Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

Those who got into top colleges, can you please give advice to my (and other) soon to be high school freshmen? Which of your activities made you stand out? Why did you get accepted when so many qualified kids didn't?

By Thedad (Thedad) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 01:21 am: Edit

For most, the most honest answer will include some luck. I've heard admissions officers from Yale, Harvard, etc. say that they could fill out their classes 3-4 times over with completely different appplicants and have no discernable aggregate difference in the total class.

(My D whiffed on HYS, got into three top LAC's.)

A couple of pieces of advice when evaluating your student's chances:

1. The admissions odds aren't as good as they seem. From the total number of students admitted, subtract out the athletes, legacies, and URM's. (If your D/S is in one of these categories, mazeltov...but even then it's not decisive, it just ups your odds by a factor of 2-3.) These "hooks" can comprise as much as half the class.

2. If you have the stats of the average admittee, you have a far less than average chance of getting in, for a number of reasons, including the natural skew in the application pool.

3. Trying to guess what special talents or EC's an adcom is looking for is a fool's game: one year it may be a bassoonist and a sculpture, the next year an opera singer and amateur rocketry enthusiast.

That said, in general, a few activities in depth seem to do better than a laundry list less fully developed. (Note: my D had 20-23 hours a week on *one* activity...and this didn't work for her. But who knows what other factors came into play.)

Finally, I'd get a hold of Harry Bauld's book on writing college essays and avoid all the mistakes he lists with respect to selection of topic.

By Kk19131 (Kk19131) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 03:15 am: Edit

Work your a#$ off!

By Kimfuge (Kimfuge) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 05:12 am: Edit

Thedad, which LAC's was your D admitted to?

By Thewestsasleep1 (Thewestsasleep1) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 12:16 pm: Edit

1. Do what you want to do, and do it well. Don't try to do a whole bunch of activities that you think would look good. Focus on what you like, and achieve recognition in the fields/subjects that you are passionate about and that you like.

2. Be proactive. If you feel your school/environment doesn't offer you any opportunities for things like research, advanced study, etc., create these opportunities. I come from a small school in a rural area. By the time I got to HS, none of the math courses offered by my HS were suitable for me-- so I got my school to start a dual enrollment program (that took some time, but as I got more parents and students involved, it took off), and took all my math classes at the local CC. My school doesn't offer any research opportunities, either, so I asked around the CC and made trips to my state university. That eventually paid off, as I had an amazing research experience working with a physics professor at the State U. Don't take no for an answer-- work for what you want.

3. Understand that the SAT scores are a sort of a cut-off. No one will care if you got a 1520 or a 1540 if the cut-off at a certain college is 1500. In this case, you won't get some special bonus for scoring 1540-- it won't really matter. Don't obsess about your scores-- there are so many other aspects of your resume that can be so much more influencial.

4. Know that there will be other people who will get extra points which they haven't really worked for-- URM's, legacies, etc. It's not fair, it shouldn't happen, but it does. Don't waste your time getting angry over it, even though it can be frustrating as hell. Focus on your own resume and your own achievements.

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 12:22 pm: Edit

My D is a legacy at 2 top 10 schools. 3 if her father's graduate institution counts. Will her classmates hate her?

By Zevdebee (Zevdebee) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 01:24 pm: Edit

yes

By Theguac (Theguac) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 01:30 pm: Edit

What are the top 10 schools?

By Bellevueteen (Bellevueteen) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 01:40 pm: Edit

Visit every school you go to BEFORE the interview. Or else, at least read up on them.

By 08pride (08pride) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 02:09 pm: Edit

Mom 101 writes:
"Those who got into top colleges, can you please give advice to my (and other) soon to be high school freshmen? Which of your activities made you stand out? Why did you get accepted when so many qualified kids didn't?"

Geez, I'm glad my parents weren't like this...

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 02:15 pm: Edit

'08 pride, so where will you be going to college?

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 03:06 pm: Edit

It will be unbelievably hard to get into top schools for the next 8-10 years. This is a really bad luck blip for these babyboomlet kids like mine. Kids whose extended family have gone to top schools for generations are breaking the trend. I am well aware there are bigger problems on the planet, but this really shakes the self esteem of these kids. My D will be going to a high school where the majority of kids are top school legacies, development candidates or highly qualified minorities. They were already chosen by ivy league standards. Yet they can't all go to top colleges. Am I wrong to help her understand what it will take to get into the schools we went to and she has seen as "college" all of her life?

By 08pride (08pride) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 03:17 pm: Edit

"'08 pride, so where will you be going to college?"

Stanford

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 03:28 pm: Edit

Why did they take you? When my D was accepted at Andover, and even though she didn't choose the school, I was impressed that a personalized acceptance letter told her what they saw in her. Do any colleges do this?

By 08pride (08pride) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 03:40 pm: Edit

"Am I wrong to help her understand what it will take to get into the schools we went to and she has seen as "college" all of her life?"

You're the parent, and you can do whatever you want with your child. But it just scares me when I see parents who are more concerned about colleges than their kids are. When I visited Princeton, I saw a Japanese family with two kids who couldn't have been older than 6. They were asking admissions officers what their kids needed to do to get into Princeton in 11 years.

But my point is, shouldn't you let your children do what makes them happy, instead of what will just get them into a top college? Shouldn't you just let your children be themselves? I didn't even start thinking about college until the beginning of Junior Year, and everything still worked out. Every club that I joined was joined because I wanted to join it. Every team that I joined was joined because I wanted to be on it. My parents had no say in those matters whatsoever.

I understand that there's a baby boom, and that it will become increasingly harder to gain admissions into top colleges. But if you push your children from freshman year, don't you think that they might get burnt out by the time Junior Year roles around? My advice, coming from a student who gained admission into top schools, is to let them alone, but still guide them. Let them choose which clubs they want to be in based on what interests them. If they get a couple of low grades, don't think its the end of the world. Just tell them to study harder next time, and be firm about it. But most of all, let them enjoy high-school, because it only happens once. And remember, HYPS aren't the only options out there.

By Mical (Mical) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 03:40 pm: Edit

This is just from my experience.

Just find a passion and stick with it. Because I really liked math, I ended up liking physics and computer science. I excelled in these classes and did well in other classes, and this was good enough to get me a good ranking (top 1%). Once I exhausted all the classes at my school, I did a mixture of independent study and college courses. My teachers also encouraged me to continue studying so I developed really good relations with them. For extracurriculars, I joined the math club, the science club, and the robotics club, and I did well in these clubs because I cared about them. For the essays, I wrote about my passions, how they came about, and how they've influenced my life.

I really didn't do much work in high school because I enjoyed everything I did and didn't consider it "work". My parents didn't force anything on me (besides studying for the SATs) and were quite hands-off.

By Theguac (Theguac) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 03:51 pm: Edit

I don't think you necessarily HAVE to go to a top school to do great in life. Today's notion that if you don't go to an Ivy League school or its equivalents you will not succeed is, as I like to say, ridiculous. While I attend a top 10 school, I had other reasons to matriculate there rather than simply for the prestige. There are many excellent institutions out there that are less-known and are not a part of the Ivies.

I know every parent wants his children to attend a prestigious university, but as Mom101 said, it is becoming harder, and I'm sure as the number of applicants rise, so too will the level of academics at all the universities. It is up to your child to do as much as he can if he really wants to make a top 10. You can't expect him to lag behind at that high school and still get in even to the top 25. We can't really tell your child what to do because he is his own person, and consequently, he has his own likes and dislikes.

You know he needs HIGH SAT's (1450+) and SAT II's above 750, but that is definitely not everything. Legacy admissions are also becoming less prominent among the best schools because they are also now looking at qualifications. Being a legacy no longer means you are a shoe-in.

I would tell your children that if they want to make a top 10 school (even if it is not a necessary feat to get into a great grad school), they will have to find a passion and stick with it and excel in it. If they cannot find something they are interested in or if they are not good in, then even today, their chances are not to their favor at many top schools.

I admire your persistance, but I truly believe it is not the prestige that really matters, but rather, what you do with your time at a university that will get you into a good grad school. The name is only a small factor.

By Theguac (Theguac) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 03:55 pm: Edit

Well said 08pride =).

Everyone I know who did activities just to make it to college got rejected from almost every school they applied to, except to their lowest safeties.

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 03:59 pm: Edit

If my kid wanted to be laid back I would support her. But she has wanted to go to Princeton since she first saw it (a school she's not a legacy at). She drove the process to go to a top boarding school--something that would not have been my choice. I'm not suggesting clubs or activities, just letting her see what commitments kids who have succeeded in the way she wants to have made. You need to know your child and provide guidance accordingly. I wish it were true that most children can not have a strategy and things simply fall into place, but I simply don't believe that's true for most. The prep school application process taught me a lesson. When my D decided on pursuing admission just before 8th grade, and we investigated, we saw she would be competing with kids who have been planning and preparing to apply all of their lives. It is a game and each gets to decide if they want to play. Congrats on Stanford 08, I'm a neighbor.

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 04:45 pm: Edit

And how will she deal with a Princeton rejection? I think it is not wise to try to point to only one school and at such an early age too. The psychologic damage could be enormous. The college admission process is an abomination and the littered wreck of children's souls is an atrocity. Good luck to you. I do not envy your household next April 1.

By Theguac (Theguac) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 05:13 pm: Edit

I think what Twojaw is trying to say is that it is ok to dream but to dwell on that dream could lead to problems if for some reason the dream does not come to fruition. College admissions has become random over the years and no one can ever say that one will be admitted to ANY of the top 10's. People can be academic superstars but if the school does not want those kinds of superstars in their student body, then they will be denied.

I'm assuming you came from Berkeley? It is definitely a GREAT university and I would urge your daughter to take that place seriously as well.

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 05:17 pm: Edit

In no way am I supporting Princeton or any one school. I do, however, think it is important for kids to understand what it takes to get into different schools. My 14 yo can handle reality and she wants to know. I am also not going to dash my child's dreams--if this is what she wants she should go for it. Actually what I'm trying to do is make sure she knows how difficult and random the process is so that a rejection won't damage her self esteem any more than it has to. This approach is not for every kid, but for one like mine that is gifted and academically driven, it is appropriate.

By Alpinesun (Alpinesun) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 06:09 pm: Edit

imo.. your "D" should be on this board asking the questions..

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 06:19 pm: Edit

We're partners. She's volunteering 50 hours a week this month. Don't worry, I give input but she actually chooses her own activities and does her own work unlike many of her peers whose parents drill them on the way to school and edit their papers.

By Thedad (Thedad) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 06:36 pm: Edit

And for some it's a shared process. It's fine.
08Pride, freshman year is not too early to be scoping out the system. The number of parents/students who begin to get engaged in senior year only to find the time for making most critical decisions passed is fairly large.

In fact, there are aspects and implications of course selection that I think the parents should be aware of in middle school. I don't think the students necessarily should be worrying about that stuff then because I think there's too much friggin' pressure already.

All the admissions-related pressure and info doesn't matter that much if you're not applying to somewhere around the most selective 70-100 schools in any event. But if a student is or will be applying to those schools, it behooves them that *someone* in the family is gathering the data on process.

Alpinesun, my D has read this board and is grateful that I took the time to wade through all the b.s. to find the useful nuggets. With 20+ hours of EC's a week and homework routinely past midnight, it wasn't a good allocation of time for her and that was her choice. Like Mom101's D, she made the decisions.

By Thedad (Thedad) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 06:39 pm: Edit

Kimfuge: Wellesley (Early Evaluation), Smith (STRIDE Scholar), and Barnard. She chose Smith.

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 06:47 pm: Edit

Thank you Thedad, I couldn't articulate it as well as you did. Smart parents have been guiding their kids' educations from the very start. We have to make the decisions until they are fully capable and then step back and just help guide them. I feel lucky to be in the stand back mode with a 14 yo, but it is the result of guiding her into the best schools and activities to spur a life long interest in learning. I know many educated, affluent families who get the shock of their life senior year because they didn't get involved and didn't understand today's realities.

By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 08:43 pm: Edit

Mom101~

There is a huge difference between
scoping" things out, help build the adequate curriculum in middle and high school, gathering information about colleges and financial issues and ... trying to model your child through a series of "successful activities". Astute readers of this board did not fail to understand the question in your original post.

As far as your question, I could summarize it in short four sentences:

1. Graduate in the top 1% of your class
2. Earn tests scores in the top 1% of the country
3. Be one of the special cases TheDad mentioned
4. If your D has not defined her "special activities" that shine brightly, it is probably too late. You can't fabricate it in the next two years.

We have had many threads as to what defines a passion. In my eyes, you can toss out everything that starts with "member of ... fill the blanks" as well as the vast majority of "kiddies volunteer work", especially at hospitals and the like. Despite being VERY beneficial and commendable activities, they have little bearing in admission to elite schools because EVERYONE has them. My test: if you can write an essay of 500 words on your passion and you would be comfortable to substitute this essay for your ENTIRE application, then your EC is a true passion. Also, if you seem to run out of place on your college app to list activities, you probably failed the test as well.

You are correct that many families are quite oblivious to the realities of the admission process. Most of them prefer NOT to hear the truth. Others believe that it is a system that they can continue to "game" in the same way as they did for kindergarten and lower schools.

By Scm007 (Scm007) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 08:55 pm: Edit

Hmmm. My mom went to Cornell and my grandfather went to Cal Tech. Would this help at all?

By Excusememixed (Excusememixed) on Sunday, June 20, 2004 - 09:18 pm: Edit

Strange...

By Foreignboy (Foreignboy) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 01:07 am: Edit

"My mom went to Cornell and my grandfather went to Cal Tech. Would this help at all?"

Yes.

As for the whole parents and college admissions business, I think it's good that parents are getting involved in their kids' education. The question is, where the line should be drawn.

As far as preparing kids for college, getting them to join activities, and to do well in school, parents should play an important part, and give them lots of encouragement.

Researching colleges and handling applications should be the kids' job. If they were brought up and prepared sufficiently by their parents, they should be mature enough to handle it by themselves. IMO, being too busy to research college is not a good excuse. After all, if someone is smart enough to be in the top 5% of their class while having truckloads of ECs, college admissions should be nothing right?

By Kishi (Kishi) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 07:59 am: Edit

Mom101, I would not be so worried. Your daughter is going to Andover, after all, and she does have an intense desire to attend Princeton. With these two things going for her, plus the knowledge she has or will gain of the necessities, such as good grades/scores and dedication to activities, only her natural ability would limit her. If she excels at a school like Andover, she will get in. If she doesn't excel even with her desire, there's not much else you can do.

By Dsh (Dsh) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 08:37 am: Edit

First of all, I detect no worry in Mom101's posts, and I'm rather annoyed at all this finger wagging and negative talk she got in response to a perfectly polite and reasonable question. Good parents guide their children and help them realize their dreams and their potential. It seems to me that's exactly what Mom101 is trying to do, and it's what I'm trying to do in reading this topic. Good parents don't just let kids proceed in ignorance on to sure failure. And good parents don't just shrug and let their kids flop if their kids prefer to study, volunteer, or just go out and play than surf the net gleaning clues for college admissions. Kids have a right to expect help, knowledge, and wisdom from their parents.

That said, my son this year was 0-2 at legacy Ivies. Don't count too much on legacy status.

My son and I belong in the category of people who thought we knew what competitive admission took and didn't. So now I'm trying to learn all I can for my next child's process. My older son was an excellent candidate, but we didn't realize he needed to emphasize a hook.

By Irishbird (Irishbird) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 11:29 am: Edit

By all means encourage her to plan for possible acceptance at an Ivy(Princeton) by working to her highest potential(academically & in other areas) while at Andover. But also investigate & point out other fine colleges/universities that will serve her well if she should receive a WL or a rejection from Princeton.
I think other posters are trying to shy away from saying what "worked for them" in being admitted because
a) they may not completely know;
and b) it may have been so pertinent to them as individuals & to "this moment in time" as opposed to being something that could work for your particular student three yrs from now.

By Sokkermom (Sokkermom) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 12:30 pm: Edit

I think even if a student excels at Andover, it is no guarantee that they will get in to Princeton. According to this web site, only 7 students will be matriculating to Princeton this year from Andover. (This does not tell us how many applied and were accepted.) I believe this was out of a class of 266.


http://www.andover.edu/cco/matrics.htm

By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 12:52 pm: Edit

It is a game and each gets to decide if they want to play.

That lines says it all!

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 01:21 pm: Edit

On the subject of pushing children to succeed at the highest level, please reference this article.

http://www.mit.edu/afs/sipb/user/jhawk/www/tmp/28MIT.html

By Achat (Achat) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 02:10 pm: Edit

I've always been haunted by Elizabeth Shin's story. Very pathetic! It came out in a NY Times Sunday magazine.

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 02:43 pm: Edit

Obviously it is a multifaceted, multifactorial story. But as long as there are certain societal, familial, individual pressures to achieve what is deemed success, then there will certainly be more Elizabeth Shins. Clearly she did not belong at MIT, but couldn't or wouldn't admit it. Because why? Because we value "success" over "failure"? Are children denied their childhood because they must "succeed"? Does HYPSM solely define "success"? And at what cost?

By 2bad4u (2bad4u) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 03:28 pm: Edit

The parents pushed her too hard and ignored all her signs. Reminds me of dead poets society.

By 2bad4u (2bad4u) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 05:41 pm: Edit

I always thought if you struggled (all-nighters in high school)to get into a top school, you don't belong there and that leads to events like Shin's, also hard for someone to go frome being a big fish in a small pond to a small fish in the ocean

By Thedad (Thedad) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 07:57 pm: Edit

The fish/pond thing is something that bears examination...and there is no "right" answer, or at least the "right" answer will vary from student to student according to temperament.

I confess, as someone who reflexively analyzes lots of things...I'd probably be making mental notes as I was standing in front of a firing squad...while I'm very happy with my D's choice of college, one of the two things I have some misgivings about is the fish/pond issue in that I think it may be a smaller pond that would otherwise draw the most out of her over four years. However, the bigger ponds she applied to either did not accept her and/or were not nearly as good fits in other dimensions. And so it goes.
Perfect fits are probably fairly rare.

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 09:44 pm: Edit

MIT was crossed off the list of colleges I'm willing to pay for when I originally heard this story. A close reading shows a problem in the school's culture and a problem with her family's expectations.

By Acennace (Acennace) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 09:53 pm: Edit

UVA: An essay about my passion of building car models.
UW-Madison: An essay about my experience of being a tribal dancer and a martial arts fan in the same time.

My GPA and test scores are good, but in no way excellent.

By Smhop (Smhop) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 10:26 pm: Edit

quote: the dad: 3. Trying to guess what special talents or EC's an adcom is looking for is a fool's game: one year it may be a bassoonist and a sculpture, the next year an opera singer and amateur rocketry enthusiast.

HAHAHA, I think all schools want bassoonists every year since that is the most popular example cited on here, and on such a regular basis.

So: any parent who pushes thier kid into bassoon playing is probably assured of top 10 admissions later. ;)

By Smhop (Smhop) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 10:33 pm: Edit

mom101: did you go to a top school? What are you doing with your life today? Working or at home with kids? If you work, are you in the top of your field? If yes, is that what you wat for your D... if no, does it really matter that you arent?

The point I am making is that top schools is not the be all and end all of existance. People can be successful (read: happy) in life regardless of where they went to college & how they did. This is especialy true for women. Ivy League does NOT gaurantee a space on the supreme court, a CEO-ship, or whatnot. As far as other successful careers, you can reach the top of any field through hard work and dedication-- and even a mediocre college (which your daughter will surely not go to after andover, she is bound to get into somewhere "good") can lead to a great graduate school.

Good luck... but meanwhile encourage your daughter to be a child. We should not encourage our children to "gear up for adulthood"' before they have even had a chance to be kids.

The competion, the drive, all that: not healthy in my opinion.

By Excusememixed (Excusememixed) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 10:36 pm: Edit

This is really cliche', but to high school freshmen, follow your heart and what you desire. You don't want to be 35, in a field, that you hate, just because people around you told you it was the "right" thing to do. Enjoy your high school years, but get the work done first. Don't assume anything with college admissions. Just let it be.

By Kousuke (Kousuke) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 10:38 pm: Edit

"I always thought if you struggled (all-nighters in high school)to get into a top school, you don't belong there and that leads to events like Shin's, also hard for someone to go frome being a big fish in a small pond to a small fish in the ocean"

i completely agree. its not going to get any easier once they get into college. its going to get worse if they get into those select colleges that they work so hard to get into! why kill your self working to end up have the workload kill you?...i dont think that made any sense but its ok.

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 11:47 pm: Edit

smhop, yes, I went to an ivy as did my husband, my brother, my husband's siblings.....All of us have done very well in terms of careers we enjoy and conventional success trapings. I grew up with nothing and landed in the ivy league almost by accident. It certainly changed my life. My D, on the other hand, grew up thinking of top schools as where she inevitably would go. It's her bad luck to be coming of age at the hardest time in history to gain admissions. Of course it's not the be all and end all--my point in starting this thread was to get practical advice as to what a child who wants to go for the top needs to consider. If an ivy education was important to us, my D would be attending our local CA public high school (where few apply to top schools other than Stanford) instead of a NE prep where she will be competeing against all of her classmates at every school she applies to.

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 12:10 am: Edit

MIT is not the only school that has had mental health problems with their students. Yale Daily News had a four part series on the number of students using their Mental hygiene department (the number was roughly 1/3 of their student body in any one year). The story of Elizabeth Shin is not necesarrily that she couldn't hack at MIT, but she could not tell anyone that she didn't like it there. That she was pushed into a mindset that HYPSM was the ultimate route to any success in life and couldn't back out of it. This happens at all of the HYPSM. The Yale article talked about a freshman who cried every night her first semester when she was in Directed Studies and eventually dropped out of Yale. try websurfing on each of the HYPSM sites and type in suicide or mental health and see what returns. You will be surprised. So just "crossing MIT off my list" will not isolate you from this greater problem.

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 12:59 am: Edit

Do you really think these schools have more stressed students than any others? I don't, with the exceptions of MIT and Caltech which are unbalanced. Frankly, the most stressed out students I know go to state schools where they are fighting to get into classes and to be in the top 10% because it makes a big difference there.

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 02:14 am: Edit

Rebecca Dana, a senior in Yale College, was honored with the Public Relations and Advocacy Award for the Best College Journalistic Contribution to the Understanding of Student Mental Health Issues by the Association of University and College Counseling Center Directors (AUCCCD). Dana's four-part series in the Yale Daily News was titled "Ivy League Students Flock to Therapists." The AUCCCD is an organization of counseling center and mental health clinic directors at over 560 colleges and universities in the U.S. and abroad.

By Thedad (Thedad) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 02:52 am: Edit

Excusedmemixed, would you be just as naysaying to a kid who wanted to be an Olympic gymnast, a top tennis player, or a top violinist?

By Thedad (Thedad) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 02:55 am: Edit

Smhop, oddly enough, the bassoonists I know/have known have none of them made it into elite schools. A couple of gone to quirky schools but not elite schools. Let's see...I know a violinist who got into Brown, another who got into Stanford, and several carloads that got into Berkeley.

By Coureur (Coureur) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 10:50 am: Edit

>>oddly enough, the bassoonists I know/have known have none of them made it into elite schools.<<

TheDad - you are forgetting my D: a bassoonist who made it into Harvard, Stanford, MIT, and Berkeley.

Double reeds rule!

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 11:34 am: Edit

Thanks again thedad. Let's get real. Think tanks are saying that this generation will in general not do as well as their parents. You will not be able to be a mediocre engineer or radiologist in this country with so many jobs moving off shore. For kids who want to have affluent futures, working their butt off is a necessity. Having focus a must. My 14 year old doesn't have a clue what she wants to be (my job is to give her as much actual exposure as possible to things her skillset fits) but she knows she will want to do something that will require overall excellence. I'm just grateful she has the maturity to understand this and want guidance in attaining lofty dreams instead of hanging out at the mall "enjoying" her youth

By Dadx (Dadx) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 11:49 am: Edit

My advice to Mom101. Explain to your kid that legacies are admitted primarily becasue they are extraordinarily competitive, especially at HYP. Harvards legacy SAT scores recently were 2 points below the overall average. That is after accepting 33-39% of them, instead of 10% of everyone else. This means that the legacy pool is enormously qualified.

At our HS, two of our legacies at HYP (the only two, I think) were rejected with scores above 1530....one being nearly 1600.

I have a totally unprovable bogeyman theory that you might be better off not disclosing legacy status. I think the pool is so qualified at HYP that the 10% of the class as legacies acts as a limiting quota on legacies these day. Especially since everyone is so concerned that someone is taking their place, I suspect that the best students would be better off not disclosing their backgrounds as legacies.

Harvard makes a point that they are looking for a "distinguishing excellence". I think that this may be defined a little differently than a "passion". Passions can be something that you love, but arently necessarily terrific at. "Distinguishing excellences" are a bit more self explanatory--plus, its as defined by the school, not by you.

I do think you need to encourage/ support the child in whatever they choose, or not. Its just too high a hurdle to realistically target one of the top 3-4 schools, do or die. Chances are too high that you'll "die". Especially today.

Xiggis post is about right. Be the best at nearly everything, and you'll have a decent chance, and still get into somewhere great. Thats all you can ask for.

The bassoonists post is actually a good one. For it to matter at the top ten schools in the country, you'd have to be one of the top ten bassonists in the country (maybe better, since they get to keep you for four years before you need to be replaced). Thats often a light cut above where many musicians are......even the ones who are very good and play out-of-the-mainstream instruments.

By Sokkermom (Sokkermom) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 12:10 pm: Edit

Mom 101:

Congrats on your daughter going to Andover. (My son just graduated from a similar school.) His best friend was a double legacy (Mom and Dad) at Yale. I think he just assumed he would be going to Yale since the time he was a small child. Kid was also being recruited for a sport and had decent "stats". He did not get in this year. He was able to find a great alternative, and even though he was surprised and disappointed that he didn't get into Yale, he is very excited about the college where he will be matriculating.

My point is that your daughter should not put all her "eggs in one basket" and decide now that Princeton is the only school for her. As others have stated, there are many good options. The NE prep school thing can be both an advantage and disadvantage. I was amazed at the talent level at these schools. A lot of the students are indeed competing for places at the same colleges!

By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 12:41 pm: Edit

Dadx~

I agree with your point about the requirements for legacies. Can't we, however, assume that the majority of legacies are advised to apply as ED or EA? It does not change one iota on the admission statistics but changes somewhat the comparison with the overall admission percentage. I believe that there are some statistics available at the UPenn Alumni website that might shed some light on this.

By Sokkermom (Sokkermom) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 12:46 pm: Edit

Xiggi;

The double legacy I described above did apply EA. He was deferred and then rejected.

Unfortunately for him, many many students applied EA at Yale this year!

By Smhop (Smhop) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 12:59 pm: Edit

As parents, we want to spare our children the agony of defeat in any context. So, of course, you want to encourage your daughter to pursue her dreams. But, I wonder why so many parents feel they should encourage thier children to prepare for adulthood so early. We have years and years of working, and so few years of having fun. All this competion starting at youth, in my opinion, is sad.

By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 01:00 pm: Edit

In my posts, I tend to challenge parent's opinions but recognize the added advantages of experience and ... wisdom.

I am wondering about the weight parents seem to carry on their shoulders when it comes to "direct" the future of their children? I realize that parents often try to shelter their offspring from the difficulties they may have encountered when growing up. That is why our generation is sometimes called the entitlement generation!

However, I am also wondering if your grandparents and your parents did NOT try to do the same for the current parent's generation but only achieved limited success? Did YOU really pay much attention to the parental advice? And do you expect us to listen to the 2004 version that is often aptly named micromanagement?

I believe that most parents on this board have posted about their whimsical decisions and changes of directions when it comes to education and careers. Do we REALLY have to know that much more than you at the same age? Did your parents know what the world would be when YOU gradudated circa 1975? Could they imagine the competitive world that would result from the commercial uses of simple things like a fax machine, the internet, and the digital revolution?

My conclusion is that YOU do NOT know what the world will be in 10-15 years, and that you do nOT have the responsibility to analyze it for us. In a way, you CAN'T ... there are many things that teenagers understand and that seems irrelevant to you. We live in a world of IPOD, IM, XBox, MP3 and our world will be different but we will survive the same way you did.

Parents and grandparents understand our past and current world much better than we do. You know where we came from and where our our society stands today, but with all due respect, you do NOT know what will be better for us or if the world will be a more difficult place.

This post is not meant to denigrate parents who are involved in their children future and help them make the correct decision. It is meant to point out that your responsibilities are limited to our environment and that you are not able to predict nor model our future. Let us be and we will be fine!

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 01:18 pm: Edit

Xiggi, the whole problem is that much of your generation is busy IMing and Xboxing. Not to mention talking on and taking pictures with your cell phones. Meanwhile, in India and China your generation is studying hard and taking many of what would have been your jobs. And we should discourage kids with high educational aims?

smhop, I have a lot of fun now, in my early 40's, because my husband and I went to top schools, worked hard, made contacts and achieved many of our goals very young. Do not discount this route, many of our classmates, especially from top business schools, went to the beach very young or could have.

Thanks to all who have written. What this thread has produced for my daughter is a very good picture of the process, how random it is, that you can't count on anything but that it's important to go for it if that's what she wants.

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 01:30 pm: Edit

Xiggi, In rereading your post I have to comment further. Of course we can predict a probable scenario for many years out. We know very well what is happening in this country and it's not good where educating your generation is concerned. Your adulthood in all probability will be much more competitive than mine, just as your college admission process will be. Other countries are kicking out butts. Take a look at what the Japanese car companies did to Detroit. A whole generation thaught they would be following their parents into middle class lifestyles working for auto companies--jobs that dissapeared. You will have to be more strategic about career moves young. Study economics if you get the chance.

By Smhop (Smhop) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 01:35 pm: Edit

MOM101, you seem very level headed. And, fortunately for your daughter, you have the skill of parental support WITHOUT the horror of parental pushiness. That is very good parenting! Nonetheless, while we can rsonably expect your D to get into a top school, we must realize it may not be top 5 or even top 10. (because admissions are a crapshot). She knows she has substantially better odds at private prep than public HS... so I suspect you each have few real worries. Good luck to you, and I hope it does work out as you want.

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 01:55 pm: Edit

I guess nobody but me finds this a little bit sad. The whole admission process has been pushed to such an extreme no one recognizes it. The elite colleges have created a situation where only perfection (80% of Stanford admits this year had GPA 4.0), high SAT (Yale's AVERAGE admitted SAT was 1500), and outrageous EC's ("Harvard makes a point that they are looking for a "distinguishing excellence""). Since that is what the schools are selecting for in a perverse Darwinian way that is what families are trying to provide. Don't you think it is a little extreme that you have to go off to a boarding school far from family and friends? Don't you think it cruel that you have to spend 50 hours a week volunteering instead of "hanging out at the mall "enjoying" her youth"? Even if your child is gifted and driven, don't you think that child is still human? At what point will the bulb burn out? At what time will the filament break? At what ultimate human cost will all of this need to achieve "lofty dreams"? Mind you I am not against achievement, striving for excellence, wanting to spend time in an orchestra rather than spray painting grafitti on a wall. But my point is this...why must children be contrived in order to be accepted at an HYPSM? Where are the hard working normal children? Where is just the AP student who participates in one varsity sport or one extracurricular activity that is NOT a world class athelete or a nationally recognized musician? Why do successful candidates have to have some contrived hook like inventing a language or driving stock cars? Marilee Jones says that MIT has addressed this issue by eliminating a line on which an applicant lists their activities. Yeah, right now that is a significant step in reducing the stress on this applicants. It is a very sad state of affairs. It WILL have a human cost. It IS being manifested at the Ivies by the increase in mental health services to those who are successful in their entrance.(Rebecca Dana's articles can be found at www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=18635
www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=18658
www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=18676
www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=18698

So the statement that there is no consequence to stress at an Ivy is specious.) I wish you all the best luck in the world...but college admissions can be very random despite the best contrived plans. Don't regret the loss of youth. Be mindful of the cost especially if you are unsuccessful for HYPSM. What in the world is so bad about going to the mall and seeing a moview with your friends? What happened to the normal, balanced, hardworking, achieving applicant? Why are they no longer wanted in HYPSM?

By Thedad (Thedad) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 02:18 pm: Edit

Because being a BWRK doesn't stand out in the applicant pool. From that, some people will conclude that it's not worth it; for others, it is.

Fwiw, I'm happy that my daughter had the ability and the guts to aim at HYS while retaining the equanimity not to be utterly disconsolate for not getting in...and happy/excited about where she *is* going. The rejections were transient stings to the ego--especially when the ever-popular "But *they* got in" was invoked--but the distilled input from this board and other places put it in such a good perspective that it really *was* transient. Actually, I'm still more annoyed about Yale than she is and that's *my* problem, not hers.

Smhop, you have correctly identified the Scylla and Charybdis: support on one hand, without pushiness on the other.

The notion of parental hands off might bear greater favor if there weren't legions of bright talented students every year whose options are screwed up by their own lack of understanding coupled with the mercies of inept college counselors.

It should always be the students choices (subject to financial considerations if necessary) but the choices should be informed choices and how the information gets there really shouldn't matter.

By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 02:22 pm: Edit

Mom101~

I am afraid that you did not really understand my post. But that is OK! I just would like to add that despite all the modern technology we use is not akin to the proverbial sand where ostriches bury their head.

The future will be competitive but there is no reason to panic while facing a global economy. If you consider the new generation of computer specialists in Bangalore to be an omen, I consider it an added opportunity. Our society is in perpetual movement and economic successes follow cycles. In this regard, I would gladly compare rhe economic results of the past 50 years of all countries in the world, especially the ones that are kicking our butts!

As far as the demise of Detroit at the hands of the Japanese car makers, I am not sure if the lessons learned would serve much purpose in the future. Some companies are healthy, some are not, and that includes some of the giant foreign automotive companies. Japanese companies were able to implement some measures that management and unions deemed farfetched and ill-advised. Did the Japaneses have the foresight to follow Peter Drucker's theories -some dating from 1946- or did they have less to lose than Detroit did? You can be the judge and jury of what is theory and what is perception!

Lastly, thank you for the advice to study economics.

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 02:39 pm: Edit

But that is my point. Why do you have to have a contrived hook to "stand out"? Why not select a different type of student? Why skew your applicants to this extreme? It does lead to unbalanced student bodies (hence the yearly increase in mental health visits at the HYPSM.) These colleges might as well have a lottery and save us all the trouble.

By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 02:40 pm: Edit

Twojaw~

One of the issues that compounds the problem is that there are more and more students who have been told they are hyperqualified to attend the elite schools. The bar has been set higher than it used to be while the definition of what constitutes an elite applicants might not have followed. Why is it so hard to understand that a handful of college receive WAY too many applicants, including a large number of misguided applications. We have 4,000 higher education schools in the United States, yet the focus is set on only 50 of them with 10-12 schools being considered the nec plus ultra.

Simply stated the elite schools are for elite students and probably for TRULY elite students. That pool of students DOES exist and it also co-exists with a much larger pool comprising the students who have parents who erroneously believe they can buy their way in the first pool.

Gaining admission at an elite school might be a crapshoot but the system is a lot fairer than people love to purport, and I believe that the "famous" top 50 are quite adept in slotting where everyone truly belongs.

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 03:01 pm: Edit

Oh, I see. That is why one of our 12 valedictorians(they were all 4.0 perfect GPAs) was accepted at Harvard but not MIT, Yale or Stanford. Or the other valedictorian that was accepted at USC but not Harvard, Stanford, MIT or Caltech. Or the other valedictorian that was going to UC Riverside but not given Regent Scholarships at UCLA, UCSB, UCSD. I think I see the pattern here. I think I can see the logic here. I think I see the fairness here. It is so much clearer now.

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 03:05 pm: Edit

Twojaw, you made the assumption that kids working hard academically and to contribute in the world would rather be at the mall. This is simply untrue. Kids who go to the top boarding schools want to be there. They thrive in environments that offer limitless opportunities. They find great joy in what they are accomplishing. When the kids who are at the mall after school daily wake up, it's often too late.

By Dadx (Dadx) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 03:26 pm: Edit

Well, if you have twelve valedictorians, you're lucky that ANY of them got accepted anywhere in the top 15 schools. I assume some of them were able to score decently on the SATs, which would allow the colleges to confirm that they were fine students.

If schools didn't pull this crapola of awarding twelve kids equally perfect records, it wouldn't lead to this angst. Its fiction. The idea that you can avoid sorting the kids by "not ranking" or by ranking everyone highly forces the schools to use some other means. So they do.

You're mildly off-base if you think your schools 12 valedictorians are better than anyone elses because there were twelve of them. It works the other way around. They're only 1/12 as good.

By Bluevartouhi (Bluevartouhi) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 03:41 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

smhop, I have a lot of fun now, in my early 40's, because my husband and I went to top schools, worked hard, made contacts and achieved many of our goals very young. Do not discount this route, many of our classmates, especially from top business schools, went to the beach very young or could have.

---

By Smhop (Smhop) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 03:54 pm: Edit

twojaw: touche'
I, too, find this all rather sad.. and have said so.

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 04:17 pm: Edit

I don't think working hard and being focussed young limited my life in any way, just the opposit. I loved every minute of my formal education, and early career success has let me define my life, choose where and how I want to live, have time to spend with my children, travel the world and choose a second career in public service. Why do so many of you think there is no fun in putting your nose to the grindstone when it's important? For people driven in this way, every success, every accomplishment is a high. No one should work like a dog and succeed who doesn't want to!

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 04:38 pm: Edit

And smhop, don't get me wrong, it IS sad what this has come to. But once again I'll say, if you believe you want to be at a top 10 school you just play the game. Personal choice that some find worth the sacrifices.

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 05:16 pm: Edit

I saw the game played out at my school. Pretty brutal you ask me. Staying up to 3 AM to get that IB project done night after night was a whole lot of "fun" especially these last 2 years. Boy it sure had it rewards. And the SAT scores of 1600 and 1540 for those validectorians...well I guess they just weren't good enough for Stanford or MIT...or the extracurricular passion that Harvard liked. Heck...if you were IB and had a class standing of 25 out of 650...well forget Stanford. So what if you got an A and a B at their summer session. So frigging what! If you didn't have a 4.0 in high school forget it. So what if you devoted hours and hours to your musical passion of the violin and played in regional orchestras! So what! Oh...but I see clearly now. That college admission process is a fair and equitable system. They can discern the proper level at which you can attain. They will sort out the best and the brightest. Oh yes It is coming into focus now.

By 2bad4u (2bad4u) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 05:25 pm: Edit

If the top 50 werent adept at slotting where everyone truly belongs they wouldnt be the top 50 for so long,nobody in these boards knows better than the admissions commitee

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 06:18 pm: Edit

Just spot on for MIT's Elizabeth Shin and for Yale's Keally DeWitt. The dirty little secret is that any number of students can attend the top 25 and do well...especially since there is very little to distinquish between them. And as for slotting...how far down did Duke, Northwestern, Chicago go on their waitlists after accepting the same EA accepts from Yale and Stanford this year?

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 06:23 pm: Edit

Twojaw, you actually hit the nail on the head. They really can't sort out the best and the brightest. Just those who played the game best (and had a million brilliant people critique their essays until they were works of art) among the best and the brightest. I'm here to learn to play the game. People on these boards describle their remarkable kids who were turned down by top schools. In the end, they often conclude they didn't understand the game well enough for this child, but they've learned. I'm still amazed my D got into top prep schools given that I wasn't prepared and didn't know the game. Knowing it now, I'm sure I could get a less bright kid in. It's nothing any of us are proud of, but this has all become a game.

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 06:24 pm: Edit

By the way, it doesn't matter how many validectorians you have (there were only 4 last year). They are all ranked number 1. It is the 13th guy that is pissed. He would normally in GPA be the salutorian (which is not given at this school) but is now ranked 13th (and so on down the line). I hardly think a college is going to ask for all of the school 600+ rankings since all 600+ didn't apply to that school. The valedictorian who apply will be ranked 1 out of 635.

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 06:32 pm: Edit

Good luck to you Mom101. I hope it works out for you. Do let your child be able to enjoy herself and not be selfabsorbed toward one goal. Self sacrifice is not always reward externally. Hard work does count for character and for spirit and for values well beyond getting into college. But hardwork is not always rewarded by the elite schools. And in fact is denigrated by their obsession for the odd and profane (stock car drivers? new language inventors? rodeo riders?) But if life boils down to that elite state school and not the top 5, let that not be a defeat but transcendence beyond the game and into life.

By Coureur (Coureur) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 07:21 pm: Edit

>>I hardly think a college is going to ask for all of the school 600+ rankings since all 600+ didn't apply to that school. The valedictorian who apply will be ranked 1 out of 635<<

However, I have heard of schools that ask the GC to tell them how many students also shared that same ranking (whatever it was) as the student in question. Those schools are clearly interested in distinguishing between those truly ranked number one and those that are part of group.

By 2bad4u (2bad4u) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 07:36 pm: Edit

"Just spot on for MIT's Elizabeth Shin and for Yale's Keally DeWitt. The dirty little secret is that any number of students can attend the top 25 and do well...especially since there is very little to distinquish between them"

True, the adcoms use this to create a class that they want to have , Shin is an example of a person that was missplaced due to prestige of a university, just because a school is in the top and a person is bright doesnt make the school a good fit.Mom101 Daughter should visit more colleges, you say she wants to go to Princeton but what does she have to compare Princeton to in terms of fit.

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 07:37 pm: Edit

Well then, so what? Did each of the validectorians earn that rank? How do you distinquish between 12 perfect 4.0 (there is no weighting at this school)? There is also no distinction in class rank on what academic track you took (IB vs. AP vs. Honors). Obviously perusing the transcript would get you the idea of the academic difficulty. The Senior Scholar (the one designated "above" all the valedictorians) is picked by the administration, but that is a honorary distinction and is only awarded on the day of graduation and is not in play for admissions. That one Scholar was in the IB tract at this school. But I fail to see why multiple valedictorians should in any way dilute the standing of that valedictorian because they did earn it (all A's , no B's). The person or persons hurt by it would be those who have 1 or 2 B's who then must have the very next class rank after the last valedictorian. And just how would you rank 12 people all with perfect records?

By Twojaw (Twojaw) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 07:46 pm: Edit

You got it 2bad4u! A small LAC might have been a much better fit for the late Ms. Shin. One must not be blinded by sheer prestige. I believe that was also the problem with Ms. Dewitt who was able to transfer to Brown. But unfortunately there is this game of prestige rules all out there that is driving the stress. a HYPSM is not a be all end all for all.

By Mom101 (Mom101) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 08:11 pm: Edit

I think to people who really know the schools, Amherst, Williams and a few others are equally prestigeous, just different choices. Same in the prep school world where St. Paul's and Groton are often chosen over Andover and Exeter.

By Pladelephantman (Pladelephantman) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 08:15 pm: Edit

Evaluate my Chances?

I am a sophmore at a highly competitive, private school in Indiana and was wondering if anyone could give me any feedback on what I might need to add into my agenda to boost my chances at top engineering colleges. Well, as a sophomore, here are a few of my specs:

~SAT: 1310
~GPA: 4.0 uw (4.0 scale)
~Curriculum: Hardest Allowed
~AP Classes: (As a sophomore, not many) AP Psychology, AP Creative Writing
~ AP Classes for Future: AP Physics, AP Chemistry, AP Calculus, AP Environmental Sciences

Extra Curriculars and Clubs:
~ Drama Club
~ Mu Alpha Theta (Math Honors Society)
~ Swing Dance Club (2 years)
~ Math Club
~ Job: I've worked at a Deli for the past 2 years
~ Mission Trip to build houses in Mexico during Spring Break
~ Writings published in the School Literary Magazine
~ No time to write more...but o, there are more...

Sports:
~ Varsity Track (9,10)
~ Varsity Tennis (9, 10)

Colleges that I'm looking at:
~ Rose-Hulman (First Choice, from Indiana, and the one I really want to know about ), Cornell, Swarthmore, Northwestern

Chances or something? Also, if you have suggestions on other engineering colleges that would be much appreciated.

By 2bad4u (2bad4u) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 08:49 pm: Edit

you hijacked this thread in the most blatant way ive seen

By 2bad4u (2bad4u) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 09:03 pm: Edit

why are there so many insecure high school kids.What are my Chances is a forum for a bunch of teenagers looking for coddling and boost for their low self esteem.My advice is to always believe you have a good as chance as any and if you have the money and time to apply why not, what is the worst thing that could happen you get a rejection,how bout viewing it as the college's loss and going to another college and proving you can succeed with your rejection.

By Chasgoose (Chasgoose) on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 09:27 pm: Edit

I think the best advice I can give to you is just let your children do what they want and have fun. My parents' involvement in my academic life was to make sure I was keeping on track academically and make sure that I did some activity outside of school. There is generally some activity for everyone and all you have to do is force your child to pick something they want to do and support them in that.

Colleges do not want academic automatons. I was in the top 10% of my 60 student class but I was definitely not at the top, yet I got into a lot of schools that people above me did not get into (I did have a 1600 on my SAT1 but everyone was close and most people had slightly better SAT2s than I did so it was about even). My Harvard interviewer seemed to love it when I explained to her why I was not at the very top of my class saying "At my school, if you want to be at the very top, you have to kill yourself and work to insane levels. I would much rather lose a few points on my GPA because I was reading some interesting book or taking a interesting, but demanding class load in subjects that weren't my forte." Whatever else went down during that interview (we talked about religion, struggles writing papers, math, etc.) it worked because I think I didn't sound like a typical Harvard applicant. All I know is that afterwards I found out that my Harvard interviewer basically wrote a letter demanding that they accept me as her report. Just tell your children to try to bring out all of the things that interest them in their college admissions package (interviews/reccomendat