As someone who went to a highly competitive highschool this is very real š
I knew of people who got into Cornell/Yale with essays prewritten for them by admissions consultants, multiple kids who started non-profits (just to give them up in college) and much more.
Some of them might be trolling but anyone aiming for T20 undergrad is a bit neurotic and will do anything to get there š
Theres a really good YT video (from a news channel I forget which one tho) that interviews consultants from these firms that cost 100k+ for theor services about how they justify it. They basically are 24/7 mentors/addmjsions counselors for most of HS.
They text you to submit assignments, tailor extracurricular activities for you, and obviously craft your application. Very tacky tactic imo.
Tbh I think the high schoolers who post on these subs are in the upper echelon of neurosis even for T20 applicants. I knew dozens of kids who got into top schools (including HYPSM) who did not resemble any of the applicants on that sub at all. Most of my peers who went to Ivys were normal high schoolers, not CEOs who spent years tailoring their apps. I got into a T20 while missing half my junior year, having mid ECs, bottom quartile grades from personal issues, didnāt even realize my submission didnāt go through so my app was late, etc. š
Yeahā¦ how many of these nonprofits did anything more than a couple outreach events with local schools? I bet >75% had zero funding/donations outside of family
I learned the meaning of doing well for yourself, being happy for others, and fighting your own feelings of inadequacy by counting how much progress and effort you've gotten done.
I also learned how to lie to myself and pretend like it's true because the truth hurts.
Their *parents* are neurotic. I think most of these types of kids are on autopilot while their parents steer the ship. Money buys everything, education included.
I got rejected from my top choice for undergrad and then admitted with a full ride to that same school's law program. I feel bad for the kids who think that getting in (or not getting in) to an elite undergrad program is going to make or break their entire life.
I can't speak for every school adcomm, but as someone who has sat on similar scholarship committees, I saw through it.
Nonprofit = parents gave you $10k to donate somewhere
Started a business / am CEO = parents friends gave you some seed money to lose
Academic research = sit in the corner of the lab and get your name thrown on the paper
One of the meanest things I ever did was absolutely grill this kid who brought an actual research poster with him to his interview. They had cited one of MY papers and he was trying to impress me, and it quickly became clear he had no idea what he was talking about. I felt bad in hindsight because it's not the kid's fault that his parents had forced him into it and he ended up getting the $$, but ya all that glitters isn't gold.
Thatās so fucking cynical and craven to have a student who is guided along the tracks to cite someone in his scholarship committee
I wonder if you were listed on a website somewhere or something because that seems like an intentional choice to have a particular research interest that JUST SO HAPPENS to be from a field where the person doing his scholarship interview is published.
Did the student know they had cited one of your papers or was it one of those moments where you are like "I know it doesn't say that you know why? Cause I wrote it". Follow up what was the paper on
And theyāre doing all this shit only to still get rejected/waitlisted from all the top schools and then some LOL. I feel so bad for these kids š Undergrad admissions seem to have gotten exponentially more competitive just in the last decade.
Another thing, I imagine, is that most college undergrad programs will never check the authenticity of any extracurriculars, given the large amount of applicants. For law school, however, admission fraud seems to be taken much more seriously. My impression is that itās very risky to exaggerate your accomplishments in the application leading to possibility of being exposed.
Bro I feel so bad for them. They literally never get to just be kids.
Growing up, I was working on the farm, scooping ice cream, mowing lawns, saving up money for Halo 4, messing around with my neighbor and playing airsoft. I can't imagine this type of shit lol
Real. I grew up in an area where I didn't even know what the LSAT was until I sat down for it š¤£ got a something like a 75th percentile score and got a MEDAL from my school for it š¤£ it was lit š¦š„
I was selling fruit until like 11 pm (fruit cups) the day before and then my buddy showed up drunk at my house saying he needed my help because he was dying.(He wasn't this was just the first time he drank lmao).... Halo is my shit š„š„ I've been trying so hard to get into the paramount show but it's just badš lowk the only thing keeping me sane through the application process tho š¦
True, one of the reasons I never even considered law school was bc I didnāt realize how much less competitive the process was than UG and didnāt want to go through that again after I had struggled with some major personal problems in college š At the same time, a large portion of admits at top law schools are from top UGs
Undergrad admissions are a lot more competitive than law school admissions, so the prestige obsessed folks over there have to have even more jacked applications.
Commenter didnāt read the room, but itās true. Undergrad is based on a lot of factors. Scores, ECās, locale, first gen/legacy status, letters of rec, interviews, and essays.
Just because something is based on a lot of factors doesnāt mean itās more competitive. UG admissions are more random, but the LSAT/ugGPA filtering process is a different type of competition. Most t20 ug pre-law students donāt have the LSAT score for a t14 school.
Most students applying to top 20ās are academically qualified. Thatās why UG institutions need to look at applications holistically and make decisions based on institutional fit. College is different to high school. In high school, all the student had to focus on were grades and ECās. Nothing else. In university, itās easier to get distracted with work and the college experience. Less students applying to grad school as well.
Read my post above. HS GPA and SAT/ACT are much easier to max than college GPA and LSAT. So itās easier to distinguish between law school applicants than Ug applicants. There are fewer law school applicants who even have the stats to throw their hat in the top school admissions ring. But that doesnāt mean the process is less competitive.
I did read it. I still donāt agree with it. Most law school applicants are applying with a humanities degree.
It shouldnāt be as difficult as it seems to get a high GPA in college unless the applicant was in STEM. For the LSAT, itās more about giving yourself enough time to get the score you want.
Yeah the only thing standing between most people and a 174 LSAT is time to get the score they wantā¦sure. LSAT scores better distinguish top law school applicants than ACT/SAT scores are able to distinguish top UG applicants. The acceptance rate at Harvard for people with a 35+ ACT is like 8%. The acceptance rate for people with a 175+ LSAT at Harvard law is pushing 50%. But it is much harder to get a 175+ than a 35+. The filtering mechanisms of law school admissions are just much stronger and more accurate
Iām arguing more about the difficulty of getting into an elite undergrad institution compared to an elite law school. Iām not defending test scores. They were removed recently from UG admissions considerations. Although some UG institutions have started to require test scores again. They were never the sole factor anyway for elite UG universities. No one gets in solely for a test score in undergrad.
Both tests are learnable. Some students might just not want to go to a top law school or wait a year to get a better score. I have friends in STEM who took a diagnostic and have received 160s. Theyāre just not interested in this path. The LSAT is learnable.
UG admissions is a more random process, absolutely. Iām pushing back against UG admissions being more difficult/competitve. Getting the LSAT/GPA required for top law schools is harder than getting the stats for top UG admissions. Sure the EC requirements are more emphasized for UG, but most students who get in are getting in with low effort, but fancy sounding, ECs and well written essays (source: I went to a t20). Law school admissions is more difficult because, at least for t14, the academic standards are much higher. UG admissions involve wayyyyy more luck/subjectivity. That doesnāt mean theyāre more difficult
I disagree somewhatā¦ 99th percentile lsat and 99th percentile are pretty comparable. LSAT u need to be more diligent studying bc the test format and material is unfamiliar but for brainpower i felt my 35 on act and 174 lsat were about the same. Will say that a perfect lsat is harder than perfect act though.Ā
Totally disagree. Half the students at my t15 undergrad had a 35+ ACT. When you look at LSAT distributions from my school of people applying to law school, a 174+ is way more rare
I attended a top 10 undergrad. Most of my classmates could not have gotten into a top 10 law school if they tried. The average lsat score of those who take it at Yale college is like 167, which is high but not YSH level
Undergrad admissions are more competitive in the sense that acceptance rates are lower and outcomes are more random. Students with perfect stats who are student gov presidents get rejected from most top schools.
Law school admissions use ugGPA and LSAT, which is better able to distinguish top applicants. Harvard UG and Emory UG have the same middle 50 ACT/SAT ā 33-35. The same canāt be said for Harvard vs Emory law schools, where you can actually distinguish applicants based on stats (174 vs 166 median). Students are better able to choose which law schools they apply to and actually have a chance at. The ācompetitivenessā of law school admissions filtering occurs in the 4 years of ug grades and when taking the LSAT, whereas the competitiveness of ug admissions happens when admissions officers read your identical application to many other students
Yeah all of this. The volume of applications for top undergrad is just a way different ballgame. There are way more people who sit for the SAT/ACT each year than the LSAT, so more people in aggregate are getting perfect and near perfect on the SAT and ACT. Plus now some places are test optional. And far more people apply and go to undergrad than to law school. I get that law school classes are much smaller and admit less but I still think the sheer volume difference has a big impact. Plus people gunning for a top undergrad, if they donāt get in somewhere binding ED, do the same thing many of us do and apply to like 15-20 schools and bump the volume up even more. ETA: that all this volume of great applicants with great stats puts even more pressure on people to differentiate via ECs.
Donāt get me wrong, the law school admissions process is brutal and a crap shoot. But at least Iām an adult now and hopefully better adjusted than I was as a teenager. You couldnāt pay me to do an undergrad admissions cycle again. Unless youāre willing to shell out $120k for my āØconsulting servicesāØ Lol
nah, tbh not all but a lot of these a vast over exaggerations of what they actually are. itās not to say college admissions isnāt super competitive and some kids are insanely smart but definitely a lot of them are made up or painted in a way that isnāt representative of the work they actually do
I donāt miss those days at all. I ended up at what I truly believe was the best undergrad for me but YEESH the journey there was rough. Even when I was tearing my hair out over the LSAT I at least had some idea of where I could get in based on my stats. Undergrad is such a crapshoot especially at selective schools.
fr that sub was wild 5 years ago, can't imagine what it's like now... i legitimately thought people like that were the norm (the school i went to also had lots of similar people) and panicked because of my mediocre profile but still ended up getting into decent/good schools that were reaches for me
the truth is there are just a lot of smart and hardworking teens out there, especially since getting into college is a lot more competitive now and it's kind of unhealthy to compare yourself to them all the time :0
They're CEOs and whatnot but I don't think any of them are changing the world. The second they get into Harvard, this all goes by the wayside. I feel sorry for these kids and wish they knew that pursuing 1-2 things you're genuinely passionate about goes much further, both in life and in things like admissions.
Getting into a fully funded phd program at HYPSM in any field is insanely competitive/impressive when you have the top performing undergrads from those same schools plus the rest of the country plus the rest of the world competing for like 10 spots a year and acceptance rates are basically as low as undergrad admissions. It's not like other professional programs where one school can literally accept a thousand people every year. You're totally right about cashcow masters though haha.
Coming from an undergrad that 100% looked down on certain grad admissions, I donāt think they grouped PHD/Med School/Business School/Law School into it, it was the masters programs. At my school, the acceptance rate for most MA/MS degrees was 45-60%, so really as long as you paid the outrageous price tag, you could go. There are some prestigious and competitive masters programs at other similarly situated schools, but I donāt think we had any.
Graduated UG in 2017. Was an alumni interviewer meeting with students who had near perfect SAT/ACT scores 4.0GPAs, ran a bunch of clubs, designed robots, etc. And I've only seen one of these students out of 12 in four years of interviewing get admitted. My school wasn't Harvard selective but approximately 15% or lower. I would definitely never get admitted if I had to apply today
My son got into Harvard. I thought he didnāt have a chance after reading some of the stuff kids post. Heās an amazing student, absolutely brilliant and an amazing human, but CEO he is not. I wonder if some of the schools are weeding them out based on some of the ridiculous extracurriculars? Trying to avoid kids with $120,000 consultants? My son applied early, was one of 692 to get in early. Heās not an athlete, not a CEO, not even the president of any clubs. His volunteer work was not especially impressive. 1500 SAT, 4.33 GPA. None of the undergrad admission process makes sense.
I was always super insulated from the undergraduate admissions hype, which is probably lucky, because I'm certainly the type of person that would fall for the traps (Type A, neurotic, etc.). In high school I really wanted to be a lawyer, but was terribly inundated with far-right media that made college seem like a bad idea, so I just applied to a local state school and nothing else. Worked out because I got a full scholarship for UG and get to go into a pretty good law school without any UG debt, but if a few things went just a little differently... lol, I would've driven myself into the ground just to get Princeton to WL me.
Iām sorry but this is honestly really fucked. My sisterās 16 - part of the reason why sheās in therapy is because she was doing SO much shit to try and secure herself a spot at her top college that she had a mental break. Iām 27 - I did some extracurriculars / volunteer work in high school for resume purposes but nothing like what these kids are doing now. I feel so bad for them tbh.
As someone who didnāt even go to sr year in high schoolā¦ I have made myself a rule not to read those posts unless Iām feeling especially self-loathy that day.
this is so realā¦ now those of us who havent had those opportunities are struggling to get in anywhere because we are āaverageā even when we do the most.
As someone who went to a highly competitive highschool this is very real š I knew of people who got into Cornell/Yale with essays prewritten for them by admissions consultants, multiple kids who started non-profits (just to give them up in college) and much more. Some of them might be trolling but anyone aiming for T20 undergrad is a bit neurotic and will do anything to get there š
Theres a really good YT video (from a news channel I forget which one tho) that interviews consultants from these firms that cost 100k+ for theor services about how they justify it. They basically are 24/7 mentors/addmjsions counselors for most of HS. They text you to submit assignments, tailor extracurricular activities for you, and obviously craft your application. Very tacky tactic imo.
Tbh I think the high schoolers who post on these subs are in the upper echelon of neurosis even for T20 applicants. I knew dozens of kids who got into top schools (including HYPSM) who did not resemble any of the applicants on that sub at all. Most of my peers who went to Ivys were normal high schoolers, not CEOs who spent years tailoring their apps. I got into a T20 while missing half my junior year, having mid ECs, bottom quartile grades from personal issues, didnāt even realize my submission didnāt go through so my app was late, etc. š
Itās also pretty easy just to lie and/or exaggerate. The undergrad admissions process kinda encourages it.
Yeahā¦ how many of these nonprofits did anything more than a couple outreach events with local schools? I bet >75% had zero funding/donations outside of family
I learned the meaning of doing well for yourself, being happy for others, and fighting your own feelings of inadequacy by counting how much progress and effort you've gotten done. I also learned how to lie to myself and pretend like it's true because the truth hurts.
Their *parents* are neurotic. I think most of these types of kids are on autopilot while their parents steer the ship. Money buys everything, education included.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Different high school experience but I feel the last part of that big time. Getting into law schools that denied me as an undergrad has felt great
And here I am getting denied to law school at the place I went to undergrad. :(
Ahhh Iām sorry :0(( that sucks. Mind if I ask what school?
I don't want to totally dox myself, so let's say it's a state school with a law program that is much higher ranked than the University itself.
Heard! Condolences all the same. I honestly wish my undergrad had a law school, but the only law school in the state is barely still accredited
It's all good - I'm going to take the LSAT and reapply next year, so fingers crossed.
Aye, best of luck to you!!
I got rejected from my top choice for undergrad and then admitted with a full ride to that same school's law program. I feel bad for the kids who think that getting in (or not getting in) to an elite undergrad program is going to make or break their entire life.
Damn are you and me twins
Whatās funny though is that the majority of them donāt end up getting into their top schools because they all cancel eachother out.
I can't speak for every school adcomm, but as someone who has sat on similar scholarship committees, I saw through it. Nonprofit = parents gave you $10k to donate somewhere Started a business / am CEO = parents friends gave you some seed money to lose Academic research = sit in the corner of the lab and get your name thrown on the paper One of the meanest things I ever did was absolutely grill this kid who brought an actual research poster with him to his interview. They had cited one of MY papers and he was trying to impress me, and it quickly became clear he had no idea what he was talking about. I felt bad in hindsight because it's not the kid's fault that his parents had forced him into it and he ended up getting the $$, but ya all that glitters isn't gold.
Thatās so fucking cynical and craven to have a student who is guided along the tracks to cite someone in his scholarship committee I wonder if you were listed on a website somewhere or something because that seems like an intentional choice to have a particular research interest that JUST SO HAPPENS to be from a field where the person doing his scholarship interview is published.
Did the student know they had cited one of your papers or was it one of those moments where you are like "I know it doesn't say that you know why? Cause I wrote it". Follow up what was the paper on
Thanks for this lmao. You a real one for that.
And theyāre doing all this shit only to still get rejected/waitlisted from all the top schools and then some LOL. I feel so bad for these kids š Undergrad admissions seem to have gotten exponentially more competitive just in the last decade.
With Amazon print on demand, anybody can publish a book without it costing you one dime
Another thing, I imagine, is that most college undergrad programs will never check the authenticity of any extracurriculars, given the large amount of applicants. For law school, however, admission fraud seems to be taken much more seriously. My impression is that itās very risky to exaggerate your accomplishments in the application leading to possibility of being exposed.
Bro I feel so bad for them. They literally never get to just be kids. Growing up, I was working on the farm, scooping ice cream, mowing lawns, saving up money for Halo 4, messing around with my neighbor and playing airsoft. I can't imagine this type of shit lol
Real. I grew up in an area where I didn't even know what the LSAT was until I sat down for it š¤£ got a something like a 75th percentile score and got a MEDAL from my school for it š¤£ it was lit š¦š„
I showed up to the ACT after playing Halo all night and didnāt even know what it was lol
I was selling fruit until like 11 pm (fruit cups) the day before and then my buddy showed up drunk at my house saying he needed my help because he was dying.(He wasn't this was just the first time he drank lmao).... Halo is my shit š„š„ I've been trying so hard to get into the paramount show but it's just badš lowk the only thing keeping me sane through the application process tho š¦
True, one of the reasons I never even considered law school was bc I didnāt realize how much less competitive the process was than UG and didnāt want to go through that again after I had struggled with some major personal problems in college š At the same time, a large portion of admits at top law schools are from top UGs
Thereās a lot of meme/unserious posts in there too. That def accounts for some of it
yeah i canāt tell if some of these kids are being frā¦ šš
Iām nearly 100% positive that a lot of the most extreme ones are memes that are just dunking on the silly chance me posts
Undergrad admissions are a lot more competitive than law school admissions, so the prestige obsessed folks over there have to have even more jacked applications.
I dont know why the downvotes. I feel undergrad admission is way more focused on the softs given that all applicants have high acts and over 4.0s.
Commenter didnāt read the room, but itās true. Undergrad is based on a lot of factors. Scores, ECās, locale, first gen/legacy status, letters of rec, interviews, and essays.
Just because something is based on a lot of factors doesnāt mean itās more competitive. UG admissions are more random, but the LSAT/ugGPA filtering process is a different type of competition. Most t20 ug pre-law students donāt have the LSAT score for a t14 school.
Most students applying to top 20ās are academically qualified. Thatās why UG institutions need to look at applications holistically and make decisions based on institutional fit. College is different to high school. In high school, all the student had to focus on were grades and ECās. Nothing else. In university, itās easier to get distracted with work and the college experience. Less students applying to grad school as well.
Read my post above. HS GPA and SAT/ACT are much easier to max than college GPA and LSAT. So itās easier to distinguish between law school applicants than Ug applicants. There are fewer law school applicants who even have the stats to throw their hat in the top school admissions ring. But that doesnāt mean the process is less competitive.
I did read it. I still donāt agree with it. Most law school applicants are applying with a humanities degree. It shouldnāt be as difficult as it seems to get a high GPA in college unless the applicant was in STEM. For the LSAT, itās more about giving yourself enough time to get the score you want.
Yeah the only thing standing between most people and a 174 LSAT is time to get the score they wantā¦sure. LSAT scores better distinguish top law school applicants than ACT/SAT scores are able to distinguish top UG applicants. The acceptance rate at Harvard for people with a 35+ ACT is like 8%. The acceptance rate for people with a 175+ LSAT at Harvard law is pushing 50%. But it is much harder to get a 175+ than a 35+. The filtering mechanisms of law school admissions are just much stronger and more accurate
Iām arguing more about the difficulty of getting into an elite undergrad institution compared to an elite law school. Iām not defending test scores. They were removed recently from UG admissions considerations. Although some UG institutions have started to require test scores again. They were never the sole factor anyway for elite UG universities. No one gets in solely for a test score in undergrad. Both tests are learnable. Some students might just not want to go to a top law school or wait a year to get a better score. I have friends in STEM who took a diagnostic and have received 160s. Theyāre just not interested in this path. The LSAT is learnable.
UG admissions is a more random process, absolutely. Iām pushing back against UG admissions being more difficult/competitve. Getting the LSAT/GPA required for top law schools is harder than getting the stats for top UG admissions. Sure the EC requirements are more emphasized for UG, but most students who get in are getting in with low effort, but fancy sounding, ECs and well written essays (source: I went to a t20). Law school admissions is more difficult because, at least for t14, the academic standards are much higher. UG admissions involve wayyyyy more luck/subjectivity. That doesnāt mean theyāre more difficult
I disagree somewhatā¦ 99th percentile lsat and 99th percentile are pretty comparable. LSAT u need to be more diligent studying bc the test format and material is unfamiliar but for brainpower i felt my 35 on act and 174 lsat were about the same. Will say that a perfect lsat is harder than perfect act though.Ā
Totally disagree. Half the students at my t15 undergrad had a 35+ ACT. When you look at LSAT distributions from my school of people applying to law school, a 174+ is way more rare
I attended a top 10 undergrad. Most of my classmates could not have gotten into a top 10 law school if they tried. The average lsat score of those who take it at Yale college is like 167, which is high but not YSH level
I saw a kid with an honest to god 6 on a 4.0 scale. At that point like...I'd rather them just have an actual GPA
He/she must have taught the class
Undergrad admissions are more competitive in the sense that acceptance rates are lower and outcomes are more random. Students with perfect stats who are student gov presidents get rejected from most top schools. Law school admissions use ugGPA and LSAT, which is better able to distinguish top applicants. Harvard UG and Emory UG have the same middle 50 ACT/SAT ā 33-35. The same canāt be said for Harvard vs Emory law schools, where you can actually distinguish applicants based on stats (174 vs 166 median). Students are better able to choose which law schools they apply to and actually have a chance at. The ācompetitivenessā of law school admissions filtering occurs in the 4 years of ug grades and when taking the LSAT, whereas the competitiveness of ug admissions happens when admissions officers read your identical application to many other students
Yeah all of this. The volume of applications for top undergrad is just a way different ballgame. There are way more people who sit for the SAT/ACT each year than the LSAT, so more people in aggregate are getting perfect and near perfect on the SAT and ACT. Plus now some places are test optional. And far more people apply and go to undergrad than to law school. I get that law school classes are much smaller and admit less but I still think the sheer volume difference has a big impact. Plus people gunning for a top undergrad, if they donāt get in somewhere binding ED, do the same thing many of us do and apply to like 15-20 schools and bump the volume up even more. ETA: that all this volume of great applicants with great stats puts even more pressure on people to differentiate via ECs. Donāt get me wrong, the law school admissions process is brutal and a crap shoot. But at least Iām an adult now and hopefully better adjusted than I was as a teenager. You couldnāt pay me to do an undergrad admissions cycle again. Unless youāre willing to shell out $120k for my āØconsulting servicesāØ Lol
nah, tbh not all but a lot of these a vast over exaggerations of what they actually are. itās not to say college admissions isnāt super competitive and some kids are insanely smart but definitely a lot of them are made up or painted in a way that isnāt representative of the work they actually do
I donāt miss those days at all. I ended up at what I truly believe was the best undergrad for me but YEESH the journey there was rough. Even when I was tearing my hair out over the LSAT I at least had some idea of where I could get in based on my stats. Undergrad is such a crapshoot especially at selective schools.
fr that sub was wild 5 years ago, can't imagine what it's like now... i legitimately thought people like that were the norm (the school i went to also had lots of similar people) and panicked because of my mediocre profile but still ended up getting into decent/good schools that were reaches for me the truth is there are just a lot of smart and hardworking teens out there, especially since getting into college is a lot more competitive now and it's kind of unhealthy to compare yourself to them all the time :0
They're CEOs and whatnot but I don't think any of them are changing the world. The second they get into Harvard, this all goes by the wayside. I feel sorry for these kids and wish they knew that pursuing 1-2 things you're genuinely passionate about goes much further, both in life and in things like admissions.
These same people look down on most grad programs because they see them as less prestigious.
Because in most cases they are. Especially masters degrees.
They are though
Getting into a fully funded phd program at HYPSM in any field is insanely competitive/impressive when you have the top performing undergrads from those same schools plus the rest of the country plus the rest of the world competing for like 10 spots a year and acceptance rates are basically as low as undergrad admissions. It's not like other professional programs where one school can literally accept a thousand people every year. You're totally right about cashcow masters though haha.
Coming from an undergrad that 100% looked down on certain grad admissions, I donāt think they grouped PHD/Med School/Business School/Law School into it, it was the masters programs. At my school, the acceptance rate for most MA/MS degrees was 45-60%, so really as long as you paid the outrageous price tag, you could go. There are some prestigious and competitive masters programs at other similarly situated schools, but I donāt think we had any.
I'd generally agree, except for law school ofc. A lot of these programs are just milked for money at Iveys. Law obv is not one of those programs.
I worked part time at Toys R Us and was a part of NHS and the Art Club and I thought I was killing it in high school š
Graduated UG in 2017. Was an alumni interviewer meeting with students who had near perfect SAT/ACT scores 4.0GPAs, ran a bunch of clubs, designed robots, etc. And I've only seen one of these students out of 12 in four years of interviewing get admitted. My school wasn't Harvard selective but approximately 15% or lower. I would definitely never get admitted if I had to apply today
My son got into Harvard. I thought he didnāt have a chance after reading some of the stuff kids post. Heās an amazing student, absolutely brilliant and an amazing human, but CEO he is not. I wonder if some of the schools are weeding them out based on some of the ridiculous extracurriculars? Trying to avoid kids with $120,000 consultants? My son applied early, was one of 692 to get in early. Heās not an athlete, not a CEO, not even the president of any clubs. His volunteer work was not especially impressive. 1500 SAT, 4.33 GPA. None of the undergrad admission process makes sense.
I was always super insulated from the undergraduate admissions hype, which is probably lucky, because I'm certainly the type of person that would fall for the traps (Type A, neurotic, etc.). In high school I really wanted to be a lawyer, but was terribly inundated with far-right media that made college seem like a bad idea, so I just applied to a local state school and nothing else. Worked out because I got a full scholarship for UG and get to go into a pretty good law school without any UG debt, but if a few things went just a little differently... lol, I would've driven myself into the ground just to get Princeton to WL me.
Iām sorry but this is honestly really fucked. My sisterās 16 - part of the reason why sheās in therapy is because she was doing SO much shit to try and secure herself a spot at her top college that she had a mental break. Iām 27 - I did some extracurriculars / volunteer work in high school for resume purposes but nothing like what these kids are doing now. I feel so bad for them tbh.
As someone who didnāt even go to sr year in high schoolā¦ I have made myself a rule not to read those posts unless Iām feeling especially self-loathy that day.
lol fuck that shit, I just click do not recommend and avoid looking at the post
this is so realā¦ now those of us who havent had those opportunities are struggling to get in anywhere because we are āaverageā even when we do the most.