WSJ article about consultant who starts them early

Applying to College
1

https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/ivy-league-college-venture-capital-23dc95fa?st=HMCWt7&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Consultant who starts working with families when the child is only eleven years old, in order to help the child to develop extremely strong EC achievement.

Interesting read. I know that the EC skill/achievement that I’m sure was the main reason behind my child’s success actually started when child was only about 8, and I know for others in that EC (music), it starts as early as age 4. Recruited athletes often begin their sport in early elementary school. But I doubt that most people are overtly focused on college applications when they help their child to find the activity that they love and do well in - they’re doing it because they want their child to find fulfillment in doing an EC that they enjoy. Lot of people enroll their children in all sorts of ECs in elementary school, and then wind up focusing on the EC that “clicks” for their child.

What seems different about the approach of using a college coach so early on is the deliberateness of the process. It is recommended that children drop ECs in which it’s obvious that they’re not going to have extraordinary achievement, in order to focus on finding the one or two activities where they can achieve at an extremely high level.

My kid was kind of an illustration of exactly the process that this young man hit upon for himself, then marketed. High grades and high test score in the most rigorous course load available to them was just a given. Found their EC passion early on, in an area that I have to admit was partially motivated on my part by the possibility of it making them an attractive candidate (but mostly because I just wanted them to learn to work hard at something useful, while at an age when school was very easy for them). But what didn’t happen was the withdrawal from activities that they enjoyed even though it was obvious that they were not going to achieve at a high level in them. My kid still played rec league level sports, tried HS level sports, even though they were never going to win anything in sports.

I would say that for most of their classmates at a tippy top, it’s obvious that their passion ECs were real - they still play high level music, or compete internationally in sports, or dance and act and sing, whatever, even though by the time they’ve started college these activities are not going to get them into the top grad school or the top Wall Street job. But I think that is who they wind up associating with. There is an entire 'nother social group there consisting of kids who went to the right prep schools, are very wealthy, and who join social clubs that have nothing to do with any particular activity other than being a member of an exclusive social club. That seems to be the demographic that this type of service is targeting.

I’m wondering how obvious it will be to ad comms, that a kid was coached like this to present as the perfect candidate. It didn’t take long for colleges to recognize the high school vacation “mission trip” for what it was, and to discount it. Same goes for the bogu nonprofit charity organization. Hopefully they’re now realizing the worthlessness of curated “research” opportunities purchased in order to have a research activity to put on college applications. But because this young man is coaching kids from very early on to present themselves in a way that successful past candidates have just fallen into naturally, because of their extreme interest in particular areas, I’m wondering if it will be harder to recognize which applicant had strong innate drives and interests, and which applicant was coached by a professional applications counselor from age eleven, or even younger.

3 Likes
2

It’s not relevant a kid had counseling (or tutoring) at an early age. In order to succeed in elite admissions, all the admits had strong innate drives and interests…they are all doing the work. Just because a counselor helped them figure things out doesn’t make the student’s accomplishments or drive less than.

What is relevant is the fact that the admitted students are very strong academically, generally with deep accomplishments.

From the article:

The average SAT score for an Ivy acceptance was 1568, and grades were as close to perfect as possible. A’s and A minuses are acceptable, but “B’s are bombs,” Beaton said.

B’s are bombs…this is so true. Generally ECs and essays will not compensate for B’s.

These ECs are not ‘discounted’ per se.

Again, nothing wrong with this activity. Not even sure what ‘manufactured’ means. An opportunity with a college prof accessed by paying a company? An opportunity with a parent’s employer, the local uni? An opportunity with a neighbor prof? A project accessed by cold email to a prof? A research project that some HSs require, which they facilitate for the students?

If a student does a research project and writes about what they learned, well, that can be valuable. It doesn’t matter how the opportunity was accessed (which often isn’t known.)

Some will always be upset that there are services like this that by and large are only accessible to the affluent (although Crimson does provide scholarships, per the article.) I understand why that may bother some people.

4 Likes
3

I find it ironic that Amy Chua (a professor of Mr. Beaton’s) talked about how he believed in self-agency and meritocracy meanwhile his working life is dedicated to shepherding kids of the elite into the Ivy of their choice. Meritocracy indeed . . .

6 Likes
4

Also from the article:

Alexander Rosenthal is a director at Verlinvest, which counts Insomnia Cookies and Vitacoco among its broad portfolio of consumer-based investments. He dismisses the criticism that private college counselors tilt the already skewed playing field of elite college admissions toward the wealthy, saying colleges have set up the system this way.

Elite universities take advantage of their tax-free status by claiming they benefit society, he said. But their primary concern is to maintain status and cultivate prestige by rejecting as many students as possible. “If they are doing so much good for society then why don’t they increase the number of students who come in?” he asked.

Indeed. The low number of ‘elite’ college seats is at the heart of the problem. Scarcity is attractive and desirable. I know why many colleges are making relatively small changes to the proportion of FGLI or other disadvantaged students in their classes, but increasing access in a more meaningful way, like in class size, is not attractive to the leadership and alum of these schools.

5

By and large, these schools don’t want to increase access. They like the exclusivity (and the wealth).

8 Likes
6

Why doesn’t the Catholic Church increase access by shoring up the declining number of priests by ordaining women? Why doesn’t the Metropolitan museum increase access by eliminating admissions fees 365 days a year? Why doesn’t the San Diego zoo increase access by allowing kids to play with the gorillas?

These non-profits have their own missions, and their own guidelines/protocols, and their own stewards who determine how/when/why. Why should Harvard (which is already landlocked… just take a look at the neighborhood fury every time it tries to expand further into its adjacent neighborhoods) take lessons on “increasing access” just because folks don’t like U Mass (which HAS expanded access- as a public institution- by building out the Boston campus which is in a dense neighborhood with good public transportation, unlike the flagship which is not).

I think Sloan Kettering hospital should buy vans and drive around the country giving free mammograms, instead of waiting for women to be diagnosed with breast cancer and fly in to the hospital for treatment. Their leadership disagrees with me- not a good use of limited resources. And that’s their prerogative.

I bet you cannot find a single instance of a kid who was rejected from Yale who then spent 30 years folding sweaters at Old Navy because there were zero educational options. Can’t get into Yale (it is also somewhat landlocked, although the life sciences campus in West Haven helps)? Plenty of other options. Why are we worried about scarcity in higher ed when institutions are closing and the country is facing the demographic cliff???

1 Like
7

I am not ‘worried’ about scarcity at elite schools, and agree it’s their prerogative. Same as it’s their prerogative to admit who they want to their various degree programs, hire who they want, expand in the countries they want.

I do find it rich that many of these schools talk a big game about increasing access…and increasing class size doesn’t mean that has to be done in-person.

1 Like
8

MIT’s many virtual offerings- is that what you’re talking about??? How much more access can you provide?

9

I am talking about virtual…but degree programs, not only certain classes, or certificates. Does MIT offer fully virtual undergrad degrees?

10

Not to my knowledge. My guess would be that it’s tough to offer a fully remote BS in Mechanical Engineering, for example, given that the labs, projects, “build a boat out of garbage and then float it down the Charles” etc. is a critical pedagogical component to the education. “mens et manus” – mind and hand; that’s the mission.

1 Like
11

I don’t think the lack of seats at Harvard (and the like) is a real problem. There are plenty of excellent schools where a talented student can get a great education. What gets me is the hypocrisy of these schools - their talk of diversity and access - when, in reality, they mainly enroll kids of the wealthy who come in already set up for success.

2 Likes
12

I didn’t think MIT offered fully remote degrees either. And yes, there are barriers to certain majors. Yet, for example, there are fully remote nursing degrees, where clinicals are done in person wherever the student lives.

My point is if you take away the scarcity aspect, companies like Crimson Education wouldn’t exist.

I agree.

Yep.

13

I am more aggravated by the growing number of state universities which are unaffordable for a growing number of its residents. Harvard, Shmarvard. Rounding error in the grand scheme of life. But that a talented student from a middle class Philadelphia family can’t afford the flagship U? THAT’s a problem.

14 Likes
14

Oh, I agree. I just get annoyed by the Harvard thing because of the hypocrisy. It’s not a real problem. The fact that the cost of many state flagships is out of reach for a good number of students is an actual problem.

2 Likes
15

Please stay on topic which is about early use of consultants. Other topics have been covered in countless other threads.

Further posts will be deleted without comment.

TIA

1 Like
16

As always, I am deeply concerned with any approach to a childhood and its relationship to college where it seems like the order is first you decide at a young age what colleges to target, and then you mold their childhood to maximize their chances at those colleges. As opposed to first you help the child have the childhood that is best for them, and then you figure out what colleges make sense for them as the next step in their personal development–if indeed college is the right next step at all.

And the earlier you begin, the worse it seems to me. An 11-year-old is still so far away from who they will be by the time they finish high school. How can you know what will be the best next step for them at that point?

And I suspect the more parents invest in a certain vision of the One True Path, the more likely they are to be reluctant to tolerate deviations from that path.

19 Likes
17

Agreed, and the rate of brain development and maturity varies widely and is very individual. You see seniors in high school deciding what they want to pursue just as they start the application process, while others make a decision earlier, but surely not independently at age 11.

2 Likes
18

I found the article sad too on so many levels.

But a few bright spots that reassure me-

1-The top 20 colleges list is more like top 50. And they can jockey for positioning all they want, but if one ranking lists CMU as 18 and another 26, or one ranks Haverford as 23 vs. 34… does it really matter? The “bench” is wide and deep.

2-A highlight of the American higher ed system is that there are pockets of excellence where one might not expect them. A kid is fascinated by the relationship between the US/Canada? (an important and yet VERY understudied relationship economically, culturally, politically). U Maine. etc. We could make a LONG list- museum studies at Delaware, CS at Stonybrook, linguistics at U Mass with some exceptional schools which the “my kid needs to end up at Harvard” crowd do not unerstand.

3- If we were that good at raising kids who did what we told them to do… how do you explain Tik-Tok, or bulimia, or whatever the demure/brat/IYKYK thing is? Some kids are malleable. And some just are not no matter how indoctrinated their parents are!!!

6 Likes
19

deleted

20

It’s sad because it becomes about “achievement” at a young age - what if a kid fails to find the EC where they can excel? What about those kids who start this process at age 11 and then fail to gain acceptance to the Ivy of their choice? The whole thing reeks of molding kids into who we think they should be instead of who they want to be–as if any college admission result can make up for taking away our kids’ agency.

11 Likes