Malo said Im Ranked "admissible"??

Discussion in 'Military Academy - USMA' started by wnal0311, Jul 14, 2012.

  1. wnal0311

    wnal0311 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2012
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi my congressional district malo told me that I was ranked "admissible" and that he is required to interview me. Is this a good thing and does that mean I'm in the running for a LOA?
    This is my stats:

    Academics:
    1/353 in class, 4.67 Weighted GPA, 3.96 un-weighted
    Sat: 650 math, 650 CR, 590 Writing
    ACT: 30 Math, 32 Reading, 26 Writing, 23 Science

    Sports:
    4 year varsity wrestling, 1 year captain
    4 year non-league off season wrestling

    EC:
    Church Group Member: 2 year
    Debate club:2 year
    National Honor Society Attendee: 3 year
    National Honor Soc. VP/Treasurer/Secretary: 2 year
    Newspaper Writer/Reporter/Staff: 1 year
    Key club: 4year
    Recycling club:3 year
    PTA member, VP of Parliament
    After School tutoring
    5 years of volunteering at local hospital with 3 years of leadership position,
    400+ volunteering hours.
     
  2. wnal0311

    wnal0311 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2012
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    And i have gotten my CAR record validated, essay finished, transcript sent, CFA passed at SLS and just waiting on SOE.
     
  3. Prep

    Prep Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0

    Your ACT scores of 30 Math, 32 Reading, 26 English, 23 Science are not within the average range (29 Math, 29 Reading, 30 English, 28 Science). I thought any subscore below a 24 (in this case science) put you in an an risk category. or maybe they will just look at SAT scores which are in the average range. Are you a recruited athlete or come from an under represented area? I think you need to be a scholar, recruited athlete or from an under represented demographic to get an LOA.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2012
  4. kinnem

    kinnem Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2010
    Messages:
    7,545
    Likes Received:
    1,005
    It means exactlwy what it says. You're admittable. Your academin scores etc squash they won't exclude you from admittance for those. Think of it as academically qualified at this point. This says nothing about being in the running for an LOA.
     
  5. wnal0311

    wnal0311 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2012
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    No im not a recruited athlete, but however I did read that west point ranks you as admissible, competitive, and at risk.
     
  6. marciemi

    marciemi USMA Alumnus

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,481
    Likes Received:
    0
    This was the guidance as to the difference between admissible and competitive that we (Field Force) just received from our RC a couple weeks ago:

    For the class of 2012, an "Admissible" candidate would almost certainly have gotten an offer. What has changed is how competitive it is to get in. Candidates generally need a much higher whole candidate score (WCS) to get in, so an admissible candidate is probably competing for admission, but may or may not be a shoe-in. It probably describes the top 30-40% of our candidates these days, but it also covers a very wide range. You could have two Admissible candidates from the same district and one could have a WCS that is literally 1000 points higher than the other.

    Competitive candidates don't have any risk factors in their files, but overall we do not rate them quite as high as the Admissibles. An Admissible candidate will have a higher whole candidate score than a Competitive candidate.


    I don't have the email in front of me, but we were also told that the guidance was that for 2017 the only LOA's would be for minority candidates and recruited athletes. I'm curious to see if this in fact ends up being the case. :confused:
     
  7. EagleScout13

    EagleScout13 USMA Class of 2017

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2011
    Messages:
    174
    Likes Received:
    6
    That would be unfortunate if only that select group (recruited athletes and minority candidates) received LOAs. If only everything were not done the politically correct way...but I digress.
     
  8. wnal0311

    wnal0311 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2012
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    The do you by chance know what percentage of admissible candidates actually gets appointed?
     
  9. MemberLG

    MemberLG Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    2,807
    Likes Received:
    444
    What's the purpose of LOA?

    My opionn, the purpose of LOA is to attract qualified candidates.

    Your case, would you only attend West Point if only got an LOA in before December or would you still attend West Point if you got your appointment in April?
     
  10. EagleScout13

    EagleScout13 USMA Class of 2017

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2011
    Messages:
    174
    Likes Received:
    6
    Absolutely not. My goal is an appointment, and that is what i am striving for. I'm very sorry if that's the way my previous post sounded. I simply mean I wish LOA's could go to scholars rather than fill some minority quota.
     
  11. Dixieland

    Dixieland Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,217
    Likes Received:
    126

    Interesting comment.

    My cadet received his appointment months and months before another candidate in his school with an LOA. It was well up into spring before the other person finally received an appointment and by then, panic had set in. Because of the LOA, the candidate didn't bother to apply to any other colleges so there was no backup plan.
     
  12. EagleScout13

    EagleScout13 USMA Class of 2017

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2011
    Messages:
    174
    Likes Received:
    6
    I have heard that happening as well. Perhaps it was somewhere else on this forum and it was your story, but regardless I need to accept that it is a viable possibly. I appreciate your input.
     
  13. Prep

    Prep Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0

    I have to agree with this. I understand limiting the number of LOAs but not simply the blanket prioritization of minority and sports stars. ( Recruited athletes are only for certain sports-so its not even all-around physical ability-some barely pass the CFA.)

    I agree, I think the priority for an LOA IS to attract highly attractive cadets to ensure a variety of strengths within the corps. Applicants who excel in Leadership and scholars should be as prioritized for what they have to give to West Point not just sports stars and minorities.

    Another point. I went to two summer leaders programs. Most of the attendees I met there also went to two some even to three SA summer programs. I do think an LOA would encourage an applicant to choose one S.A. academy over another. (obviously as this is the intent on an LOA:rolleyes:).

    MemberLG-the question you asked was asked to and answered specifically by Eaglescout. However, the intent of your question was inane to me because that is IN FACT the purpose of an LOA. Why does USMA offer LOAs. Simple: competition. The USMA is competing with other service academies as well as competing with other colleges. And every year they have to get “attractive” kids to apply, why should only sports stars and minorities be attractive-what about leaders and scholars?
     
  14. MemberLG

    MemberLG Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    2,807
    Likes Received:
    444
    It is what it is, personally I do agree with you mostly.

    Professionally, I disagree with you. Don't take this in a wrong way as to I am guessing that you think you are a scholar so you wish that LOA's are given to scholars.

    So, why is okay to fill a quota with scholars but not okay to fill a quota with some other factors?

    I think I understand where you are coming from as I have been a FFR for a long time. Simply, give your 100%. If you let other things beyond your control and might not be factual bother you, you are beating up yourself for nothing.
     
  15. MemberLG

    MemberLG Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    2,807
    Likes Received:
    444
    First of all, have we seen anything official from USMA stating that only recurit athletes and minorities will get LOAs. I like Marciemi and Marciemi has no reason to lie, but at the same time email is not an official policy.

    There were several discussions about who should attend West Point. There are many sports stars and minorities that could have gotten appointed to West Point with other accomplishments. (On a side this dicussion, this is why I don't like affirmative action - one of my roommates at West Point was a minority. He was a scholar/leader. But not knowing him personally, many people probably believed he got into West Point because he was a miniority.)

    If I may deduce or induce

    Sports stars and minorities are not leaders and scholars?

    Lastly, to answer your question, scholars and leaders are not "attractive [for the purpose of LOAs]" to SAs because majority of applicants are leaders and scholars already.

    The true competition among SAs is for athletes and minorities that are qualified for appointment. All SAs want a good football player with 1800 on the SAT. I am pretty sure there are less good football players with 1800 on the SAT in comparison to SA applicants with 1800 on the SAT.
     
  16. Prep

    Prep Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    My comment from my earlier posts states: "Applicants who excel in Leadership and scholars should be as prioritized for what they have to give to West Point not just sports stars and minorities."

    I do want to make is clear that I do think minorities and sports stars should be given LOAs-to ensure a variety of strengths within the corps. Applicants who excel in Leadership and scholars should be as prioritized AS WELL for what they have to give to West Point not just sports stars and minorities. It was the word "ONLY" in Marciemi's post that is the agitator: "that for 2017 the only LOA's would be for minority candidates and recruited athletes"

    Do I think athlete and scholar are mutually exclusive?-No I certainly don’t. (IE Jeremy Lin) and those should be clearly given the letter of assurance. What we are not talking about here obviously is the boy whose father is mexican american who can thread a needle with a football on an 80 yard pass who has a 35 composite ACT score and was ranked first in his class. That is an statistical anomly regardless and not really a point.


    Additionally, while a majority of applicants in general are of course scholars and leaders-there is a very wide range of their scholastic and leadership ability and experience. Though to be honest I consider myself an average applicant there are some applicants with out of this world academic/scholastic achievement and leadership ability that should be just as valued as the ability to make a three point throw or the color of someone's father's skin.
     
  17. MemberLG

    MemberLG Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    2,807
    Likes Received:
    444
    Yes, applicants with great academic/scholastic acheivement and leadership abilty are just valued as someone with an ability to make "a three point throw or the color of someone's father's skin."

    Another way to look at the situation is that the limitation of the appointment and LOA numbers.

    Personally, I am not a big fan of LOAs. Regardless, there should be about 1300 appointment offers. So what's the a good number for LOAs? Definitely not ONE or Definitely not 650. For this discussion purpose, say 300. How do we break this 300 down? How about 100 scholars, 100 athletes, and 100 highly qualified miniorities? Whatever the breakdown is, there will be a group saying their share should be higher. What if LOA # is cut down to 200? Someone at the admissions office has to exercise his or her judgement to prioritize the LOAs. Not everybody is going to happy.

    Analytically, I can support limiting LOAs to athletes and minorities. The proability is that West Point can yield enough exceptional scholars/leaders without LOAs.
     
  18. marciemi

    marciemi USMA Alumnus

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,481
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't have those stats, but I do recall from our last MALO training that this has changed dramatically over the past few years. For the class of 2012, it was something like only 500 candidates who were Triple Q'd (Academically/Scholastically, Medically, and Physically) didn't receive appointments (so something like 1500/2000 did). With 2016, more students who were fully qualified received QNS letters than didn't - so due to the increase in applications, now something like 1300/3000 received appointments. Please don't quote me on the stats but it was something that dramatic - where 4 years ago, being fully qualified meant you had around a 75% chance of getting in and now it's well under 50%.
     
  19. Prep

    Prep Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your argument does have merit.
     
  20. wnal0311

    wnal0311 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2012
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    thanks for helping out us worried candidates
     

Share This Page