4 ms·

Parsing through 37,601 (and accepting only 1500) applications without standardized testing sounds incredibly difficult. If I were a teenager trying to get into

Parsing through 37,601 (and accepting only 1500) applications without standardized testing sounds incredibly difficult. If I were a teenager trying to get into a top school these days, my anxiety would be through the roof. Can't imagine the extracurricular work you have to put in now.

abledon 6y ago
and surrounded by way more screens/extended screen-time as your brain tries to develop... arghhh
csa 6y ago
> Parsing through 37,601 (and accepting only 1500) applications without standardized testing sounds incredibly difficult. While the task is daunting, it’s not quite as bad as you think when well over half of the applications are almost instant rejections. > If I were a teenager trying to get into a top school these days, my anxiety would be through the roof. Can't imagine the extracurricular work you have to put in now. It’s quality not quantity. So many people miss this point.
nemothekid 6y ago
I can't imagine standardized testing being anything but a low pass filter for these schools. Roughly 2 million students take the SAT every year, which means 100,000 scores in the top 5%; 20,000 in the top 1%. Whittling down 20,000 high scores to 1500 isn't any easier.
- flavius29663 6y ago
  But you don't have 20000 applicants from the top 1%, because not all will apply to every top school.
  - nemothekid 6y ago
    Princeton's SAT score percentile, last year, ranged from 96%-99%. That is still, potentially, 80,0000 applicants. Furthermore, it's not like the applicants are ranked and accepted in order of test scores. My point is that having test scores doesn't make this process that much easier for a school like Princeton. They were already down weighting test scores after you scored in a certain range; you still needed to pile on extra curricular and recommendations (and maybe donate a building or two if your parents could afford it).
    - flavius29663 6y ago
      This sounds to me like such a non-problem that is blown out of proportions. Somewhat typical for American way of handling politics. Back at home for example (in Romania), there is an SAT equivalent (that is also much tougher). The universities can each choose to use just that in the admission, or they can choose to give another test on their own. These admission tests are usually setup around the country such that large universities don't have it on the same day. For the top universities the admission tests can be quite difficult, a top 1% would be at the bottom 25% if they don't prepare specifically for those tests. The tests are usually given for Math, so they're pretty fair and easy to score. And if you prepare for one university it's pretty much the same for all, with slight differences. That math is hard, but at least you know what to expect. And if you prepare properly, you kind of know where you stand. I don't understand how US admission is acceptable: very wishy-washy, essays, extra-curricular activities, references...who decides what matters most? It's by design unfair and unpredictable.
      - nemothekid 6y ago
        You can’t compare American universities to Romania. A school like Princeton is attracting candidates internationally - if they just used a perfectly objective math exam they would likely have 50,000 applicants with perfect stores, but then what do you do about the students who don’t want to be math majors? These schools are operating on a completely different scale in terms of potential applicants and still only have 3000 seats.
busyant 6y ago
> If I were a teenager trying to get into a top school these days, my anxiety would be through the roof. If I knew a teenager in this situation, I'd emphasize that there is a large "quasi-random" component to admission to these types of school. What I mean is that the number of incredibly talented applicants _rejected_ by Princeton and Harvard is probably as large as the number of admissions. I know someone who is _tenured_ in the physics department @ a HYPS school. He was an undergrad (and grad student) @ Harvard. He once told me that if he applied as an undergraduate today, he'd probably have a 50/50 shot at getting in.
- dopu 6y ago
  Your comment illustrates another way in which these institutions maintain exclusivity -- they hire and admit people that are already in them. I did my undergraduate in a run-of-the-mill liberal arts college. I managed to get into a post-baccalaureate program at a HYPS-level institution, and I'm now doing my PhD at a HYPS. I find it extremely difficult to believe that I would've been evaluated the same way in grad school applications if I hadn't done the post-bac where I did.
  - busyant 6y ago
    > I find it extremely difficult to believe that I would've been evaluated the same way in grad school applications if I hadn't done the post-bac where I did. I have a similar background: undergrad @ middle-of-the-road state school. PhD at HYPS school. As you would expect, I was a teaching assistant for a couple of undergraduate courses. As such, I got to know many undergrads. I would occasionally bump into them when they were about to graduate and I was frequently shocked when they told me stuff like, "Yeah. I'm going to Harvard Med" (or some other illustrious program) and I would think to myself, "You were a good student, but I knew undergrads at my state school who were just as good. And Harvard Med didn't even given them an _interview_." I'm not saying the students were not talented enough to excel @ Harvard Med, but I imagine there is some level of "peace of mind" if these schools favor their own. As the saying goes: Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM stock....
    - 6y ago

abledon 6y ago

and surrounded by way more screens/extended screen-time as your brain tries to develop... arghhh

csa 6y ago

> Parsing through 37,601 (and accepting only 1500) applications without standardized testing sounds incredibly difficult. While the task is daunting, it’s not quite as bad as you think when well over half of the applications are almost instant rejections. > If I were a teenager trying to get into a top school these days, my anxiety would be through the roof. Can't imagine the extracurricular work you have to put in now. It’s quality not quantity. So many people miss this point.

nemothekid 6y ago

I can't imagine standardized testing being anything but a low pass filter for these schools. Roughly 2 million students take the SAT every year, which means 100,000 scores in the top 5%; 20,000 in the top 1%. Whittling down 20,000 high scores to 1500 isn't any easier.

flavius29663 6y ago
But you don't have 20000 applicants from the top 1%, because not all will apply to every top school.
- nemothekid 6y ago
  Princeton's SAT score percentile, last year, ranged from 96%-99%. That is still, potentially, 80,0000 applicants. Furthermore, it's not like the applicants are ranked and accepted in order of test scores. My point is that having test scores doesn't make this process that much easier for a school like Princeton. They were already down weighting test scores after you scored in a certain range; you still needed to pile on extra curricular and recommendations (and maybe donate a building or two if your parents could afford it).
  - flavius29663 6y ago
    This sounds to me like such a non-problem that is blown out of proportions. Somewhat typical for American way of handling politics. Back at home for example (in Romania), there is an SAT equivalent (that is also much tougher). The universities can each choose to use just that in the admission, or they can choose to give another test on their own. These admission tests are usually setup around the country such that large universities don't have it on the same day. For the top universities the admission tests can be quite difficult, a top 1% would be at the bottom 25% if they don't prepare specifically for those tests. The tests are usually given for Math, so they're pretty fair and easy to score. And if you prepare for one university it's pretty much the same for all, with slight differences. That math is hard, but at least you know what to expect. And if you prepare properly, you kind of know where you stand. I don't understand how US admission is acceptable: very wishy-washy, essays, extra-curricular activities, references...who decides what matters most? It's by design unfair and unpredictable.
    - nemothekid 6y ago
      You can’t compare American universities to Romania. A school like Princeton is attracting candidates internationally - if they just used a perfectly objective math exam they would likely have 50,000 applicants with perfect stores, but then what do you do about the students who don’t want to be math majors? These schools are operating on a completely different scale in terms of potential applicants and still only have 3000 seats.

busyant 6y ago

> If I were a teenager trying to get into a top school these days, my anxiety would be through the roof. If I knew a teenager in this situation, I'd emphasize that there is a large "quasi-random" component to admission to these types of school. What I mean is that the number of incredibly talented applicants _rejected_ by Princeton and Harvard is probably as large as the number of admissions. I know someone who is _tenured_ in the physics department @ a HYPS school. He was an undergrad (and grad student) @ Harvard. He once told me that if he applied as an undergraduate today, he'd probably have a 50/50 shot at getting in.

dopu 6y ago
Your comment illustrates another way in which these institutions maintain exclusivity -- they hire and admit people that are already in them. I did my undergraduate in a run-of-the-mill liberal arts college. I managed to get into a post-baccalaureate program at a HYPS-level institution, and I'm now doing my PhD at a HYPS. I find it extremely difficult to believe that I would've been evaluated the same way in grad school applications if I hadn't done the post-bac where I did.
- busyant 6y ago
  > I find it extremely difficult to believe that I would've been evaluated the same way in grad school applications if I hadn't done the post-bac where I did. I have a similar background: undergrad @ middle-of-the-road state school. PhD at HYPS school. As you would expect, I was a teaching assistant for a couple of undergraduate courses. As such, I got to know many undergrads. I would occasionally bump into them when they were about to graduate and I was frequently shocked when they told me stuff like, "Yeah. I'm going to Harvard Med" (or some other illustrious program) and I would think to myself, "You were a good student, but I knew undergrads at my state school who were just as good. And Harvard Med didn't even given them an _interview_." I'm not saying the students were not talented enough to excel @ Harvard Med, but I imagine there is some level of "peace of mind" if these schools favor their own. As the saying goes: Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM stock....
  - 6y ago