Lots of second chances, adult education divisions, etc. But yeah, if you do have a fairly ambitious goal (like becoming a doctor), you probably have to buckle down at some point. And certainly, it doesn’t have to be during HS.
@gallentjill Average excellent kids get into elite schools all the time. Just off the top of my head, I know 3 non-athletic upper middle class Asian students admitted to Princeton, Brown, and Harvard in the past 2 years. One valedictorian, other two were top 2%. None of them had done anything extraordinary. Math club, orchestra, piano, other school clubs, and volunteering were their main ECs. In fact, students with far more impressive ECs and higher class rank (except the val) in their schools were rejected. The Princeton and Brown admits were in the same high school ad applied to the same colleges. The top 2% kid had better admission results then the val.
Agree S2 had a female friend who went to Harvard. Just a true all around kind of person. Nothing national or quirky or unique. Smart in the kind of way a lot of kids are today…study hard, get top grades. Involved in athletics and clubs at the high school. Wasn’t even the top student…probably two or three. Well liked by teachers, administrators, etc. It can happen. Great kid you would never at a glance distinguish from hundreds of others. A scholar , athlete, leader type in the high school with moderate need.
@lookingforward I’m not the one who insists that national awards and accomplishments are necessary. I’m questioning what keeps getting repeated here at CC. And no, I don’t believe everything I read here, which is why I asked the question. Even in this one thread, there are contradictory statements being made. The anecdotes provided by @itsgettingreal17 and @momofthreeboys are the kind of stories I was asking about. They are antidotes to the idea that there is one magic formula to gain admission to an elite school.
Maybe one of the things that needs to be focused on here is the actual application. No matter what a student has done with their academics and their ECs, if they don’t shine in their app then they won’t be accepted. I’ve been looking at books and websites that describe how to fill out the activities section, what schools really want to know about the student in the essay, and what they are hoping to hear in the recommendations. I’m betting that lots of kids overlook the activities section and don’t say all that they could in the descriptions. And I bet many kids write good essays but not the kind that the AOs need to really feel the applicant. Each student has so much to offer but it has to SHOW in that application. Have to wonder if many kids who were disappointed didn’t send the best apps.
Like everyone I don’t know. After they pick the very famous, the athletes and the legacies I think they look for smart kids who are social, engage in the college and based on high school history will contribute to the campus through interactions with clubs, events, dorm mates etc and kids who fill a spot they need through major or some other thing they are missing. I actually think this is true for many colleges with the difference that Harvard or Yale or any Uber selective probably knows it is that kid’s first choice.
@momofthreeboys I think your point about major is also extremely important. The kid who wants to be a classics or French literature major may be filling a completely different institutional need then the CS major. The university needs to fill all the slots.
I hope people realize that Girl Scouts of America has been inclusive since they were founded in 1912. Along with the radical idea that girls should be active, empowered leaders, GS has always been open with regards to race, disability, socioeconomics, etc. African American girls were part of the third troop ever formed, and the first all black troop started in 1917. In 2015, GS returned a donation of $100,000 because the donor stipulated that it could not be used to support transgender girls (who are welcome in GS). The organization’s staff is now 45% POC, and they are currently working on how to better reach out to Hispanic/Latina girls. Last spring, the NYTimes started a series of articles about the expansion of a GS troop for homeless girls into 15 homeless shelters in the city (worth reading about).
I don’t think Girl Scouts is some magic bullet for college admissions, but it is a diverse and empowering organization. Also, they don’t give awards for community service. Community service is expected–if you want to earn an award you have to go beyond that, addressing the root cause of a problem and making sure the change you make is sustainable. All projects aren’t equal of course, but GS is aiming to inspire/reward new, creative thinking and meaningful leadership.