a "good" SAT score

[mepstein]

Originally Posted by AZ_porschekid

That's an old post.

But at the same time. That's really good for a liberal arts degree, and frankly very hard to accomplish without networking... I take it you're in De?

He's finishing up school near Charlotte NC and will work there. No networking, just applied for the paid summer internship. His roommate is going to Wells Fargo. Both are analyst positions. Apparently that's the starting rate for that position.

Hope his sister can do as well. She missed 3 SAT questions.

But in all seriousness, sat's are only one ingredient in the recipe.

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

But that wasn't enough to get him accepted to UCLA which is where he wanted to go.
He was kind of bummed but they were cool about it, he was simply too white and too rich and too local.
A friend of the family works there and told us if he was a non-resident he would have gotten in. Same story if he were poor or had a different complexion.

What complexion would have helped? I thought affirmative action at the UCs was banned in California by Prop 206? Making admissions race-neutral and merit based only? (Which is why the top UCs are now 40-50% Asian and only 1-5% African American).

Although it seems like it does help to be out of state, given that the cash strapped UCs desperately need that out of state tuition ($30K/yr higher than in state). That always struck me as outrageous. Californian families who have paid taxes for decades, only to find their kids can't get in to the top UCs because those spots are being whore'd out to the higher out of state bidders.

Congrats on finishing the process and I'm sure he'll like UCSD and be very successful there!

[jcommin]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

That's right, they don't ask for admissions info on the new tests where he could check the box for his ethnicity (Hispanic).

He's definitely not from a low income family, but he's not a white kid either as far as they are concerned.
He meets every requirement for "special consideration" because of his heritage.
It'll be up to him if he takes advantage of it.

There was a time when I would have discouraged it, but with all the reverse discrimination in the world today there has to be some way to level the playing field.

Sammy are you Hispanic?

[MRM]

Race is complicated in the US where it doesn't matter but it's so important that we slice it and dice it to the nth degree. Hispanic is an ethnicity rather than a race, as in white of Hispanic heritage. Instead of the one drop rule, the standard in these enlightened times is Caucasian with an Hispanic surname. At the same time, Hispanic is a European heritage because the conquistadors were from Spain. So it's not settled whether being Hispanic is a structural disadvantage or n advantage. And Hispanics have paternal names, much like the Russians have sons named Ivan Devonov Ivanovich Rasputin when their last name is really Mokba. So figuring out who is Hispanic is a bit of a chore.

Anyway, I gather that Sammy is a Caucasian not of Hispanic descent while his wife is Caucasian of Hispanic descent and has an Hispanic surname. Since Sammy's children bear his name, they are Caucasian of Hispanic descent but without an Hispanic surname. Colleges of course are modern institutions that offer race (ethnicity) blind admissions in all respects. Anything else would be discriminatory. So instead they have quotas. Much like the Ivy League in 1929 and their famous Jewish Quota.

But since race and ethnicity don't matter anymore, none of the above applies to any new college applicant.

[jcommin]

Originally Posted by MRM

Race is complicated in the US where it doesn't matter but it's so important that we slice it and dice it to the nth degree. Hispanic is an ethnicity rather than a race, as in white of Hispanic heritage. Instead of the one drop rule, the standard in these enlightened times is Caucasian with an Hispanic surname. At the same time, Hispanic is a European heritage because the conquistadors were from Spain. So it's not settled whether being Hispanic is a structural disadvantage or n advantage. And Hispanics have paternal names, much like the Russians have sons named Ivan Devonov Ivanovich Rasputin when their last name is really Mokba. So figuring out who is Hispanic is a bit of a chore.

Anyway, I gather that Sammy is a Caucasian not of Hispanic descent while his wife is Caucasian of Hispanic descent and has an Hispanic surname. Since Sammy's children bear his name, they are Caucasian of Hispanic descent but without an Hispanic surname. Colleges of course are modern institutions that offer race (ethnicity) blind admissions in all respects. Anything else would be discriminatory. So instead they have quotas. Much like the Ivy League in 1929 and their famous Jewish Quota.

But since race and ethnicity don't matter anymore, none of the above applies to any new college applicant.

what rock you living under? Assuming he is white, he gamed the system

[Bowling]

Originally Posted by McLovin

What complexion would have helped? I thought affirmative action at the UCs was banned in California by Prop 206? Making admissions race-neutral and merit based only? (Which is why the top UCs are now 40-50% Asian and only 1-5% African American).

Although it seems like it does help to be out of state, given that the cash strapped UCs desperately need that out of state tuition ($30K/yr higher than in state). That always struck me as outrageous. Californian families who have paid taxes for decades, only to find their kids can't get in to the top UCs because those spots are being whore'd out to the higher out of state bidders.

Congrats on finishing the process and I'm sure he'll like UCSD and be very successful there!

Non resident and international students tend to get the nod here at University of Michigan. Was my daughter's experience this year, they push the tax paying resident family children to the extensions in Dearborn and Flint with the carrot of transfer to Ann Arbor campus second year. Getting a straight answer from the admissions representative was like trying to pin down a 30 year House of Representatives member. Daughter is full of disdain for the university. She has gladly moved on and will most likely choose a career in another state when finished with education.

[jcommin]

If affirmative requirements don't mean jack, why his his son Hioanic - I will tell you why - because it matters. He took advantage of the same liberal system he bashes on this board. I'm perfectly cool with it - just don't bite the hand that feeds you. Its not genuine.

[JavaBrewer]

Friends of ours have a son going to UCLA on a partial scholarship. Regents program or something like that. He graduated with a 4.6 GPA, valedictorian in HS, maxed out in sciences by his sophomore year, calculus by freshman, music, perfect score ACT, almost perfect in SAT. His entire life was dedicated to getting to this point. He has zero male friends and has never gone to a HS party. Going for Law/Politics. His sister is on course to exceed his record and has hopes to go to an ivy school, same as he did but was denied. IMO - no diversity in life.

Yet, we feel sorry for them. I cannot begin to detail the sacrifices the entire family has endured. Life happens once, youth, middle age, adult, senior, they all need to be embraced for the short time they are active.

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by JavaBrewer

His sister is on course to exceed his record and has hopes to go to an ivy school, same as he did but was denied. IMO - no diversity in life.

Yes, admissions to the very top schools (for example, the Forbes Top 10 or 20 https://www.forbes.com/top-colleges/#7f2c9fd01987 ) generally depends on more than just grades and GPA these days. Because there are simply so few spots in those classes, and so many people with high numbers gunning for those spots.

Plus, at most of those schools (all the Ivies, the top Little Ivies like Amherst and Williams, and the other elites like Stanford and Duke), many of the spots are already "taken" and not available to most applicants. This includes recruited athletes (can be as high as 30% at smaller schools like Amherst and Williams), legacies (10-15% at most of the schools), racial minorities (all those schools are going to magically have entering freshman classes that are approximately 14% black and 14% Latino/Hispanic), around 20% "low income," and some amount of "development" students (from ultra-wealthy or influential donors).

So adding those up, you can see if you don't have one of those "hooks," you can still get in, but you are competing for a very small number of remaining spots. You can get in, but you are generally going to need some kind of national-level (or close) talent, accomplishment, etc. Playing the piano, being in the school play, or volunteering locally isn't usually going to be enough.

So kids like your friend's kids, who have very high numbers, are generally going to need something else in addition to get into those schools at the very top of the list (as they have found out). They are strong candidates with numbers like that, and it is possible, but it is difficult.

The good news is you (obviously) don't "have" to go to one of those schools. The scenario is very different once you drop down even a little further down the list. Then, extremely high numbers like that is going to get you some admissions, even with no "hooks" or special talents or backgrounds. The reason is those schools are always trying to move up the list, and one key way is by getting students who have those very high SAT/ACT and GPA numbers.

And, you don't "have" to go to even a top 50 school to be successful (obviously). One thing that most don't realize is that while it's true that admission to the very top schools is crazy difficult for an "unhooked" applicant, college admissions in general is not very selective. There are something like 2,500+ colleges in the US. Of those, only 25 or so have an acceptance rate of 15% or less. And only 100 or so have an acceptance rate of less than around 45%. So for any really good student, there is a very good school they will get into, and can become very successful at.

I studied top college admissions very intensively when my kids were in high school, this included going out to at least 5 of those schools on the Forbes top 20 list and meeting with people there. Although I'm glad its over, it was a fascinating process and learning experience.

[KFC911]

Interesting thread....and I'm an old fart with no kids . Methinks this pursuit of perfect test scores, and pursuit of acceptance to the VERY top tier schools is a bit overrated by many. Sorta like being a football player and just HAVING to attend 'bama or THAT OSU in order to be a star in the NFL....I don't get it .

I have a VERY talented bunch of younger relatives....one went the Harvard > Stanford path (for example), another did undergrad at a school most of y'all have probably never heard of (Campbell), before attending med school at Wake, along with lots of other examples that went to lowly "state schools". .Bottom line...they are ALL gonna have very successful lives...university of choice has very little impact on that imo...if a kid has "it", they will be very successful....just way too much emphasis on a very finite number of slots imo.

BTW...back in the day, my SAT scores weren't perfect, but high enough to go anywhere and raise the average....just my .02 worth.

LOTS of ways to skin a dawg....life's a journey....enjoy the ride!

Just don't get a worthless degree from Trump University and spend a fortune in the process...

Oh yeah....in my corporate career, I worked with many exceptional folks from all over....few attended the "elite" schools and some that did, weren't that impessive either...YMMV.

[billh1963]

Originally Posted by rattlsnak

It is great that you support your son in his choices but you really have to look long term in this case. That is a very hard road to take for the long term. 20 years from now when all of his white collar friends are off on Friday playing golf, he will be working 6 days a week trying to make a paycheck.

20 years from now how many good paying white collar jobs will be out there?

Becoming an expert in a trade and owning your own business seems to be the best way to control your own destiny.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by jcommin

Sammy are you Hispanic?

No, I am not.
My wife is.

[RKDinOKC]

Nephew was running into the admissions gauntlet of barriers until...He put down he wanted to major in Large Animal Veterinary Medicine. Then the door not only opened up WIDE, but there was all kinds of money from the cattle industry. They even went to bat for him to make sure he got accepted.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by McLovin

What complexion would have helped? I thought affirmative action at the UCs was banned in California by Prop 206? Making admissions race-neutral and merit based only? (Which is why the top UCs are now 40-50% Asian and only 1-5% African American).

Although it seems like it does help to be out of state, given that the cash strapped UCs desperately need that out of state tuition ($30K/yr higher than in state). That always struck me as outrageous. Californian families who have paid taxes for decades, only to find their kids can't get in to the top UCs because those spots are being whore'd out to the higher out of state bidders.

Congrats on finishing the process and I'm sure he'll like UCSD and be very successful there!

That is not correct.
There are many ways around the system. They can and do set admissions requirements lower for students eligible for pell grants, minority grants, etc.

They can and do control the admissions based on race.

And jcommin, go to hell.

My son told the truth on his admissions applications.
It did not benefit him in the least.

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

That is not correct.
There are many ways around the system. They can and do set admissions requirements lower for students eligible for pell grants, minority grants, etc.

They can and do control the admissions based on race.

You'd think that, since colleges are addicted to social engineering.

But Prop 206 makes affirmative action illegal in the UC's. And if they are controlling admissions based on race (through minority grants, etc.), the UC system is doing a pretty bad job of it.

UCSD, is for example, 50% Asian and 1% Black. If they are controlling admissions based on race, why are the demographics like that? What's the explanation?

(UCB and UCLA are similar, even with all the black athletes, they are still only 3-4% black, and highly Asian).

They do seem to be admitting based on income, though. The UC's are filled mostly with low income students these days. (40% are Pell grant eligible, meaning less than $50,000/yr family income, and around 70% receive some form of need-based financial aid). The UC Regents and admissions departments no doubt love low income and first-in-the-family-to-attend-college students. But for some reason, that's not translating to racial diversity.

[daepp]

You clearly pointed out that it didn't help your son; and it was easy to infer he/you told the truth.

[sammyg2]

He's officially a junior now.
AP classes rock.
They don't call them semesters tho, something about three quarters in a year? I know, must be that new math.

Their engineering program is designed to be a 5 year deal for most students, he is planning to do it in three and a half if all goes well.
Cool, saves me $$$$$$

[masraum]

Cool, congrats!

[SCadaddle]

Way back in 1980, as a "C" student in the local public school system, I scored a 24 on the ACT on a Saturday morning with a hangover from the Friday night beforehand.

One of my friends, an "A" and "B" student in the local prestigious episcopal private school, that took the same test on the same day at the same venue, without drinking the night before, scored a 9. Nine. That wouldn't qualify him for a HBC so he took it again and upped his game to a 15.