Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

First of a three part story that follows three New York City students (from very different backgrounds) from the spring of their junior year to spring of their senior year (2001-2002).

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/05/education/05COLL.html (The New York Times requires registration to read their stories, but it's free.)

This promises to be an interesting read. I'll post the subsequent links for the next two parts when they're published.

Comments, anyone? I was struck in this first part by the fact that Jed's counselor discouraged others in his class from applying ED to Yale because he felt Jed would be a good fit and would do better if he weren't competing with anyone else from his school (counselors DO play favorites? or is this something different?). One wonders how those classmates and their parents are reacting upon reading about this now.

By amd on Sunday, May 05, 2002 - 08:22 pm: Edit

Thanks for posting this Anon Mom. I posted a few to this board but forgot to press Post this Message when it showed me the preview. (Roger: As you may remember, this has gotten me multiple times.)

By collegemom aka Anon Mom on Monday, May 06, 2002 - 07:16 am: Edit

Here's Part 2:
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/06/nyregion/06COLL.html

(amd, I know what you mean. I think that preview/post thing has gotten me once or twice in the past, and I've caught myself several times recently almost forgetting to hit post.)

By Rhonda on Monday, May 06, 2002 - 08:27 am: Edit

STruck by a couple of things. First, what college mom said, that the counselor dissuaded other students from applying ED to Yale to give Jed the best advantage (and then he gets deferred!). In that school, I wonder if parents of those "dissuaded" kids are thinking lawsuit!! Second, I'm a little turned off by Jed's family -- a trip to Rome right before the 12/31 deadline? trying to lobby a Yale alum who lives in the neighborhood? Vassar's not good enough for their kid? I'm waiting to see how this all turned out...

By Rhonda on Monday, May 06, 2002 - 08:30 am: Edit

Oh, one more thing -- Jed's GC seemed to emphasize the difference btwn a 1490 and a 1500, based on the US News ranking system process. Made me think a bit -- my kid has a 1480 and is not inclined to retake. Based on the brutal curve on the math section, and his tendency to make careless errors in math, I'm not pushing a re-take. Also somewhat concerned about the randomness of the Verbal score -- his was very high, but one weird reading comp passage and it could go down next time! He's a URM, interested in Brown/ Wes/ maybe Yale. Any thoughts?

By Reader on Monday, May 06, 2002 - 09:17 am: Edit

I am rooting for Reuben but after seeing his SAT scores, doesn't he need more safeties? I can't remember if the article mentioned his grades. I realize he is poor and a minority, but I thought Cardinal Hayes is a highly respected school (Regis went there, fwiw). If so, he had the benefit of a top flight high school education. Doesn't this undermine playing the disadvantaged card? I don't mean to be racist, just wonder how this seeming hook plays out. IOW, does 4 years at Andover offset a disadvantaged background to some extent?

I don't think SATs are infallable but I wonder how low you can score and still succeed at such a supposedly hard major as engineering. I wish him luck.

By Reader on Monday, May 06, 2002 - 09:21 am: Edit

P.S. I was also struck by the way his guidance counselor discouraged other kids from applying to Yale ED for Jed's sake. I would love to know what the fallout was, if any. If I were a parent paying NY private school prices, I'd be furious.

By Theparents (Theparents) on Monday, May 06, 2002 - 09:23 am: Edit

I have heard stories from friends in NYC about their domineering college counselors, looking after the reputation of the private school rather than the best interests of the applicant. They encourage students to apply to certain schools because it would be good publicity for the h.s.

By Reader on Monday, May 06, 2002 - 10:34 am: Edit

It's not surprising that GCs might act in furtherance of their schools' best interest, especially when it seems to be in the child's best interest, too, like encouraging them to apply to schools with good reputations. Like checks and balances, it's the parents' responsibility to confirm that the GC's proposals really are in their child's best interest. In this case, however, the GC was acting in a way that benefited one child at the expense of others who were also under his or her charge. That kind of blatant favoritism is unanticipated and unreasonable.

Rhonda, I was also surprised by the 1490/1500 comment, I thought the difference was more psychological than anything else. I've seen 1480/1490 accepted but I've also heard of 1500s re-taking to shore up their chances. It's a very hard call, one I would leave to the student. I think that the URM status will help. It's hard to imagine those schools thinking twice about a student with 1480.

By Rhonda on Monday, May 06, 2002 - 01:13 pm: Edit

Update -- there is a discussion on the NYT website on this series of articles. First, Jed's GC strongly denies having discouraged other students from applying to Yale ED. Second, someone raises the issue of whether going from a 1490 to 1500 on the SAT really matters (saying that in the US News methodology it's not particularly important).

By collegemom aka Anon Mom on Monday, May 06, 2002 - 08:01 pm: Edit

Re the Collegiate School counselor (I had the same initial reaction that everyone else had) visit this link. He has a couple of posts here defending himself. He makes a credible argument that the reporter misrepresented what happened (and he also sent her a strongly worded e-mail last night after reading the story).

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?50@@.f2b0c3c

By Reader on Monday, May 06, 2002 - 10:25 pm: Edit

And you had that initial reaction first, collegemom! Thank you both for pointing to developments into what is turning into a very interesting subtext.

The counselor had his hands full of messages and answered them with grace. If anyone has the hard copy with the promised corrections, please post if the author replies with any explanation for the discrepancy between her account and the counselor's.

One thing that's important to keep in mind is that the 3 students followed by the writer are examples but are not necessarily representative of applicants to or from a given school.

By collegemom aka Anon Mom on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 06:23 am: Edit

Part 3: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/07/nyregion/07COLL.html

By Rhonda on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 08:00 am: Edit

Dave Berry -- as the expert here, do you have any thoughts on the counselor's statement that there is an exponential difference (i.e. benefit) to having a 1500 compared to a 1490? Thx

By Dad in Chicago on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 09:09 am: Edit

Interesting that the guidance counselor from Collegiate makes calls to the admissions committees and sways their decision making in the middle of the process. I thought this was illegal. Basically, he's negotiating deals for his students in a smoke filled room. If this is acceptable, why don't all guidance counselors do this? I think this is totally surprising!

By Dave Berry on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 11:20 am: Edit

In my view, Rhonda, the difference is purely psychological, not exponentially quantitative. It's kind of like the old K-Mart $9.88 price point. That sounds somewhat significantly less than $10.00. Same thing with a 1500 SAT. Honestly, now, does that counselor really believe that an admissions officer is going to be that much more impressed with one applicant's 1500 compared to another's 1490 (all other credentials being relatively equal)? Really? Come on. Who is he trying to fool? Today's 1490 is tomorrow's 1520 (or 1470), depending on the test version and the ambiguity level of ETS's questions (oops, I guess I let my anti-ETS sentiment slip there, didn't I?)

Another analogy is that of batting .400 in baseball. A .399 probably won't be remembered, but Ted Williams' effort will be. It's a psychological edge, not a statistical or purely quantitative edge. That's what my beloved profile marketing theory is all about. Bottom line from this corner: Give me the kid with the 1490 and strong essays any day.

By Reader on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 12:21 pm: Edit

Does anyone have a link to the correction /retraction? The counselor seemed satisfied with it.

Dad in Chicago, I was also surprised about the communications between counselor and colleges. I realize it's desirable for a GC to develop an on-going relationship with colleges based on trust but I had trouble imagining how these conversations actually play out where GC leaks student's lack of interest or intention to enroll.

I was thrilled for Reuben and hope to see a follow-up. I couldn't muster much interest for the girl, it was hard for me to care about her when she didn't seem to care that much herself. I didn't understand why she changed her mind about Fordham.

By Rhonda on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 12:24 pm: Edit

Thanks, Dave, that's reassuring to someone who's kid got a 1480 and wouldn't retake even if I insisted!! I noticed a post on the NYT discussion on this series that disputed the counselor's claim about the impact of US News rankings -- the counselor said US News uses increments of 100 pts in SAT scores, so a 1500 is exponentially better than a 1490. The post pointed out that the Common Data Set, which US NEws uses, groups together scores from math and verbal separately, in 100 pt increments, so that a kid w/1490 would be in the same group as a 1500 kid, assuming both composite scores consist of separate scores above 700. In Jed's case, his improvement from a 680 verbal to something like a 740 verbal was probably beneficial, to my kid going from a 720 Math to a 740 math probably wouldn't matter. HOwever, the counselor (briemer?) didn't respond to this post. Perhaps he doesn't want to admit his mistake??

By Rhonda on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 12:26 pm: Edit

To Reader -- my impression was that the counselor only leaks out lack of interest if that's the kid's safety school AND the kid has gotten into a higher choice. It seemed like the idea was to give the counselor credibility -- he's doing his part to help the colleges' yields by telling them this kid isn't interested and won't attend b/c he's gotten into another college he'd rather go to. Seems sort of like he's trying to build and maintain a good relationship with the adcoms by helping them out, not sure what other purpose it would serve.

By devon on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 12:46 pm: Edit

I think it is outrageous that the counselor (Breimer) and the colleges are basically colluding on getting these kids into these elite colleges. He gives them the inside info to improve their yields and they reward him by giving his kids an edge when he makes a pitch for them. Where does this leave all the other kids who have as solid a record as his, but don't have the counselor bargaining power to back them up? This is patently unfair to kids whose parents are unaware and unable to place their kids in a school where such collusion takes place.

By Rhonda on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 01:13 pm: Edit

Devon, I completely agree. While in theory any counselor could call the adcoms, a counselor at a large public school is going to have trouble doing that b/c of sheer workload -- even to select the most qualified students to lobby for would be a large group at many good public schools!! It would be nice if the schools adopted a policy of refusing to talk to a counselor about a kid's chances unless a decision has been made. You're absolutely right about the mutual back-scratching aspect here.

By Reader on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 01:30 pm: Edit

Rhonda, ivy league decisions are released on the same date, usually later than other schools, so since we're talking about the race for elite schools, there's a good chance that the applicant hasn't yet heard from colleges higher on his list. IOW, it sounds as if a counselor wouldn't be in a position to leak to ivy league type schools the candidate's intent to go elsewhere. Think of a timeline with the most competitive schools towards the end. Exceptions to this are possible, of course, but most likely occurs when the student uses ivy as a back up, which isn't common.

By Rhonda on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 02:08 pm: Edit

Reader, I understand what you're saying, and I also thought the ivies had agreed on a date before which they wouldn't send out decisions. To some extent they've bypassed this through the "likely letters" that go out as early as Feb. Also, it sounds like they may be giving some counselors early indication of how they're leaning on a particular candidate. So the following could happen -- on March 28, Yale tells Mr. Counselor that Top Student is going to be admitted. So Mr. C calls Brown and tells them that TS isn't going to accept Brown if admitted. So Brown doesn't admit him, thus helping its yield. Don't know that this actually happens, the article wasn't this explicit, but it certainly sounded like a possibility.

By Reader on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 02:34 pm: Edit

Now I see what you mean. But with such selective schools, it sounds like playing Russian roulette and denies the student room to change his mind even though he applied RD and theoretically wasn't supposed to be bound. It's hard to believe that this actually happens although, like you, I got the impression that the counselor may be tipped off to an impending decision. The part that troubles me is that the GC would reveal information to the college that the student might have reasonably assumed was confidential.

By Dad in Chicago on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 05:40 pm: Edit

To Reader and Rhonda:
Yes, this is the troubling aspect, that a kid's future is being determined on the sly. Suppose he changes his mind? I understand what both sides are getting here, and its not bad for either that it does happen: fine for outside kids who might now get an acceptance, not bad for the index kid if that's really the choice and fine for the college's rep. The problem is for everyone else who doesn't have the opportunity of being pushed by a counselor who is this connected. What else can he influence? That's the bugaboo here.

By Reader on Tuesday, May 07, 2002 - 07:30 pm: Edit

I don't see the victims as the unconnected competitors as much as the applicants who may become locked into decisions through conversations unbeknownst to them.

By Rhonda on Monday, May 13, 2002 - 08:28 am: Edit

Update -- there is a message on the discussion board that the NYT set up last week, from a student who says he graduated from Collegiate (Jed's HS) in 1978, was on finaid there, and accuses the counselor (same one Jed has) of doing exactly what the counselor insists he doesn't do -- dissuading him from applying to Princeton and other comparable schools -- even suggesting the counselor graded him as "not recommended" to Princeton while "recommending" other kids with lower SAT scores and lower GPAs but wealthy parents. He claims to have had a 1410 SAT score (pretty high pre-recentering, and well above the class avg that year) and a GPA of A-. Interesting ... no response from the counselor, but this person's post sounds very plausible, not made up.

By Dadster on Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 11:20 pm: Edit

To me, that counselor sounds WAY too manipulative. The article mentions that he dissuaded other ED applicants to Yale to leave a clear field for Jed. That shouldn't be his decision to make!

I wouldn't make that decision for my own kid, and I certainly wouldn't want some counselor making it for my kid either! I get the impression he treats the admissions process as a chess game, and the students are his pieces on the board...

By Reader on Wednesday, May 15, 2002 - 12:05 pm: Edit

<<The article mentions that he dissuaded other ED applicants to Yale to leave a clear field for Jed.

According to the NYT website, that was refuted and a retraction or correction was published.

By Rhonda on Wednesday, May 15, 2002 - 12:20 pm: Edit

And then according to a collegiate alum, Briemer's refutation (is that a word?) was less-than-completely-honest. See my post of May 13 above. Seems to come down to who you gonna believe?

By FGFCAFY on Saturday, May 25, 2002 - 09:16 pm: Edit

That was a really interesting story... Jed's story makes me wonder just how in the world I got into Yale. Compared to the kid, my "extensive" (or so I thought) participation in theater is rather flimsy. I go to an average public school. Last time we sent anyone to Yale was 8 years ago. My counselor, although very enthusiastic about college admissions process, does not have time and connection to have private talks with the adcoms. It's almost funny, however, how Jed and I share so many same "stats." We both have same SAT scores, we are both interested in theater, we are both lyric tenors, and we both sent recordings. The only differences were: I applied as biomedical engineering major (my prime interes is still in the science area), and I came to the US about 5 years ago (asian immigrant).

By FGFCAFY on Saturday, May 25, 2002 - 09:17 pm: Edit

Oh, and I was waitlisted at Brown, which was my first (feasible) choice.

By California Mom (Calmom) on Tuesday, May 28, 2002 - 06:25 am: Edit

I'll bet it was the combination of strong math/science interest and aptitude along with talent in music and theatre that made your application stand out.

Jed perhaps looked like "just another theater major".. whereas you have the kind of combination of interests and abilities that defies stereotypes.