legacy

[devildeac]

We're all very impressed with your method of doing things, Colchar. We get it, Canada's awesome and we suck.

That said, I'm certain I would not get into Duke if I applied in 2007 instead of 1993.

TB-you are not the only one. When I consider my appy from 1971 for the class of 1976 and the current apps, there is NO WAY I would be admitted now. But then again, a lot of the ol' farts might not be admitted now and where would we be if ol' geezers like OZZIE, Ricks '68, Stray, Jarhead(?), Bob Green, Jim Sumner and Mr. Brill were unc or NCSU alums instead (this is not meant to malign any one as I do not know thier credentials, I am just pickin' on some of the boards' senior citizens). BTW, we also cheered louder, longer, more cleverly and poured beer better back in the 60's and 70's (oops, wrong thread)

[colchar]

We're all very impressed with your method of doing things, Colchar. We get it, Canada's awesome and we suck.

Dude...what the hell is your problem? All I was saying was that I was surprised you guys started that early. And this isn't a Canada thing, this is an Ontario thing as I have no idea when the universities in other provinces start their school years.

Seriously man, take a freakin' pill and chill out.

If you were referring to my comment that we don't have the same kind of admission system as you guys do (legacy status doesn't mean squat up here) then yeah, you guys do suck. Admissions should be based on merit and not on the fact that Mommy and Daddy went to school X. We don't do legacy admissions here, they don't do them in Britain, they don't do them in Australia, they don't do them in New Zealand. In all those countries admissions are based on merit.

So yeah, if that was what you were referring to you should be impressed with our system as the kid who is the first in their family to go to university has the same chance of getting in as a kid with the same grades whose parents are doctors.

[Lavabe]

Dude...what the hell is your problem?

Watch out Throaty! I was also duded the other day.

On a more serious question about schools north of the border, do you have courtesy scholarships (upon normal admission) for children of faculty?

I'm curious about that one. At one point several years ago, I had applied for a position at UBC, and wondered about it.

Throaty: Oddly enough, I vaguely recall that the Mizzou system got rid of courtesy scholarships a while ago. Have they changed it back?

Cheers Dudes,
Lavabe
P.S. Hmmm... I think I could get into this duding! ... NAH!!!

[throatybeard]

The UM system gives faculty offspring 50%. This per my next door neighbor in the office whose kid goes here at UMSL. This works system-wide, so say you work at UMKC--your kid can get the discount here or at Rolla or Mizzou.

WashU still has free ride for these kids. But WashU has more money than God. Actually, I think he's their Provost.

[Lavabe]

The UM system gives faculty offspring 50%. This per my next door neighbor in the office whose kid goes here at UMSL. This works system-wide, so say you work at UMKC--your kid can get the discount here or at Rolla or Mizzou.

WashU still has free ride for these kids. But WashU has more money than God. Actually, I think he's their Provost.

Duke does something similar to WashU, but it also gives reduced rates at a number of other schools. Emory, on the other hand, only gives it for Emory.

I was at Wash U prior to the massive capital campaign. The effect of that campaign can't be overemphasized. Emory had started up with the merit-scholarships. Once the WashU campaign took place, WashU did the same as Emory. It isn't odd that a massive capital campaign occurs, and your rankings go up.

Cheers,
Lavabe

[colchar]

On a more serious question about schools north of the border, do you have courtesy scholarships (upon normal admission) for children of faculty?

I'm curious about that one. At one point several years ago, I had applied for a position at UBC, and wondered about it.

It varies by school. Some will give tuition discounts and others will give free tuition.

[kexman]

I think Throaty and other early to mid 90's grads would still get in to Duke. I think Duke has maintained or fallen in the rankings since that time (US News for what it is worth). I thought we peaked at number 4 one year in the early 90's? I guess my thought is that I don't think that kids in general today are any smarter than the kids of 15 years ago. I also think Duke fresh off of 2 national championships (and not hated at that point) was a "hot" school to attend.
What I do think is that kids today are much more prepped for college admission. I would love to hear someone with actual data suggest how many kids are being prepped for college applications versus 10 years ago. Articles in magazines describe parents spending 30-40K on admissions counselors (a donation might be easier, but I digress). Sending kids abroad so that they have a cool experience for essays and interviews. It is amazing the lengths that parents/kids will go to today to prep for college admission. I think that was the minority in the early 90's, but is now fairly mainstream. My college prep was that I purchased an SAT book the week before the test. Today I would probably sit through a Kaplan or Princeton review course. Also the SAT scores have been recentered during the 90's so Throaty can add approximately 100 points to his SAT score in comparison to the applicants today.


p.s. I think Wash U will pay up to 50% of their tuition elsewhere (which basically would cover the full cost of a state school).

[throatybeard]

That's true about the SAT. And it's been recentered twice.

If, if Throaty has any offspring, he's got his eyes on Truman State, which looks like an exceptional value. Duke's gonna cost $85K a year by the time any hypothetical spawn of mine is 18.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truman_State_University

[Lavabe]

I think Throaty and other early to mid 90's grads would still get in to Duke. ... Also the SAT scores have been recentered during the 90's so Throaty can add approximately 100 points to his SAT score in comparison to the applicants today.

So my 1360 from the late 70's/early 80's is really more like a 1460 or something? COOL!!

I wonder if my chances would improve if I came from Montana, Idaho, or some other often-underrepresented state? Is there still some admissions component that promotes geographical diversity? Alas, I was part of the New Jersey diaspora.

Cheers,
Lavabe

[DevilAlumna]

If, if Throaty has any offspring, he's got his eyes on Truman State, which looks like an exceptional value. Duke's gonna cost $85K a year by the time any hypothetical spawn of mine is 18.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truman_State_University

Hey, Pam from The Office is a TSU alum!

But throaty, you would knowingly send your hypothetical child to a "dry" campus? That seems... out of character.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

So my 1360 from the late 70's/early 80's is really more like a 1460 or something? COOL!!

And my 1370 would be 1470. I was accepted at Cornell (Engineering), GaTech and Duke (Engineering). I think I would still be accepted at Duke today. You can't count lost brain cells today against me if I was still 18.

Now, I might find it harder to graduate today than back then. For one thing, my AP credits (3's on the tests) wouldn't be good for squat today from what I understand.

[devildeac]

And my 1370 would be 1470. I was accepted at Cornell (Engineering), GaTech and Duke (Engineering). I think I would still be accepted at Duke today. You can't count lost brain cells today against me if I was still 18.

Now, I might find it harder to graduate today than back then. For one thing, my AP credits (3's on the tests) wouldn't be good for squat today from what I understand.

Hoped my 'funnin' with some of the old timers would elicit some responses-not meant to malign. My 1310 would be a 1410 I guess and my participation in numerous clubs, editing/writing 2 sections of the school newspaper, varsity golf, being president of a couple clubs and being from NJ would probably not earn me a spot this decade at Duke. We had no AP classes at my relatively small suburban HS. I got into Bucknell, Delaware and Duke and rejected from ewe-vee-eh(they had a huge emphasis that year on making the male-female ratio 50-50) and of course I was out-of-state. Did manage to get wait-listed at Princeton.

[hurleyfor3]

I wonder if my chances would improve if I came from Montana, Idaho, or some other often-underrepresented state? Is there still some admissions component that promotes geographical diversity? Alas, I was part of the New Jersey diaspora.

There's definitely a sunbconscious effort at geographic diversity at pretty much any big-name private school.

Many years ago I taught SAT prep. I always told kids the best way to get into the Ivies was to move from Winnetka to North Dakota. I wasn't kidding.

[tecumseh]

100 points is pushing it and how much it helped you depends upon what your scores were. There was actually very little change in the math SAT scores with recentering but in the Verbal there was an add of like 60 points or so depending upon where your scores were. Back in the day almost no one got an 800 on the verbal. In fact if you got over 750 verbal you were in the top .1% but if you got over 750 in the math you were only in the top 1%. I think it created a generation of kids who thought they were smarter in math than verbal because their SAT math was higher than their verbal when that was not at all the case. Count me as one of them when in fact my verbal should have been higher if properly centered.

Back in the day if you were going to do well on the SAT say pretty sure you would get 1350 or better almost no one prepped where I went to school. Now everyone does prep courses cause they want to get the 2350s or better and a fairly large percentage hire private consultants. The odd thing is it is probably less important now than it used to be and the explosion of merit aid has drained a fair number of top students away from the Dukes and Ivies of the world.

[billybreen]

100 points is pushing it and how much it helped you depends upon what your scores were. There was actually very little change in the math SAT scores with recentering but in the Verbal there was an add of like 60 points or so depending upon where your scores were. Back in the day almost no one got an 800 on the verbal. In fact if you got over 750 verbal you were in the top .1% but if you got over 750 in the math you were only in the top 1%. I think it created a generation of kids who thought they were smarter in math than verbal because their SAT math was higher than their verbal when that was not at all the case. Count me as one of them when in fact my verbal should have been higher if properly centered.

Yeah, I took mine at basically the time recentering was instituted. My math didn't change (actually, I think I lost 10 points with recentering) and my verbal didn't change either.

[throatybeard]

Hey, Pam from The Office is a TSU alum!

But throaty, you would knowingly send your hypothetical child to a "dry" campus? That seems... out of character.

I was dry when I was a Ugrad.

[-jk]

I was dry when I was a Ugrad.

Ah, I misunderstood too, then. The phalanx just always seemed so, well..., lubricated.

So well lubricated.

Perhaps, even, just so lubricated.

-jk