Interesting article in The New Yorker on college admissions

[bibiche]

7 hours ago, Frances said:

While I agree it is a very good thing to help underprepared students succeed and have had summer jobs with both high school and college students that do this very thing, choosing a highly ranked school can also sometimes close some options for students because there simply isn’t time to catch up and excel when your educational background was so poor (through no fault of your own) compared to your college peers. For some students, I think the better option is to go to a smaller, more nurturing, less competitive, lower ranked school. For instance, if your goal is medical school, simply graduating from college is not enough. You need to excel both in and outside of the classroom. There are many LACs and smaller schools outside of the top 50 that can be a great fit in such cases.

 

For students who have not been well-prepared for university, choosing a lower ranked school might actually be the opposite of what they need. It’s often the highly ranked schools that have the resources to invest in transitional programs in which students are supported and prepared for more intensive learning. These programs select students carefully, looking for potential and motivation. So kids can try it out and if it doesn’t work out, they’re not out several thousand dollars. 
 

I don’t think a small school, no matter how well-intentioned, will necessarily be able to provide the support that students coming from educationally disadvantaged backgrounds might need. 
 

 

[stripe]

Here are examples of larger state systems’ programs

https://www2.calstate.edu/attend/student-services/eop

https://www.uidaho.edu/current-students/academic-support

https://www.umflint.edu/studentsuccess/

I have attended college meetings for schools with high numbers of first generation college students, and they express a willingness to, for example, have lots of academic advising and help students orient themselves to campus. These “minor” issues contribute to students not feeling comfortable on campus or not having a clear sense of academic direction, which often leads to them dropping out, and that’s aside from academic issues. I was insulted and presumed to be underprepared by several professors when I was in grad school, and I actually WAS prepared.
 

[Frances]

30 minutes ago, bibiche said:

For students who have not been well-prepared for university, choosing a lower ranked school might actually be the opposite of what they need. It’s often the highly ranked schools that have the resources to invest in transitional programs in which students are supported and prepared for more intensive learning. These programs select students carefully, looking for potential and motivation. So kids can try it out and if it doesn’t work out, they’re not out several thousand dollars. 
 

I don’t think a small school, no matter how well-intentioned, will necessarily be able to provide the support that students coming from educationally disadvantaged backgrounds might need. 
 

 

Way back in the 1980s my Colleges that Change Lives school was providing some pretty intensive help to first generation college students. I’m guessing there are a wide range of schools out there that can support students who are coming from more disadvantaged educational backgrounds. But having worked in such a program at any Ivy League university while in grad school, I was not impressed at all with the selection process or really the program. And working as a TA, there were definitely students that were way in over their depth without the extra resources necessary to succeed.

Hopefully a student needing and wanting such support would be able to talk to students from similar backgrounds already at the college to see if it will be a good fit for them and met their needs.

Edited to note that I’m not advocating for low ranked schools, just to not think highly ranked schools necessarily do a good job with this. Fit, not rank, should be the primary consideration.

Edited June 5, 2021 by Frances

[bibiche]

53 minutes ago, Frances said:

Way back in the 1980s my Colleges that Change Lives school was providing some pretty intensive help to first generation college students. I’m guessing there are a wide range of schools out there that can support students who are coming from more disadvantaged educational backgrounds. But having worked in such a program at any Ivy League university while in grad school, I was not impressed at all with the selection process or really the program. And working as a TA, there were definitely students that were way in over their depth without the extra resources necessary to succeed.

Hopefully a student needing and wanting such support would be able to talk to students from similar backgrounds already at the college to see if it will be a good fit for them and met their needs.

Edited to note that I’m not advocating for low ranked schools, just to not think highly ranked schools necessarily do a good job with this. Fit, not rank, should be the primary consideration.

I am right there with you on the fit, not rank. I expound on this regularly, and for us for undergrad, elite schools are not high on the list just because they’re elite schools. In fact, there are at least one or two Ivies we wouldn’t send DS to if they paid us, precisely because they wouldn’t be the right fit.

I’m saying that when looking for fit, highly ranked schools shouldn’t be automatically eliminated, because often they have the money to support students who need it. I’m sorry you didn’t find that to be the case at your graduate school, and glad that it was at your undergrad institution. 

[Roadrunner]

so how does one measure potential? IQ tests? Recommendation letters?
To me GPA shows achievement, not potential. And  so do standardized tests.

And should we disregard potential from middle class and upper class kids? So should poor show potential but the rest academic achievement? 
 

[Sneezyone]

2 hours ago, Frances said:

Way back in the 1980s my Colleges that Change Lives school was providing some pretty intensive help to first generation college students. I’m guessing there are a wide range of schools out there that can support students who are coming from more disadvantaged educational backgrounds. But having worked in such a program at any Ivy League university while in grad school, I was not impressed at all with the selection process or really the program. And working as a TA, there were definitely students that were way in over their depth without the extra resources necessary to succeed.

Hopefully a student needing and wanting such support would be able to talk to students from similar backgrounds already at the college to see if it will be a good fit for them and met their needs.

Edited to note that I’m not advocating for low ranked schools, just to not think highly ranked schools necessarily do a good job with this. Fit, not rank, should be the primary consideration.

I wasn’t a first generation college student but I got zero support or guidance from my parents about what to look for or where/how to apply.  Most of my friends were/are domestic (not international) first gen’s. My experience was that students with stronger, more intense personality types did better at our top school, regardless of their preparation, than meek students with awesome grades and credentials. The meek students got run over in discussions and classroom debates. One might think that’s of no consequence since grades determine graduate placements but that’s not so in a field like poly sci. Connections and impressions matter. Thus, I’ve been much more focused on finding the right combo of nurturing my anxious student and developing the academic potential. I do not believe that would be possible at the school I attended, for ex. I see the same thing in DHs work with top school and academy grads. Matching the personality with the school and the area of study/career is much more important (and challenging) than just going to the best school you can get into, regardless of whether or not supports are in place.

Edited June 5, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Roadrunner]

28 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I wasn’t a first generation college student but I got zero support or guidance from my parents about what to look for or where/how to apply.  Most of my friends were/are domestic (not international) first gen’s. My experience was that students with stronger, more intense personality types did better at our top school, regardless of their preparation, than meek students with awesome grades and credentials. The meek students got run over in discussions and classroom debates. One might think that’s of no consequence since grades determine graduate placements but that’s not so in a field like poly sci. Connections and impressions matter. Thus, I’ve been much more focused on finding the right combo of nurturing my anxious student and developing the academic potential. I do not believe that would be possible at the school I attended, for ex. I see the same thing in DHs work with top school and academy grads. Matching the personality with the school and the area of study/career is much more important (and challenging) than just going to the best school you can get into, regardless of whether or not supports are in place.

This. Absolutely this.

[MamaSprout]

59 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I wasn’t a first generation college student but I got zero support or guidance from my parents about what to look for or where/how to apply.  

My parents were actually unhelpful! I still marvel that they made it through college and into adulthood at all, actually. ETA- I really would have benefitted from some of the services that first-gen students get. I didn't know what I didn't know.

Fit is so important. Even though conventional wisdom is that an engineering student can go anywhere that is ABET accredited, I would not send Dd to where I work (which is primarily an engineering school) even though it would be free. It would be a spectacularly bad fit. It would be a great fit for a motivated but not superstar student who needs some academic support and wants to play DIII sports, though.

Edited June 5, 2021 by MamaSprout

[Sneezyone]

38 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

This. Absolutely this.

Funny thing is, if I had gone to the school that studiously recruited me and gave me a full scholarship, I’d have been MISERABLE (but debt free) because my kind of thinking wasn’t welcome there. I know that now. I only sensed it then. As involved parents we have the advantage of being able to help guide our children and avoid that mismatch. I expect every ‘top’ college looks for that kind of personality/drive and major fit but they don’t all support the capable students they accept with whatever they need.
 

My bestie (1st gen) nearly flunked out at USC b/c no one told her that the most challenging classes she had access to didn’t cut it in MechE at USC. As a crew, we hid the fact that she was academically disqualified for spring/summer (she continued to pay university rent) while she took classes at LACC to boost her GPA. By fall, she was reinstated. She graduated with us, on time, two years later. There are no mentors for that stuff. We were just scrappy and resourceful and figured out a complimentary major she could switch to by ourselves. She BELONGED there and has gone on to have a very, very accomplished military career. Ironically, the academies do better with students like this than USC. SMH.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 5, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Roadrunner]

6 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Funny thing is, if I had gone to the school that studiously recruited me and gave me a full scholarship, I’d have been MISERABLE (but debt free) because my kind of thinking wasn’t welcome there. I know that now. I only sensed it then. As involved parents we have the advantage of being able to help guide our children and avoid that mismatch. I expect every ‘top’ college looks for that kind of personality/drive and major fit but they don’t all support the capable students they accept with whatever they need.
 

My bestie (1st gen) nearly flunked out at USC b/c no one told her that the most challenging classes she had access to didn’t cut it in MechE at USC. As a crew, we hid that fact that she was academically disqualified for spring/summer (she continued to pay university rent) while she took classes at LACC to boost her GPA. By fall, she was reinstated. She graduated with us, on time, two years later. There are no mentors for that stuff. We were just scrappy and resourceful and figured out a complimentary major she could switch to by ourselves. She BELONGED there and has gone on to have a very, very accomplished military career. Ironically, the academies do better with students like this than USC. SMH.

 

 

 

 

Only I think it’s really difficult to figure out that culture. I have a highly academic kid who needs a very low key environment. Not an easy combination. I look at UCs and shake my head. It seems to be completely dominated by highly competitive kids from Silicon Valley. My child wouldn’t last a day. 
Everybody else thinks I am nuts and read too much into it. 
 

I don’t feel qualified to guide my kid at all.
So I just got a Fisk guide from a friend and plan on having him read some representative samples of descriptions and see if anything “speaks” to him. Maybe couple of descriptions of LACs, couple tech schools, couple large public U’s.... 

[bibiche]

1 hour ago, Roadrunner said:

so how does one measure potential? IQ tests? Recommendation letters?
To me GPA shows achievement, not potential. And  so do standardized tests.

And should we disregard potential from middle class and upper class kids? So should poor show potential but the rest academic achievement? 
 

These programs usually recruit in underserved communities and look for candidates with demonstrated leadership qualities, academic potential, and resilience. 
 

Should potential in middle and upper class kids be disregarded? No, and  I don’t think it is disregarded by admissions officers - I think that’s always what universities are looking for. But potential is perhaps demonstrated in different ways in middle+ class kids than it is in poor kids. And I expect that admissions thinks that the middle+ kids have had time to show their potential academically in high school. I think all these kids are being evaluated for potential, it just looks different based on different backgrounds.

[Roadrunner]

2 hours ago, bibiche said:

These programs usually recruit in underserved communities and look for candidates with demonstrated leadership qualities, academic potential, and resilience. 
 

Should potential in middle and upper class kids be disregarded? No, and  I don’t think it is disregarded by admissions officers - I think that’s always what universities are looking for. But potential is perhaps demonstrated in different ways in middle+ class kids than it is in poor kids. And I expect that admissions thinks that the middle+ kids have had time to show their potential academically in high school. I think all these kids are being evaluated for potential, it just looks different based on different backgrounds.

Having personally seen some of these admissions officers, I find it absolutely repulsive that we seriously think these people are truly measuring our children’s potential. I will say no more. 

And accomplishing it in just 15 minutes per application! 

Edited June 5, 2021 by Roadrunner

[Sneezyone]

1 hour ago, Roadrunner said:

Only I think it’s really difficult to figure out that culture. I have a highly academic kid who needs a very low key environment. Not an easy combination. I look at UCs and shake my head. It seems to be completely dominated by highly competitive kids from Silicon Valley. My child wouldn’t last a day. 
Everybody else thinks I am nuts and read too much into it. 
 

I don’t feel qualified to guide my kid at all.
So I just got a Fisk guide from a friend and plan on having him read some representative samples of descriptions and see if anything “speaks” to him. Maybe couple of descriptions of LACs, couple tech schools, couple large public U’s.... 

It is HARD. If I hadn’t been to my near miss on ‘nerdling’ weekend... my one and only college tour... I’d have been screwed. There but for grace.

If your peeps are perceptive, just going on the occasional tour will help get a feel for things. If you can’t tour, read the comments from students/parents who attend. Reading these is like deciphering house listings. Cozy=small. If that’s not possible, find someone in your social network who knows you and  that area/region of the country. Put out feelers.

The obsession over what works or is preferred for the tippy top schools only works b/c that’s what people think leads to success but I’ve had just as many professional rejections b/c of my ‘name’ school as interviews. Some people read snobby and others read competence.

 

[RootAnn]

Well, my dd#2 is going to be attending a small public college which has a very active support group for 1st gens, low income, or just academically challenged kids. They have a summer bridge program (arriving 2 weeks early for academic, group building, & orientation stuff), special tutoring, their own hangout area, etc. I don't know what all because we don't qualify, but every kid at orientation had to fill out the form (so the college could figure out who needed it).

And they might only have 500-600 total on campus students. It's a tiny school. The average ACT score is hard to find, but I think the last time I looked, it was 18.

My oldest would have been a very bad fit. My dd#2 won't probably be able to find her tribe, but the small campus will be better for her than a large undergrad population.

[bibiche]

3 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

Having personally seen some of these admissions officers, I find it absolutely repulsive that we seriously think these people are truly measuring our children’s potential. I will say no more. 

And accomplishing it in just 15 minutes per application! 

Pretty sure they don’t spend that much time per application. I think it’s more like five if you’re lucky. 😐 Way too many applicants to spend much time evaluating.

[Frances]

1 hour ago, bibiche said:

Pretty sure they don’t spend that much time per application. I think it’s more like five if you’re lucky. 😐 Way too many applicants to spend much time evaluating.

So true. I mean for these schools that are basically lotteries, people don’t really believe they are picking the students with the most potential, do they? 

[Frances]

7 hours ago, MamaSprout said:

My parents were actually unhelpful! I still marvel that they made it through college and into adulthood at all, actually. ETA- I really would have benefitted from some of the services that first-gen students get. I didn't know what I didn't know.

Fit is so important. Even though conventional wisdom is that an engineering student can go anywhere that is ABET accredited, I would not send Dd to where I work (which is primarily an engineering school) even though it would be free. It would be a spectacularly bad fit. It would be a great fit for a motivated but not superstar student who needs some academic support and wants to play DIII sports, though.

My parents simply didn’t know anything about the system or how any of it worked. And my high school guidance counselor was spectacularly unqualified. I almost ended up at DeVry for computer science. Shudder. It’s basically pure luck that I ende up at one of the Colleges that Change Lives schools. My guidance counselor’s response when I told him (I also received their top scholarship)? I hear that’s a really tough school, are you sure you want to go there?

While I had the stats for higher rates schools and my background would have likely been seen as adding diversity (small town Midwest, first generation college student), I think I would have been absolutely miserable and overwhelmed at the type of top ranked Ivy where I attended grad school. 

[Roadrunner]

On 6/4/2021 at 2:43 PM, stripe said:

I tend to think the tests are biased, though. Or just not that important.

And I have a lot of respect for schools that take in underprepared students and help them, bring their basic scores up, give them support, so they are able to graduate.

I think this really needs to be the focus of high schools. It’s unforgivable what our high schools look like.