Why a Rejection Letter From Harvard or Other Top Colleges Can Be Surprisingly Helpful

[Sarah Bee]

Just thought of sharing this.

 

College acceptances have started to roll in for high-school seniors, and for the next several months, much of the focus of the national media will be on those students vying to get into the three dozen or so most selective colleges and universities in the country.

By May, we’ll hear campuses, such as Stanford, Harvard, and Princeton, bragging about how they accepted on 1 out of every 10 applicants this year, and set another record for applications and the number of students they rejected, including hundreds of high-school valedictorians.

Although these elite institutions enroll fewer than 6 percent of American college students, you might conclude from these stories that very few students are accepted into college in the United States. Not so. There are some 5,300 colleges and universities in the U.S., and the vast majority of them accept far more applicants than they reject.

But for some parents and students today, college admissions has turned into a game, where getting to Go seems to be ultimate goal rather than the education or degree itself.

Consider the reactions of a few students and their parents who found out last week that they didn’t get accepted into the University of Virginia, one of the nation’s most elite universities, which accepts fewer than 30% of students who apply. Here’s what one parent wrote on a blog maintained by a senior assistant dean of admissions at the university, which gives outsiders a rare window into the admissions process:

As a parent I find myself stunned my daughter was denied...over 1360 on the SATs, almost a perfect 800 on the writing, ranked 6in her class and straight As and A+ all 4 years. Add to that on the varsity track team for 4 years, active in her community and carrying a full AP COURSE load this year where she's carrying a 4.8 out of a possible 5.0. Scratching my head wondering how she wasn't acceptable.

Or from some students:

Pretty confused as to how I didn't get in. With a 4.3 GPA, a 34 on the ACT, and being a National Merit Semifinalist, I'm wondering what could've been missing from my application for UVA to have denied me.

I have had my heart set on UVA since last year, and it kind of sucked to find out I wasn't accepted. It was the only school I cared about, and even though it was too expensive for me and my mom...I don't know what I did wrong.

Lots of factors influence the crafting of class at these top colleges, and in recent years that task has become even more difficult as applications have flooded these institutions (sometimes encouraged, of course, by the colleges themselves). At the very top of American higher education, there are few differences in quality between schools. In other words, they are all good.

But trying to tell parents their Johnny or Suzie is not the brightest student in the class or thebest athlete despite the fact that they received an A in every class since middle school and a trophy for just showing up all these years is sometimes impossible. It’s highly unlikely that any of these students will skip college or end up at a school of much lower quality because they weren’t accepted to UVA.

Jeannine Lalonde, the senior assistant dean who writes the UVA blog, told me that most of the comments that I saw were written in the heat of the moment, minutes or hours after the university released the decisions for those students who applied early (another set of decisions go out later this spring). “It’s a tough night, but I think most will move on quickly. In a few weeks, they’ll be excited about some other wonderful school,” she said.

But whether intentional or not, we’ve created a sense of entitlement among high-school students these days who have excelled within their own little world for much of their adolescence. College admissions is perhaps the first time where they are competing with a much wider world of talent, much like the one that they are about to enter for the rest of their lives.

A lesson in rejection is a good one to have at a young age as it makes you appreciate what follows even more and allows you to take No as an answer in stride in the future. While I congratulate those students accepted to UVA last week, they will have to wait a bit longer for that life lesson.

 

Source: http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20140122172026-17000124-why-a-rejection-letter-from-harvard-or-other-top-colleges-can-be-surprisingly-helpful?trk=tod-home-art-list-large_0

[TheCrow]

But for some parents and students today, college admissions has turned into a game, where getting to Go seems to be ultimate goal rather than the education or degree itself.

 

It depends on whether you're viewing higher education from a human capital perspective or a status-conflict perspective. For the majority of college applicants, their application to baccalaureate programs is an exercise in instrumental rationality (i.e., a means to another end). The tired argument that you can get just as good of an education at a less selective school as you can at an elite school is moot if students are ultimately being hired and admitted to graduate school due to factors other than the quality of the education itself. Our current system of rankings rewards those who enroll top students and makes little if any effort to assess the quality of the education itself.

 

 

 

Lots of factors influence the crafting of class at these top colleges, and in recent years that task has become even more difficult as applications have flooded these institutions [...] But whether intentional or not, we’ve created a sense of entitlement among high-school students these days who have excelled within their own little world for much of their adolescence. College admissions is perhaps the first time where they are competing with a much wider world of talent, much like the one that they are about to enter for the rest of their lives.

 

I would push back a bit against this narrative of personal merit and individualistic competition. Your SAT and GPA are near perfect (perhaps even above the 75th percentile at the institution you applied to); you have significant extracurriculars and strong letters. When you don't get in, it wasn't necessarily because you didn't try enough or because other people were better. It often means that you just didn't have enough of what the dominant subgroup values: financial capital (and correlates thereof), cultural capital, social capital, etc.

 

Learning how to accept rejection is positive, but it doesn't follow from that premise that schools ought to be excused from their participation in replicating inequality from one generation to the next.

Edited January 24, 2014 by TheCrow

[iExcelAtMicrosoftPuns]

.

But whether intentional or not, we’ve created a sense of entitlement among high-school students these days who have excelled within their own little world for much of their adolescence. College admissions is perhaps the first time where they are competing with a much wider world of talent, much like the one that they are about to enter for the rest of their lives.

A lesson in rejection is a good one to have at a young age as it makes you appreciate what follows even more and allows you to take No as an answer in stride in the future. While I congratulate those students accepted to UVA last week, they will have to wait a bit longer for that life lesson.

 

Source: http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20140122172026-17000124-why-a-rejection-letter-from-harvard-or-other-top-colleges-can-be-surprisingly-helpful?trk=tod-home-art-list-large_0

The Dalek in me says,  "substantiate!"

Entitle... that is a word I do not like. I can't stand how it is thrown around as an insult to the people who need a handout. I can't stand how presumptuous it is to just make the assertion that someone feels "entitled" to something.

Please, please, please don't toss that word around. People were upset and wrote some comments - they were grieving, let em. 

Can we agree not to assume that folks feel entitled? please?

And the bit about the accepted folks learning rejection later in life - You just don't know. I reckon that there is atleast 1 accepted student who has dealt with rejection already - be it cultural, social, economical, whatever. Children are abandoned by parents, society, or peers every day. And some of them end up at top schools.

Soooooo - just don't assume they haven't dealt with rejection and don't assume they feel entitled.. just give them a pat on the back and wish them one love.

Admissions is a crazy beast.

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

I can't imagine having busted my ass since middle school. I'm glad I took the less glamorous road. Where my high school dropouts and community college graduates at?! And since this is a grad school forum, I think you learn later in your academic life that those unattainable schools are much more attainable when you apply for a PhD, if you earn it, no matter where you started your journey. It's funny when somebody went to a top high school and elite university for their BA only to go on to some undistinguished grad program. It's even funnier when the reason they got rejected from an elite program was because some nobody stole their spot. I guess I just have a thing against elite people. You'll never beat it out of me.

[fuzzylogician]

I guess I just have a thing against elite people. You'll never beat it out of me.

 

Somebody worked really hard all through middle school and high school, and got into a good school. Now they are an "elite person"? How about someone whose hard work paid off? I suppose given your rhetoric also that if you went the non-traditional route and got into the same good school, you are still not an "elite person"? I agree that you can end up at a good school through all kinds of ways and journeys, including the traditional route. All the "it's funny when.." rhetoric makes me wonder just how happy you are with your non traditional route, that you feel you need to stick it to anyone who didn't take such a route. 

 

I agree with BowTiesAreCool's thoughts above -- the people who are described in the article seem to have worked hard and had strong accomplishments. They should be allowed to be upset at not getting admitted, especially since we know that the comments that were quoted were written just after they found out. I'm sure their accomplishments will earn them a spot in some other good school and they will be successful, so they will overcome the setback, but they are allowed to be upset at it. 

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

Somebody worked really hard all through middle school and high school, and got into a good school. Now they are an "elite person"? How about someone whose hard work paid off? I suppose given your rhetoric also that if you went the non-traditional route and got into the same good school, you are still not an "elite person"? I agree that you can end up at a good school through all kinds of ways and journeys, including the traditional route. All the "it's funny when.." rhetoric makes me wonder just how happy you are with your non traditional route, that you feel you need to stick it to anyone who didn't take such a route. 

 

I agree with BowTiesAreCool's thoughts above -- the people who are described in the article seem to have worked hard and had strong accomplishments. They should be allowed to be upset at not getting admitted, especially since we know that the comments that were quoted were written just after they found out. I'm sure their accomplishments will earn them a spot in some other good school and they will be successful, so they will overcome the setback, but they are allowed to be upset at it.

I'm definitely not envious, if that's what you're getting at. I'm definitely not happy with how everything in my life has turned out, but preparing for the Ivy League since a toddler is not one of them.

[fuzzylogician]

I'm definitely not envious, if that's what you're getting at. I'm definitely not happy with how everything in my life has turned out, but preparing for the Ivy League since a toddler is not one of them.

 

Then I don't understand the contempt for anyone who just went the traditional route (this actually doesn't include me, btw, so I really am just wondering, not offended or anything). 

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

I guess I just grew up hating rich kids and kids with encouraging parents and/or teachers. I thought they were soft and had no real problems. It's hard to go your entire life focused on school and make it into an Ivy without a lot of help, encouragement and even handouts along the way. As an adult you realize a lot of people who went that route, or even went straight to college after high school, lack a lot of real life experience. I don't hate these types of people anymore, but I find it hard to respect a lot of them. Maybe one day I'll get over it, but as of now, at the very least, a lot of them just annoy me.

[m-ttl]

I guess I just grew up hating rich kids and kids with encouraging parents and/or teachers. I thought they were soft and had no real problems. It's hard to go your entire life focused on school and make it into an Ivy without a lot of help, encouragement and even handouts along the way. As an adult you realize a lot of people who went that route, or even went straight to college after high school, lack a lot of real life experience. I don't hate these types of people anymore, but I find it hard to respect a lot of them. Maybe one day I'll get over it, but as of now, at the very least, a lot of them just annoy me.

 

Speaking as someone who is not rich -- I understand the resentment. I have to work twice as hard to get half as far. But I was under pressure from both my family and myself to be like those kids (because I went to school with them, and because they were going to get an education -- highly valued), so I did go this more traditional route. After my parent's divorce, even if I hadn't wanted to, I would have had to -- I had no money to buy a car so I could work, and my parents essentially told me I could go to college, get a job, or be kicked out (lovingly). My mother lost our house anyways, after I turned 18 she no longer had my child support to put towards our mortgage -- college was going to be the only home I had available to me immediately. 

 

I would point out that the traditional route isn't all just kids who are like this article implies -- well-to-do, middle class white students who expect to get into Yale (as my freshman year roommate did just because she was a good student). A girl I befriended on Collegeconfidential fought her way to work while doing distance learning, paying her own electricity, water, etc, dealing with her abusive mother. We were both minority students but she was lucky enough to obtain the Questbridge scholarship and went to Stanford with full funding. I worked my ass off in school while my home was falling apart and getting into the baby Ivy I had originally wanted to attend was the first time my hard work had ever gone to something for myself alone. 

 

They took away my funding, but certainly I went out of my way to befriend the other students like myself, the first-gen, URM, low-income students who fought just to get a smidge of the chances these other students did. I feel as if a lot of them had a good head on their shoulders, though I can't speak for myself in an unbiased way. If anything, they did make me feel less alienated than the bored rich students I encounter who have no need to worry about their degree, job, salary, loans...who glided in and out of places. 

 

The teenagers in this article just don't have the full story -- or anything to compare their rejections to. Other teens? Well, we had plenty of much worse rejections to deal with. 

Edited January 24, 2014 by m-ttl

[rising_star]

I guess I just grew up hating rich kids and kids with encouraging parents and/or teachers. I thought they were soft and had no real problems. It's hard to go your entire life focused on school and make it into an Ivy without a lot of help, encouragement and even handouts along the way. As an adult you realize a lot of people who went that route, or even went straight to college after high school, lack a lot of real life experience. I don't hate these types of people anymore, but I find it hard to respect a lot of them. Maybe one day I'll get over it, but as of now, at the very least, a lot of them just annoy me.

 

You do realize that not everyone at Ivy League schools grew up wealthy or has encouraging parents or teachers, right? I know many people who applied to those schools in spite of everyone (teachers, parents, guidance counselors) telling them they couldn't or wouldn't get in. And sure, most of them didn't. But some did. You want to know why they applied anyway? Because the financial aid at those schools is *amazing* if you come from a poorer family. At several of them, if your parents' combined income is under $75K, your tuition, room, and board are all awarded to you via a scholarship. It is an amazing opportunity to realize some small part of the American dream and people that are able to do that shouldn't be looked down on. You have to work your ass off to get into a good school when you don't come from a prestigious high school or the places people are expecting.

 

Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "real life" experience. I've met people both rich and poor that seemed to have no real life experience. I've met kids that went to Ivy undergrad and started working at the age of 14 and others whose parents handed them everything. I've also met kids that went to Big State U, had everything handed to them, dropped out due to lack of interest, lived on mommy and daddy's money for a few years while trying to decide what to do, then went back. By your description, the latter kids are less annoying and easier to respect, which makes no sense to me.

 

You should probably try to avoid painting thousands of people with such a broad brush.

[ImpulsiveNixie]

But whether intentional or not, we’ve created a sense of entitlement among high-school students these days who have excelled within their own little world for much of their adolescence. College admissions is perhaps the first time where they are competing with a much wider world of talent, much like the one that they are about to enter for the rest of their lives.

A lesson in rejection is a good one to have at a young age as it makes you appreciate what follows even more and allows you to take No as an answer in stride in the future. While I congratulate those students accepted to UVA last week, they will have to wait a bit longer for that life lesson.

 

Source: http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20140122172026-17000124-why-a-rejection-letter-from-harvard-or-other-top-colleges-can-be-surprisingly-helpful?trk=tod-home-art-list-large_0

It is wonderful that you make this point. Some of the best decisions I have made have come from the rejection of something I thought I wanted.

[juilletmercredi]

^But some of the best decisions I've made have also come from being given a chance, accepted somewhere, and taking that offer.

 

I actually kind of hate all of the sensationalism about the "entitlement" of the Millennial generation and how they expect everything to be handed to them.  The University of Virginia is a public university; it's designed to serve the needs of the residents of Virginia.  The average SAT math + reading is like a 1260-1460.  So when a kid has a 1360 on the SAT, a near-perfect GPA and great activities...YES, you DO expect for her to get admitted to a college where she fits the mold of the average student, especially if she's a VA resident.  Same with the National Merit Semifinalist with a 4.3 and a 34 ACT.  UVa is not one of those hyper-competitive places like Harvard or Yale - they admit 30% of their applicants!  Things are different if either of those high schoolers are not from Virginia, but I think a talented, high-achieving Virginian should be expected to be accepted to her state's flagship university, where her parents pay taxes.

 

But the changing nature of higher education is what's changing the playing field for these students.  There are some high-profile public universities that have turned to recruiting out of state students because those students will pay out-of-state tuition and aren't eligible for state sources of financial aid.  At places like UVa, Michigan, Alabama, and Wisconsin-Madison, Penn State, and Oregon, 30-40% of the student body are from out of state.  (Compare to Washington, UCLA, Berkeley, and UGA, where less than 15% of the students were from OOS).  As a matter of fact, if you look at a lot of the state flagships these days they have MUCH higher numbers of OOS students than they did 15 or even just 10 years ago.  It's not because those schools changed substantially in the last few years; as states decrease funding for their flagship universities, universities feel compelled to look elsewhere for money, and one of the places they find it is in wealthy OOS students who are willing to pay full price.  But that drives up the selectivity/drives down the acceptance rate for in-state students.

 

And then for the selective privates...some of them are deliberately driving down their acceptance rates by doing recruitment.  They will go visit the schools where they routinely accept students from, but they'll also flood the mailboxes of students who have little hope of getting admitted to their schools.  I was visiting the page of Northwestern the other day; the front page of their site boasts that they received a record number of applications this year.  Their acceptance rate is already 18%; they have more than 5 applicants for every 1 slot they have in their freshman class.  Why are they trying to attract MORE applicants (aside from trying to increase the diversity of their class)?  My hypothesis is that it's all about those stupid U.S. News rankings.  Wealthy and upper-middle-class families decide where to send their children partially based on rankings, and most rankings (most prominently USN) use selectivity as a factor in the rankings.  The other factors (faculty resources, alumni giving, graduation rates) are much harder and more expensive to change quickly, but acceptance rate is something that's easy to drive down relatively quickly.  That's my theory, at least.

 

Anyway, my point is that I don't think it's a "sense of entitlement" that high schoolers who bust their ass all through high school expect to get accepted to a good college.  That's supposed to be the deal, right? - you work hard and you get rewarded for that hard work.  Yes, they are competing nationally, but how many students are there nationally with a 4.8, a 2180, straight As and a full extracurricular schedule?  Actually, not that many.  Perhaps enough to fill the classes at all the Ivies, but there are still at least 200-300 other great selective colleges where I think a student can expect to go.

[MadtownJacket]

When I see someone with a GPA of 4.8, I think of grade inflation.  Maybe that's definitely not the case.

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

When I see someone with a GPA of 4.8, I think of grade inflation.  Maybe that's definitely not the case.

I didn't really do the high school thing, but I've heard how it works. The high school I attended (freshmen year a few go-ats) had regular, honors, AP and IB. I believe regular and honors both were on a 4.0 scale. I guess honors just looks a little better but doesn't "inflate" your GPA. Then AP is on a 5.0 scale, so a B in an AP class is like an A in regular/honors. Then IB is on a 6.0 scale, so a C is like an A in regular/honors. But then you get your weighted (factoring in IB and AP) and your unweighted (everything on a 4.0 scale) GPAs. I had some IB friends who had 4.5 weighted GPAs and 2.5 unweighted. Then I had some friends with A's in almost every class (regular and honors) they ever took who only had a 3.9 weighted and unweighted. 

 

A little off topic, but I knew a girl who went to the University of Alabama. They're one of the few universities with an A+ grade (4.33). I had a 4.0 undergrad GPA and she had a 4.1. But she had like five C's on her transcript, and she would still try to brag how her GPA was better than mine. Anyway, so yea, grade inflation. 

Edited January 25, 2014 by Gnome Chomsky

[MadtownJacket]

My high school doesn't give extra GPA points for AP classes.  What you get is on the same scale as everyone else.  If it was consistent across the country, then I'd be okay with having AP on a 5.0 scale, IB on a 6.0 scale, etc.

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

My high school doesn't give extra GPA points for AP classes.  What you get is on the same scale as everyone else.  If it was consistent across the country, then I'd be okay with having AP on a 5.0 scale, IB on a 6.0 scale, etc.

Yeah this was back in 2000-2004. I dunno if it changed since then. But I have a friend who just graduated from high school a year ago and she said her AP classes were 5.0. 

[m-ttl]

I didn't really do the high school thing, but I've heard how it works. The high school I attended (freshmen year a few go-ats) had regular, honors, AP and IB. I believe regular and honors both were on a 4.0 scale. I guess honors just looks a little better but doesn't "inflate" your GPA. Then AP is on a 5.0 scale, so a B in an AP class is like an A in regular/honors. Then IB is on a 6.0 scale, so a C is like an A in regular/honors. But then you get your weighted (factoring in IB and AP) and your unweighted (everything on a 4.0 scale) GPAs. I had some IB friends who had 4.5 weighted GPAs and 2.5 unweighted. Then I had some friends with A's in almost every class (regular and honors) they ever took who only had a 3.9 weighted and unweighted. 

 

A little off topic, but I knew a girl who went to the University of Alabama. They're one of the few universities with an A+ grade (4.33). I had a 4.0 undergrad GPA and she had a 4.1. But she had like five C's on her transcript, and she would still try to brag how her GPA was better than mine. Anyway, so yea, grade inflation. 

 

Sort of. This varies wildly by High School (for example, all my school's honors/AP classes were weighted on a 5.0 scale as opposed to the regular 4.0) HOWEVER our GPA would list both the weighted AND unweighted GPAs (so I would list GPAs like 3.3 UW, 3.5 W, for example), plus all high schools submit a profile to colleges when the school counselors send in their recommendation letters. 

 

Basically that profile lists the following things: How many honors or AP courses are available at your school (because if you took 5 APs at a school that only offers 5, it looks impressive. If you only took 5 at a school that offers say, 15, or some other high number...well, you're slacking, comparatively), if your school offers IB, whether or not there are specific "tracks" or levels of coursework, and which level you were on, how many students go to your school, the requirements for GPA minimums, the GPA scale (which may be entirely weighted, but admissions will unweight them for you, or may have their own scale), etc. 

 

This also usually includes graduation rates, socioeconomic and racial breakdowns, etc. You're NOT just showing up with a 4.5 GPA. You're showing up as someone with a 4.5 on a weighted scale of 5.0 or 6.0 which translates to something else unweighted. They'll compare you to your school's profile, and gauge how much work you've done based on the resources available to you. 

 

You're showing up against the entire rest of your school who may not even be applying to X College AND past students who were accepted places (because you can't lower the minimums usually at that point; if one student went to Yale the previous year, you'd better hope your stats are at least close to the same), PLUS the students of your local geographic region's stats. My high school counselor was completely shocked that I asked what was on the HS profile because most students have no idea it even exists -- but I had done a specific program available at my school that I wanted to have show up and be explained in my application that might not otherwise have been mentioned.

 

I know it looks like it stops at grade inflation, but it really doesn't: most admissions committees get rid of that if the school profile tells them how their grades are scaled (and you're supposed to in a profile).

 

Collegeboard's sample profile is pretty telling. 

Edited January 25, 2014 by m-ttl

[CageFree]

I guess I just grew up hating rich kids and kids with encouraging parents and/or teachers. I thought they were soft and had no real problems. It's hard to go your entire life focused on school and make it into an Ivy without a lot of help, encouragement and even handouts along the way. As an adult you realize a lot of people who went that route, or even went straight to college after high school, lack a lot of real life experience. I don't hate these types of people anymore, but I find it hard to respect a lot of them. Maybe one day I'll get over it, but as of now, at the very least, a lot of them just annoy me.

 

 

You seem to assume that every kid who went "straight through" comes from privileged backgrounds. That's most certainly not the case. I went to college straight out of high school, after living in another country for over half of my life, having to re-learn English, and navigating the american system of college acceptance without any guidance or "handouts." I  was 16 when I came back to the US... I had never even HEARD of an SAT.

 

Immigrant families often make tremendous sacrifices to ensure that their children will be in a position to reach the "American Dream." My parents moved our entire family back to the US because they saw there was no opportunity for me or my siblings back where I grew up.

 

My family encouraged me to study, but my father was a HS dropout and my mother only had about a semester's worth of college (in another country)... neither of them understood how it worked. My high school counselor tried to steer me toward vocational programs because she thought that being from another country (or having grown up in one) made me unworthy of attending any university, let alone the "public Ivy" that became my alma mater.

 

You know who I actually "resent?" The people who've had every opportunity available to them, and decided not to take advantage. I would have killed to be in a GATE program, to take advanced classes early in my academic career, to actually prepare for SATs and AP exams. Seeing students who are perfectly capable of achieving something just throw it away because they have the PRIVILEGE to say, "I am not going to bust my ass now, I can just go to community college and start my life later," really chaps my hide. The fact that you could "wait" a few years before dedicating yourself to school is the ultimate "first world problem." Those of us who grew up outside the American bubble often don't get to choose when to work hard... we have the one chance, and we take it, so forgive us for not getting that "real life experience" that you believe makes you superior. 

 

I didn't have the privilege of putting off college... I had no CHOICE but to "bust my ass in school" so that my parents could see that their sacrifices were worthwhile.

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

You seem to assume that every kid who went "straight through" comes from privileged backgrounds. That's most certainly not the case. I went to college straight out of high school, after living in another country for over half of my life, having to re-learn English, and navigating the american system of college acceptance without any guidance or "handouts." I  was 16 when I came back to the US... I had never even HEARD of an SAT.

 

Immigrant families often make tremendous sacrifices to ensure that their children will be in a position to reach the "American Dream." My parents moved our entire family back to the US because they saw there was no opportunity for me or my siblings back where I grew up.

 

My family encouraged me to study, but my father was a HS dropout and my mother only had about a semester's worth of college (in another country)... neither of them understood how it worked. My high school counselor tried to steer me toward vocational programs because she thought that being from another country (or having grown up in one) made me unworthy of attending any university, let alone the "public Ivy" that became my alma mater.

 

You know who I actually "resent?" The people who've had every opportunity available to them, and decided not to take advantage. I would have killed to be in a GATE program, to take advanced classes early in my academic career, to actually prepare for SATs and AP exams. Seeing students who are perfectly capable of achieving something just throw it away because they have the PRIVILEGE to say, "I am not going to bust my ass now, I can just go to community college and start my life later," really chaps my hide. The fact that you could "wait" a few years before dedicating yourself to school is the ultimate "first world problem." Those of us who grew up outside the American bubble often don't get to choose when to work hard... we have the one chance, and we take it, so forgive us for not getting that "real life experience" that you believe makes you superior. 

 

I didn't have the privilege of putting off college... I had no CHOICE but to "bust my ass in school" so that my parents could see that their sacrifices were worthwhile.

 

I didn't have the privilege of putting off college. I joined the military at 17 because I was sleeping on the trains in New York City. And I dropped out of high school at 16 because I was working construction full-time during school hours. I had to make a choice. After I gained some stability on my own, I enrolled in community college. I don't know if you were lumping me into that category or just making a generalization (which is what I did in my original post). I guess that's the problem with generalizations. I made one that everyone who goes straight from high school to college had a good life, and you made one that every American has vast opportunities to choose from. 

[trizzleYO]

I don't know, I kind of hate these kids too. 

 

Granted, they're just kids and kids will be kids so w.e., but we have so much that I find it irritating when people complain about not getting what they want.  Obviously, there are two sides to that coin, and I believe in fair practices, but this is not the labor market, and I know a lot of people like this and they're generally very judgemental, spiteful people. 

 

We can also gripe about generalizations, and yes, everyone deserves a voice, but sadly they're useful to your brain - there just isn't enough time or room in the day to accommodate the possibilities of every single person.  We can do our best, and as a minority, a college dropout, community college come-backer, I try to give eveyrone the opportunity to be themselves, but I'm not going to spend the brain power to go out of my way to defend entitled kids.

[CageFree]

I didn't have the privilege of putting off college. I joined the military at 17 because I was sleeping on the trains in New York City. And I dropped out of high school at 16 because I was working construction full-time during school hours. I had to make a choice. After I gained some stability on my own, I enrolled in community college. I don't know if you were lumping me into that category or just making a generalization (which is what I did in my original post). I guess that's the problem with generalizations. I made one that everyone who goes straight from high school to college had a good life, and you made one that every American has vast opportunities to choose from. 

 

Mine was not a generalization about every American. I don't resent kids who through accident of birth and/or circumstance have opportunities (whether it's due to money, being in a good district, having good mentors) and take advantage of them to go to an Ivy League school. I was simply commenting on students who DO have opportunities and throw them away.

Edited January 28, 2014 by CageFree

[gingin6789]

I can't imagine having busted my ass since middle school. I'm glad I took the less glamorous road. Where my high school dropouts and community college graduates at?! And since this is a grad school forum, I think you learn later in your academic life that those unattainable schools are much more attainable when you apply for a PhD, if you earn it, no matter where you started your journey. It's funny when somebody went to a top high school and elite university for their BA only to go on to some undistinguished grad program. It's even funnier when the reason they got rejected from an elite program was because some nobody stole their spot. I guess I just have a thing against elite people. You'll never beat it out of me.

 

Right here!! GED class of 2007 representing!!!!!  Community college class of 2011!!  I'm also a non-traditional student

 

I agree with everything up to the last couple sentences.  Has coming up from the bottom made me eternally grateful to just be able to apply to grad school?  Yes, of course!  I can't think of myself as better than those with traditional backgrounds, however.  Sure, there are kids who have had everything handed to them, access to extra resources such as tutors and SAT prep classes (never took the SATs, myself), and things like that make me angry; if a score becomes based on access to resources rather than ability, then I get upset.

 

However, My mom was third in her class in high school.  Very traditional background.  With the world her oyster, she chose to attend community college and commute to nearby PSU Harrisburg for her bachelors degree because it was less expensive and so she could be home to take care of her grandmother.  Even though I dropped out, she never saw herself as elite compared to me.  I could get Fs as long as she knew I was trying my best.  She went to college for business administration, and I'm going for sociology.  She never saw it as a "soft field" or asked "What are you going to do with that?" like so many others did and still do ... So there are folks like my mom with a traditional background who aren't elitists.  I've met non-traditional students who were extremely elitist!

 

I do understand where you and trizzleyo are coming from though.  Just thought I'd add my two cents =) 

[dania201]

Having gone to an Ivy League institution in my undergrad, I remember quickly realizing that a lot of these schools (for undergrad, at least) are looking for this other thing--this thing that's hard to measure. A perfect SAT (or GRE) is great, but its not necessarily an indication that you are an individual who will make an extraordinary contribution, or has a unique contribution to campus academic life. I think we figure that high scores get us in--but in reality its only a small part of the picture.