What are the top five or so things Ivies look for in
applicants for admission?
15 year old son, 4.0, Stuco president, active community
service, Homecoming prince, football, choir and additional clubs. First generation,
Caucasian, middle income.
*****************************************************************
What follows is my (somewhat edited) answer to this question that was orininally asked on Quora.com
If you read some of the hype in the media surrounding
admission into the Ivies, then here are 5 things you might read up on in answer
your question.
Private/Feeder School: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/13/making-harvard-feeder-schools/
Legacy: http://www.businessinsider.com/legacy-kids-have-an-admissions-advantage-2013-6,
http://www.salon.com/2013/09/09/the_1_percents_ivy_league_loophole/
Athlete: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/sports/before-athletic-recruiting-in-the-ivy-league-some-math.html
Early Action/Early Decision: http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2012/12/12/ivy-early-apps-soar/, http://today.duke.edu/node/137465
On the other hand, with the exception of just one of the
above, the 5 things above have little do, from what I can tell, with your
question.
If you think that I am saying the all the media hype is
wrong, I’m not. It’s just overblown (that’s why it’s hype) and does not address
what matters to the vast majority of students who apply to Ivies.
Let me try to address the 5 factors I’ve listed and put them
into a more accurate perspective.
Money: Is it true those really rich kids or the sons and
daughters of the Hollywood elite or even students who are part of the Hollywood
elite get special consideration in admission? Of course But to read the articles
out there it would seem that all the kids going to Ivies are billionaire kids.
They aren’t. The number of slots that go to the super rich because they are
super rich is very small. Tiny. But that doesn’t get headlines.
It is true however, that 45.6% of the students who go to
Harvard are in the top 4% of national income: in dollars = $200,000.
Let’s put this sum in a little perspective. A family of 4 making that
sum and living in NY metro area, Fairfax County, VA, Palo Alto, CA, Cherry
Creek, CO, and a whole bunch of other communities nationwide are not, by any
stretch, truly rich. Yes, there are far more secure as they likely have a mortgage,
steady and good employment. In addition they have access to great public schools, or if not,
then many send their kids to private schools. The tax rates in these communities are
high, so too the cost of living and if the families choose private schools then
there is very little disposable income for the families to save enough money
for the kids to go debt free to university when they come of age. The truth is
that if you are upper middle class and save money and have a house worth a fair
amount then you are out of luck when it comes to financial aid. Ivies cost,
including books etc. 60,000; therefore, for those families that can afford to pay, but are not millionaires, two kids going to school will pretty much leave many with few savings at the end of the education cycle. I am not trying to make
it out that these families have it nearly as tough as those at the bottom end,
but they also don’t have it as easy as the media seems to assume.
 |
| TJ High School is not a 'feeder" school to Harvard. Why? |
You say you are middle income. This covers a lot of
territory but if you are not in the 200,000 club you may be in luck. Some of
the ivies pay for everything to those who earn below this number. The Ivies
have made huge efforts to recruit low and middle come students. The problem is
that they do need to compete against those who tend to attend schools that are
great because they live in great neighborhoods. It isn’t just that the schools
are good; it’s also the culture within the schools. The students are competitive
and looking at top schools. The competition at these schools is, at time,
cutthroat and in one way prepares them for the deep pool of the most selective colleges
and universities.
One of the most common comments I’ve hard over the years
from parents: My son or daughter attends a great high school. If he or she went
to some rural school he/she would be valedictorian but in her
private/magnet/great suburban school she’s only in the top third”. My response
is not as warm and fuzzy as it could be: “to whom much is given much is expected”
(via JFK).
Here’s the thing. Students who attend a great school in which
virtually all the students attend college are going to be in a much more competitive
situation than a student who attends a rural school in North Dakota. A great
school might offer 30 or more different APs, have a strong college counseling
office and have a range of great schools that come to recruit students. The
atmosphere is geared toward success. It’s this atmosphere that can’t readily be
measured, but that is crucial for many people. Students are affected in the US
especially) by peers and being around avid learners and high flyers is both
more of a challenge and more of an opportunity. People tend to swim in the
waters they are in. A student who attends a school with very few students who
go to college will have to swim against the tide of low expectation on the part
of student, teachers, and administrators. For those who have the personal
strength to rise above the tide, then it may in fact be true that attending
such a school and being valedictorian would improve the chance of getting into
a great school. But the odds are against the school and the student.
If you look at the list of schools that comprise what are
call feeders to Harvard you will recognize the names of some of the best schools in the US. (I actually have an issue that they don’t take more students from the top
schools outside the US but that is a whole other issue.) But what you will also
notice is that some of the schools are close by the Harvard campus. This should
not come as a shock as Harvard exists as a community and not just a school. Most colleges and universities try to help the local people who may have some connection: the parents might be part of the faculty or staff, or the family may
run a business that helps students etc. Community relations come into play, as I think they should and not just for the Ivies. But
the more important point -- the numbers of students who come from all of
these schools actually comprise a low percentage of the incoming students.
And so too for legacies and athletes. The percentage let in
comprises a relatively small number of the entering class. And some of these
students are either 2 fers or 3 fers. In other words, they may attend one of the
feeder schools, they may be billionaire kids or they may be an early action kid
(there may be a few 4 fers in there too).
To sum up, the numbers of these specials (and there are a
few other special groups too, first generation and under-represented minorities
are two) don’t make up the majority of the student body. Not even close. That’s
the good news.
But the fact is these schools get huge numbers of
applications and all these special groups do take up spaces. So if your child
is not in this group, then they face dauntingly high rates of rejection. Most
of these schools turn down over 50% of the valedictories, lots of student
council presidents and football players etc.
In addition there are geographical considerations. A regular great kid
from the northeast is in a group with many many thousands of students. A great
kid from Montana, because schools like students from all over the US and the
world, will be given an edge.
And then there is the unspoken but documented (as far as I can tell) discrimination against Asians. It is way harder to get in to Ivies if a student is Asian. The data is pretty clear about this. (I’ve posted about this issue on several occasions).
The last thing on the list of 5 is early action/decision.
And this is one thing you should pay attention to. The schools have been
getting more and more early action aps in recent years (although Harvard fell
off a bit this year), because the stats show that the acceptance rate for those
students is higher than for those who apply during the regular decision
process. This data point then has created a feedback loop so that now more
people are applying early because it is perceived to be an edge in admission.
The feeling is that top students should apply somewhere early and given the
stats I’d have to agree. U Penn especially gives a big edge to early decision.
It’s less clear how different those academic stats are for early and regular at
some of the other schools.
It sounds like your son is a star but one without a specific
hook that might help in some dramatic or even small way. Given the under 10% acceptance rate of these schools it is
tough for anyone to get in. but subtract out the special groups and the
acceptance rate is likely to be closer to 1%. And for Asians and for those from
China especially the acceptance rate is likely lower than that (the schools
don’t release data on this for obvious reason).
Your son needs to continue to do what he has done and then
think about how he might make an impression on the school in some other ways. For example, a student I just talked to at Harvard is majoring in Classics..
In high school, he’d already completed 4 years of ancient Greek and was tops in
Latin too so he had an academic hook that almost no one else could match.
Just being a great well-rounded kid will get your son into
great schools. Whether the name belongs to a particular sports league is much
harder to predict, but his scores better be very high and he better be taking
the best courses and earning A's in APs. His first generation status will help
but it’s not nearly as big a factor as some of the ones I’ve listed above.
********************************************************************************
In response to my answer, the writer of the question followed up with a comment, which I then responded to:
Anonymous
This is a very helpful answer. Many thanks. He is young enough that he is just now finding his unique niche. I can't wait to share this advice. He needs to find his contribution and my advice, while sharing this, is to let him know he needs to open up and find that. What he loves and how to turn it into something that not only furthers his education but helps outward into the world.
That said, yes he is in a school district in the middle of Kansas that is highly rated. Yes, there are graduates that do well. Many AP courses, rigorous curriculum...he is at the top of his class, as you said. A star. I don't want to freak him out when it comes to college and university but I do know he is a candidate for other than state schools. We know he will do well wherever he goes. Therein the dilemma, do we challenge him to shoot for the stars?
Parke Muth
Your first paragraph indicates you are doing what a great parent should: encourage learning and finding his passion. Some students find a particular subject or area they love and some love the broad scope, but most top students fall somewhere in between.
An ivy admission guy once advised a group of counselors at a conference to encourage their students to be “themed”. By this he meant that a student should have things aligned. For example, a Classics kid takes Latin and Greek, does a dig in Sicily, elected to leadership positions at a national level in Latin activities, does on-line research on mummies and the Greek poems they used to wrap them with etc. etc. (my examples, not his).
The folks who charge huge sums to families to get kids into Ivies develop a full themed approach. In the few minutes an admission officer has to pitch to a committee (or just read the application) a themed approach like a good elevator pitch can ‘sell’ a kid to others: “Here’s our star Greek scholar”. I am not as judgemental as some seem to be about encouraging students to pursue, from an early age, a passion. We, as a culture, seem to think that paying for athletic camps and summer programs and lots else sports related is what a parent should do. I think this is fine, but I'd prefer more parents to think about doing the same in academic areas. Some parents do this But in what I see as an unfortunate irony, all too often admission people categorize special programs and study in foregn coutries etc, if they cost money, as one example of privilege rather than academic prowess. Manufacturing an interest and plugging a kid into it is another matter altogether, but I think encourging a passion with support, both economic and intellectual, should, to me, be regarded by highly selective admission offices.
The other point I should make-- I recently reviewed Gladwell’s David and Goliath.. I focus ostly on his chapter on education. He gives a story of a kid who goes Ivy and then regrets it. He cites data about the usefulness of being a big fish at a little pond to support his thesis that going to the most competive school that a one gets into is not always the best strategy.
For a number of years, I was in charge of selecting the honors scholars for the school I worked for. These kids sometimes turned down higher ranked schools (not all that often), mostly in order to save money. Statistically, these kids came in at the top and, more often than not, left at the top. For example, the business school at my old university is top 5, but students have to apply once they are enrolled. The honors kids make up about half of the kids they take (and most of the honors kids don’t even apply--the acceptance rate of the honors scholars far outpaces the rest of the student body. As almost all colleges, the honors kids get perks and sometimes money too. Colleges invest in their success. All my years in education have shown me that it’s better going to a good school and come out near the top than to go to a top ranked school and come out in the middle. Far too much emphasis is placed on the name of the school.
The kids I work with are now at Goldman, Stanford, Harvard, Google, etc. etc. They were star as undergrads and they stood out in the pool because they developed themselves fully as undergrads. Most people just can’t get their heads around ranking. Just read Gladwell’s now old piece on the US News rankings. Listen to recruiters and grad school deans. Your son is a star now and may be at any school, but the choice of school should be made because his stats predict he will continue to be on top.
Anonymous
Late here. Again, thank you for invaluable information. I read this to my son with my thinking (told you so) in the background. Anyway this helped back up my thought that he can go anywhere if he keeps on the same path. Doesn't have to be top tier. I used this to tell him that it is better to be top of your class than middle as you said, but mostly to accomplish something greater than you thought you could. A million thanks. This will be referred to many times.
********************************************************************************
In response to my answer, the writer of the question followed up with a comment, which I then responded to:
Anonymous
This is a very helpful answer. Many thanks. He is young enough that he is just now finding his unique niche. I can't wait to share this advice. He needs to find his contribution and my advice, while sharing this, is to let him know he needs to open up and find that. What he loves and how to turn it into something that not only furthers his education but helps outward into the world.
That said, yes he is in a school district in the middle of Kansas that is highly rated. Yes, there are graduates that do well. Many AP courses, rigorous curriculum...he is at the top of his class, as you said. A star. I don't want to freak him out when it comes to college and university but I do know he is a candidate for other than state schools. We know he will do well wherever he goes. Therein the dilemma, do we challenge him to shoot for the stars?
Parke Muth
Your first paragraph indicates you are doing what a great parent should: encourage learning and finding his passion. Some students find a particular subject or area they love and some love the broad scope, but most top students fall somewhere in between.
An ivy admission guy once advised a group of counselors at a conference to encourage their students to be “themed”. By this he meant that a student should have things aligned. For example, a Classics kid takes Latin and Greek, does a dig in Sicily, elected to leadership positions at a national level in Latin activities, does on-line research on mummies and the Greek poems they used to wrap them with etc. etc. (my examples, not his).
The folks who charge huge sums to families to get kids into Ivies develop a full themed approach. In the few minutes an admission officer has to pitch to a committee (or just read the application) a themed approach like a good elevator pitch can ‘sell’ a kid to others: “Here’s our star Greek scholar”. I am not as judgemental as some seem to be about encouraging students to pursue, from an early age, a passion. We, as a culture, seem to think that paying for athletic camps and summer programs and lots else sports related is what a parent should do. I think this is fine, but I'd prefer more parents to think about doing the same in academic areas. Some parents do this But in what I see as an unfortunate irony, all too often admission people categorize special programs and study in foregn coutries etc, if they cost money, as one example of privilege rather than academic prowess. Manufacturing an interest and plugging a kid into it is another matter altogether, but I think encourging a passion with support, both economic and intellectual, should, to me, be regarded by highly selective admission offices.
The other point I should make-- I recently reviewed Gladwell’s David and Goliath.. I focus ostly on his chapter on education. He gives a story of a kid who goes Ivy and then regrets it. He cites data about the usefulness of being a big fish at a little pond to support his thesis that going to the most competive school that a one gets into is not always the best strategy.
For a number of years, I was in charge of selecting the honors scholars for the school I worked for. These kids sometimes turned down higher ranked schools (not all that often), mostly in order to save money. Statistically, these kids came in at the top and, more often than not, left at the top. For example, the business school at my old university is top 5, but students have to apply once they are enrolled. The honors kids make up about half of the kids they take (and most of the honors kids don’t even apply--the acceptance rate of the honors scholars far outpaces the rest of the student body. As almost all colleges, the honors kids get perks and sometimes money too. Colleges invest in their success. All my years in education have shown me that it’s better going to a good school and come out near the top than to go to a top ranked school and come out in the middle. Far too much emphasis is placed on the name of the school.
The kids I work with are now at Goldman, Stanford, Harvard, Google, etc. etc. They were star as undergrads and they stood out in the pool because they developed themselves fully as undergrads. Most people just can’t get their heads around ranking. Just read Gladwell’s now old piece on the US News rankings. Listen to recruiters and grad school deans. Your son is a star now and may be at any school, but the choice of school should be made because his stats predict he will continue to be on top.
Anonymous
Late here. Again, thank you for invaluable information. I read this to my son with my thinking (told you so) in the background. Anyway this helped back up my thought that he can go anywhere if he keeps on the same path. Doesn't have to be top tier. I used this to tell him that it is better to be top of your class than middle as you said, but mostly to accomplish something greater than you thought you could. A million thanks. This will be referred to many times.
No comments:
Post a Comment