Questioning the USMMA Appointment Procedure

Discussion in 'Merchant Marine Academy - USMMA' started by SvcDad, Jun 22, 2012.

  1. SvcDad

    SvcDad New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    We were very disappointed last year when our daughter didn't get an appointment to the Class of 2011. We didn't feel that she should have been denied and tried to research how appointments are offered. We found that the Federal regulations governing the Academy allocate a minimum number of vacancies to each state. For example, Florida gets 10 and Louisiana gets 4. Furthermore, it looks like each year a small number of states get the majority of allocations (far above their state's respective allocation in the federal regulation) while typically 10 or more states are not even awarded their minimum number of promised slots even though they have nominated, qualified candidates on-hold, waiting for appointments. Because the incoming class size is much smaller than other academies it is really important that each state at least get their federally mandated appointments if they have qualified candidates accepted by the academy as viable alternates.

    My question is, are you aware of anyone that has complained about this shortchanging states of their promised slots or challenging the appointment process on this basis? It doesn't seem fair.
     
  2. Navy4ever

    Navy4ever Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2012
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe this year the Academy is only bringing in around 275 students. There were over 2,200 applicants for the Academy for the Class of 2016. They offered somewhere around 400 to bring in the class size of 275. They had well over 200 “alternates” who, due to their size limitations, were not able to offer admission. It is anticipated that the future Class sizes will probably be around the same number, that only means that more students will be “alternates”. There will never be a time when KP will ever be bringing in Classes that are as large as USMA, USNA, or USAFA (which are 1,000+) USMMA is a smaller school, and as such will always have a limited number of students going there. They are required to try to bring in students from all the States, relatively proportional to each State’s size/population/representation, which limits the number that could come from any one State.
    I can see how it would seem unfair to you and that the numbers appear skewed, however, I believe that the admissions staff does its best to try to get the nationally mandated representation. There are so many factors and requirements that result in an appointment being offered to a candidate. Good luck to your daughter..I hope she tries again:smile:
     
  3. jasperdog

    jasperdog Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    17
    Where to Begin ...

    SvcDad:

    Navy4Evr brings up many good points but I'd like to add a few specifics. First I'll answer directly, I do not believe anyone has " complained about this shortchanging states of their promised slots or challenging the appointment process on this basis" nor do I believe any complaints are warranted. As noted by Navy4Evr, the admissions selection process that the USMMA Admissions staff goes through is very deliberate and as far as I've seen over the past 30+ years quite fair. As you note there are a number of "slots" in each class allocated proportionally by state and geography, these details are visible in Code of Federal Regulations, specifically 46 CFR 310.53.

    When you go through that CFR you'll note that the "allocated" spots in the US total ~266 (depending on how many of the 40 spots the Maritime Administrator can allocate he or she "uses". That said the basic reality as I understand it is this, each Member of Congress, (US Representative or Senator) can nominate up to ten (10) residents of that State (covered in a different subsection of 46 CFR 310, nominees must be residents of that Member's State); they then compete basically for that State's "spots", if they are not selected for that State's spots, they go into a National Pool and are ranked - these become the alternates. However, note as I understand it ALL appointee's must meet or exceed that Class Year's minimums. That's how some States and Geographies end up with more than their proportionally allocated number of spots. For example, despite working hard at it, as far as I know, the District of Columbia has never used their full authorized number of 4 spots as listed in 46 CFR 310.53 and surprisingly from time to time California has not used their full nineteen (19). So while everyone generally assumes that the spots being filled by alternates from coastal states such as the Commonwealth of Virginia are unused spots from their landlocked far away cousins such as Wyoming, that is not always the case.

    One thing for sure though is that the competition for those spots be they the 307 in the entering Class of 2012 or the ~275 we are hearing in the entering Class of 2016, the competition for the spots is just getting tougher and tougher and the quality of the entering Classes better and better. The actual selection of who fills the allocated spots in each USMMA entering class is governed by 46 CFR 310.57 and as I mentioned earlier I've always found the administration of the process by the USMMA Admissions Staff to be very objective and fair. Why shouldn't/wouldn't it be? They have a relatively large pool of basically excellent candidates to select a relatively small number of available spots for. Whether you look at the entering Class of 2012's numbers or the entering Class of 2015 (seen here on the USMMA's own website) there is no reason what-so-ever not to administer the process fairly and as transparently as protection of the individual applicant's privacy permits. However, I'd further note the process that the Admissions Staff goes through after receipt of complete applications is further guided by the authorizing legislation in the applicable CFR:

    Finally while the numbers aren't all available for the Entering CLass of 2016 who will report to the USMMA looking at the Class of 2015 numbers you can see that while 1631 Candidates were nominated and 639 met the selection criteria to fill the Class of 285 spots only 412 appointments were offered. I understand the numbers clearly offer no consolation to those who don't get in and getting in to any of the Federal Service Academies is a high mountain to climb. I only offer all this information in response to your question about fairness based on the allotted spots/geographies. Like Navy4Evr, assuming USMMA is still a goal of your Daughter, I hope she tries again, I understand anecdotally that this past year (Class of 2016) and last year (Class of 2015) were the toughest in a long while because the reduction in offered appointments by ~40 since the entering Classes of 2012 and 2013.
     
  4. Kram1

    Kram1 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Seriously? I doubt that any parent who had a son/daughter apply and did not receive acceptance would see the system as "fair" as certainly their son/daughter SHOULD have been accepted. That being said, I agree that all states, if they have qualified candidates, should be represented withing the ranks of the Midshipmen. However, in my experience, I have never seen that to be the exact case. When so many qualified candidates apply, it is tough to see the process as fair...especially when ones own son/daughter doesn't get that acceptance letter. But, hang in there and give it another try. As you can see from this website along, there are many who tried and failed for any number of reasons only to be accepted the next year. I am sorry your DD has to wait, but hope you and she both see the possibilities ahead. As a parent, I think it important to not stress the "unfairness" angle, but rather to help understand that there will be many disappointments in life, but that they can be overcome. Work on making lemonade out of the lemon this time around. I have seem many do that very successfully. I have a feeling you will do just that. Good luck and hang in there.
     
  5. SvcDad

    SvcDad New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Where to continue...

    Sorry for the poor choice of words, I am not so naive or uninformed as to think that simply not getting in was "unfair". In retrospect, I think "illegal" is the better word choice... Let's see what kind of reaction that gets :smile:

    But first, give me a chance to explain as well as thank you for your responses, support and insight... Let's start with the easy one. @Navy4Ever: You are right - all the academies are very competitive and the USMMA is growing in its popularity (aka applications) every year. The word is out! We certainly didn't know a lot about the MMA before a chance meeting with a well-placed alum.

    @Kram1: I'm dead serious. My daughter was accepted to five division 1 colleges and NROTC but wanted to attend MMA after digging into the place. She just finished her freshman year and has the option of taking another run at MMA and adding a year to her education or staying with the NROTC program. As to why this still gnaws at me is related to your statement of:



    "I agree that all states, if they have qualified candidates, should be represented withing the ranks of the Midshipmen"

    This is actually mandated by the federal regulations that jasperdog quoted. I didn't want to write a book on my first post before seeing who I could engage in the discussion. Which brings us to @jasperdog: Before I get started, I am wondering how many forum members can quote the verb and verse of 46 CFR (yes I know the GPO has it online), I mean that it was the first place you went rather than the more general responses of Navy3Ever and Kram1... just wondering if you are just a 1982 alum or are you closer to the rules and regulations of the Academy for a vocational reason? Just wondering... OK, moving forward: As of this writing, I cannot state the 30+ year history of appointment demographics nor do I believe is it relevant to the discussion since I think only until the recent (last 5 or so years?) surge of qualified applications has made the vacancy mandates of 46 CFR more important to the smaller (in representation) states. Aka - many states simply didn't have enough qualified candidates to even cover their allocation in the past. This is in agreement with your comments that one cannot assume that all states and territories have enough qualified candidates to fill their allocations... However, for the Class of 2015, there were 10 states that had Fully Qualified, On Hold Candidates (my daughter being one of them) that were not granted appointments even though their individual state's allocation as mandated in 46 CFR was unfilled by the respective states own candidates. Those slots were given away to other candidates... Quoting the USMMA's very own website:

    http://www.usmma.edu/admissions/facts/appointments.shtml
    Candidates are appointed competitively by the Academy for the vacancies allocated to their state or geographical area. Each state has an assigned number of appointees proportionate to its representation in Congress. After the Academy has selected its principal appointees, the remaining qualified candidates will be designated as alternates, to be appointed in order of merit should openings occur within their states. In the event that a state fails to satisfy its allotment, appointments to fill the unfilled vacancies are determined from the national list of alternates, ranked in order of merit as described above.

    This is simply mirroring 46 CFR 310.53 (e) Appointments.
    (1) The Administrator shall make appointments to fill the vacancies allocated pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section from among qualified nominees, in order of merit, from each geographical area. The order of merit shall be established according to the procedure as specified in 310.57(b). Such appointments first shall be made from among residents of each geographic area listed in paragraph (b) of this section. Thereafter, appointments shall be made from among residents of each geographic area listed in paragraph (b) of this section. Thereafter appointments shall be made from among remaining qualified nominees (national alternates) in order of merit regardless of the area of residence.


    To be specific, there are 215 allocated vacancies for the 50 states. A additional 9 slots for territories like Guam and the (40) Non-compete Administrative selections that open another can of EO worms that I will leave for another day... Unlike the bigger DOD Academies with annual 1000+ classes, the DOT/MMA only has space for, as you have all mentioned, a much smaller annual class size (285 for Class of 2015), depending on the budget and need, etc... Like the larger academies, the state nominating officials get first say on the States allocated slots. However, with the smaller Class size of the MMA, a given state's nominating Senators and Representatives must share the states allocation rather than each having their own. For example, the three DOD Academies with their 4000+ cadets, gives each US Senator (100 total) and each Congressional District (435 total) 5 slots all to their own. When a congressionally nominated academy position is vacant, a Member of Congress may nominate 10 persons for possible appointment. (Ref: Congressional Nominations to U.S. Service Academies)

    Using your example state of California, with 53 congressional districts and two senators, California has 275 cadets in Annapolis at any given time. The DOT governed USMMA with its much smaller class size, only allocates (19) slots per year or (76) slots across the classes at KP at any given time. Those same (55) California congressional members must share the (19) USMMA appointment slots each year. Are you beginning to see how this subtle (or not so subtle) difference between the DOD allocations and the DOT allocations combined with the lower number qualified applications coming in from the smaller states can have a dramatic affect on the successful fulfillment of 46 CFR mandated slots if the Admissions office is not up to the task?

    @jasperdog: You said "I mentioned earlier I've always found the administration of the process by the USMMA Admissions Staff to be very objective and fair. Why shouldn't/wouldn't it be?"

    I want to believe the USMMA admissions group is not acting maliciously. However, without a better justification by the Admissions Staff; it simply appears that because of laziness, ignorance, incompetency or obstinacy; they have rationalized that their overall goal to fill the class allows them to deviate from CFR Title 46 and deprive our state and others of their federally mandated appointments. It is simply easier to spit out an over-allocation of appointment offers to a nationalized pool of candidates EARLY in the recruiting cycle, rather than manage the 46 CFR mandated allocations for each state and make the effort to ensure all the states are fairly represented by their respective, nominated, FULLY QUALIFIED ON HOLD candidates.

    If the "current" (and that is an important distinction) USMMA Admissions officers are doing their job then why didn't little Oklahoma with its (3) QUALIFIED CANDIDATES get to fill its (2) federally mandated slots in a year the class size was (285) which was comfortably above the (224) vacancies allocated to the States and Territories forgetting for a moment the DISCRETIONARY (40) Administrator vacancies? Why - because they gave (32) appointments to New York, a state with (15) allocations and (18) appointments to New Jersey, a state with an allocation of (6) etc... the top (10) states received a whopping (93) additional appointments over and above their (76) allocated vacancies for a total of (169).

    Hello - (2) slots to QUALIFIED, ON HOLD candidates... nope - See ya later alligator, thanks for playing, better luck next time... ditto for (9) other states for the Class of 2015.

    ... and you thought I was just voicing a knee jerk reaction to my daughter not being granted an appointment... :rolleyes:

    What say you?
     
  6. cmakin

    cmakin Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    688
    Likes Received:
    74
    But the new Superintendent got his kid in there. . . . .
     
  7. Luigi59

    Luigi59 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    4,628
    Likes Received:
    5
    More reason to eliminate the archaic system of using nominations to select an academy class.

    Awarding appointments via a nationwide merit-based system, without regard to Congressional geography, seems to be working well at another small SA....
     
  8. jasperdog

    jasperdog Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    17
    SvcDad:

    Wow, gotta love this forum sometimes not sure if your last post is trolling, directed only at me or really just trying to "air" out some concerns but in any case I'll try respond to your comments without raising to the bait too much.

    1) re: " just wondering if you are just a 1982 alum or are you closer to the rules and regulations of the Academy for a vocational reason? Just wondering... "

    Wonder no more, I am a 1982 Alum with a son who just graduated in the Class of 2012, that's pretty well documented. As far as "vocational reasons" not sure what you mean, but I would say no, now 30 years out of USMMA, I have not been directly involved in the Maritime Industry for going on 20 years, I did have a career in the middle of my post USMMA life that centered on supply chain IT and automation but since 1998 I have been involved in Force Protection and Homeland Security fields and since 2006 I have focused on the development, application etc. of advanced sensors and sensor networks for those applications. Throughout my now 30 years since USMMA graduation, I have been and remain an active alumni and I have been an admissions field representative for now 20+ years while we have lived in for (4) different states. I try and stay current on the process and situations with regard to both admissions, the curricula, and also help with and through our local alumni chapter with midshipman internships and berthing for mids during those internships. That said other than being your normal, opinionated USMMA grad and parent, I have no vocational or personal axes to grind.

    2) In your final words you bring up several interesting points one being your stated perspective of:

    " It is simply easier to spit out an over-allocation of appointment offers to a nationalized pool of candidates EARLY in the recruiting cycle, rather than manage the 46 CFR mandated allocations for each state and make the effort to ensure all the states are fairly represented by their respective, nominated, FULLY QUALIFIED ON HOLD candidates."

    For the record, the USMMA Graduating Class of 2012 had members from 44 States and 4 Foreign Nations, for a Class of 219 that's a pretty good geographic distribution.

    As to the Class of 2015 and

    "why didn't little Oklahoma with its (3) QUALIFIED CANDIDATES get to fill its (2) federally mandated slots in a year the class size was (285) which was..."

    I really don't personally know but I'm pretty comfortable in saying what I said and I'll reiterate and amplify that I don't think it's because of geographic bias, improper management of the process, nor, only because it was brought up by others, "laziness incompetency or obstinacy" and finally I don't think what is being done is even close to any gray areas given how thorough and conservative legal reviews and readings by MARAD Legal staff on pretty much everything that happens at USMMA including, but not limited to, the gifting process, are.

    Finally, I'll just say that this is in diametric opposition to Luigi's response and what he is advocating with regard to transitioning to a system like USCGA where there is only a National Pool - check out the geographic distribution there, or for that matter USNA or the other Service Academies. There is not, nor has there ever been any sort of normalized distribution regardless of the system for a lot of reasons I'm sure someone smarter than I has written grad school papers on. I am not in any way, shape or form and advocate of doing away with the current CFR structure or the need for a Congressional Nomination as part of the USMMA admissions process. That said it would totally obviate any questions such as SvcDad has raised.

    I don't think nor did I ever think the original post was necessarily voicing an uniformed reaction. I do think that every post/opinion/question comes from a personal perspective and with a daughter who has otherwise been accepted to five division 1 colleges and NROTC (not sure what this means, did she/does she have an NROTC Scholarship? by division 1 colleges do you mean top tier, "Most Selective" and or "Highly Selective" colleges with regard to admissions like Stanford, "the Ivies", etc.? That probably doesn't matter in this discussion but it could indeed be relevant. More relevant is how does she demographically compare to the numbers Average/Mean SAT etc that are published for the Class of 2015 on the USMMA site, and what else has she/does she do (whole person concept). I will be frank, I too wonder how this all now plays out in this new era (past three years) where USMMA now has rolling admissions (for good reasons and NOT because it's "easier to spit out...") I've wonder, and like you still do to some degree how the USMMA Admissions staff reconciles this with the implementation and reporting requirements they have back to MARAD, DOT and Congress on their progress and compliance with CFR implementation. I'm sure it's not an easy job, and from working with them over the years as an admissions field rep, I know it's not one they take lightly.
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2012
  9. Kram1

    Kram1 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    SvcDad...well, you do have a very poor sense of word choice...it goes from "unfair" to "illegal"....

    Well played...sounds like a lot of "sour grapes" now....helicopter Dad perhaps?

    Press on...and good luck to your daughter next time around. If she gets in, I am sure the admins at Kings Point will hear from you often about how "unfair" and "illegally" your DD is being treated. Sigh.

    I'll bet your daughter is fully capable of "fighting her own battles" and she probably won't do it on message boards. She appears to be a very good candidate from what you have said, but getting into five Division One schools has absolutely ZERO to do with acceptance at Kings Point or any other of the service academies. Many applicants have faced the same situation through the years at each of our service academies. In fact, the US Coast Guard Academy was "unfair" to our DS in medically disqualifying him and not granting him a waiver as the Naval Academy and Kings Point both did without any difficulties. At the time the USCGA granted ZERO medical waivers we were told...How unfair...and perhaps illegal? Really?

    I am truly sorry for your disappointment. If your DD really wants to attend KP, join the ranks of those who have come before and were not accepted the first time around but who gained admission on a second try. I can assure you of one thing however, it will not help to post about how "unfair and illegal" the selection process is at Kings Point or any of the other Service Academies.
     
  10. Packer

    Packer Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    Messages:
    1,877
    Likes Received:
    5
    I am no expert on this but from what I can tell there are minimum standards and qualifying standards. The qualifying standards move up and down with the strength of the competition. Also the standards involve more than grades, and SAT scores so it is nearly impossible to determine how one ranks with respect to the competition. I would suggest your DD talk to admissions to determine where her weaknesses are and work to address them. Good luck to your DD.
     
  11. DevilDog

    DevilDog Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    616
    Likes Received:
    47
    It is real easy to call this gentlman a "Helicopter Dad" or suggest he has sour grapes. I understand where he is coming from. If the law mandates that each state has a certain number of openings per class, how is he wrong? It seems to me that the people at KP are wrong and not following the laws of this country.

    You can say what you want about outside influences not being the case, but Jasperdad, I had a friend that would have graduated with your class if he stayed, and the only reason he got into the MMA was because of his father's Naval ties to the school. My friend was turned down at first, but his father stepped in and got him in. That friend of mine did not last a week at King's Point.

    I think he should talk to his representatives that make the appointments, but he should bring data.
     
  12. 4 kids

    4 kids New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know anything about the USMMA admission process but I can read the CFR that SvcDad says is applicable:

    (1) The Administrator shall make appointments to fill the vacancies allocated pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section from among qualified nominees, in order of merit, from each geographical area. The order of merit shall be established according to the procedure as specified in 310.57(b). Such appointments first shall be made from among residents of each geographic area listed in paragraph (b) of this section. Thereafter, appointments shall be made from among residents of each geographic area listed in paragraph (b) of this section. Thereafter appointments shall be made from among remaining qualified nominees (national alternates) in order of merit regardless of the area of residence.

    SvcDad focuses on the language specifying "appointments first shall be made from among residents of each geographic area". However, if you look at the very next sentence, it provides: [t]hereafter appointments shall be made from among remaining qualified nominees (national alternates) in order of merit regardless of the area of residence.

    It is not clear to me where he got his information about how many qualified candidates Oklahoma had and where his daughter was ranked but it seems to me that even if what he says is true the Academy could still be complying with the regulations. Members of Congress have the ability to give a lot more nominations to the USMMA than to the big three academies. From reading this forum, it is clear that many applicants put USMMA as a back-up interest. As a result, kids that are not actually interested in the Academy can end up with a nomination to USMMA. Since there are several sources they can seek nominations, the top-grade kids in any state often end up with nominations to more than one Academy. They cover their bases by applying to all the academies. If they are accepted to more than one, they take the one they are most interested in and turn down the others. Thus, kids that may not even have been on SvcDad's radar as being interested in the USMMA were offered the 2 Oklahoma appointments. They turned them down, and another two kids he may not know anything about got offered, and they turned them down also. At that point, under the terms of the regulation, the Academy is to go to the national pool that is ranked by order of merit, not by geography

    Frankly, this seems like a nice compromise between the desire to have a geographically mixed class and the need to offer the slots to the most qualified students, regardless of location (especially in a school which apparently flunks out 30 to 40 percent of each class, mostly on the basis of academics). Your beef may not actually be with the Academy, but with the members of Congress who hand out nominations to the USMMA like candy ("if I can't give them what they really want, at least I can give them a consolation prize").
     
  13. Lynpar

    Lynpar Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    723
    Likes Received:
    2
    4 kis brings me to a point all perspective applicants to KP need to know.
    ( slightly off topic but related) if you are applying to KP you may apply for nomination not only from your senators but to each House of Representatives member of congress IN YOUR STATE. Not just the one whose district you live in. Yes KP nominations are plentiful and available if you really go after one. If a qualified applicant applied to everyone and only listed KP as the school of interest I can't believe they wouldn't recieve a nom.

    Back to your normally scheduled thread:wink:
     
  14. jasperdog

    jasperdog Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    17
    A couple of points:
    1) I was not the poster who referred to anyone as a helicopter anything or "sour grapes" - I did say everyone who posts has their own perspective implying a) it's based on our own experiences and frankly b) at least in my case, I always think my kid should get anything they want and work for so I too would be at least frustrated and perplexed.

    2) 4 Kids already made the next point, but I'll say it as well, the CFR's wording has "wiggle room" in it for lots of good reasons. The way I read it it does NOT require that the minimum number nominees receive appointments from each state if they are judged to have not met the current year's criteria.The key is was the documented process that was reviewed and approved by MARAD and DOT legal and subject to review and oversight by the nominating authorities (US Congressmen and Senators and their staffs) theory followed and applied fairly and equitably? I've made my point that I can't say how or why it wouldn't be.

    3) Pretty sure the way i read SvcDad's original post his DD had a nomination in hand which I inferred from the rest of his post, but am not positive about, came from one of their MOC's in Oklahoma. No issues there on my part just clarifying my understanding.

    As for something that is alleged to have happened in 1977 and 1978 and wether it applies today -I'm not sure I understand the relationship to what is being discussed which if I understand it ? Depending on his actual year your friend may or may not have taken anyone's "slot" - in fact I believe if what you say is true, he would have just been added as some sort of "pick" like an athletic pick to the Class and caused the Class he was admitted to back then by one person - something that I believe the current processes - rightfully - prevent from happening. That said the fact you state

    "My friend was turned down at first, but his father stepped in and got him in. That friend of mine did not last a week at King's Point."

    only proves one of my usual statements and points - everyone who goes to ANY Federal Service Academy and successfully completes the course of study through graduation has to be there because THEY want it AND once they graduate they all have the same piece of paper and are part of the same family.

    Finally for the record the reason I originally referred to the CFR's that are applicable is my experience has been that even interested folks who are otherwise very well informed about the USMMA, have been known to have the misconception that the nomination and appointment process is the exact same as the other Federal Service Academies that require a nomination as part of their admissions process.

    In closing, I hope that assuming SvcDad's DD still wants to attend USMMA she reapplies and gets in. If memory serves me right something like 85% of the women who graduated in the first USMMA Class to include women had at least one year of college prior to reporting in 1974 and if you look up what those women have accomplished in the 34 years since they graduated I don't think you can help but be impressed. The young woman who was the USMMA Class of 2010's Valedictorian had three years of prior college in a demanding major at "a division 1 college" and frankly during her time at USMMA by all accounts to use a baseball season phrase she "knocked it out of the park." If SvcDad's DD does goe to KP as part of the Class of 2017 after two years of college elsewhere she won't be the only entering PC who is 20 or 21 and she likely will also do very well as she will be a lot more focused than many of her classmates - if she's like most people who go to KP after going elsewhere for a while.

    Now I'll just watch what else comes to be on this thread since I've clearly babbled on "way more" than I had intended and unless I think someone again puts words in my mouth or misattributes something to me, I won't have anything to add to this conversation.
     
  15. Packer

    Packer Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    Messages:
    1,877
    Likes Received:
    5
    4 kids, are appointments offered and appointments made the same thing? I don't think they are. If two appointments are offered to kids in OK but they decline them then no appointments would be made to OK. If there are other OK candidates that are qualified, I would think they would be next in line to fill those OK vacancies irregardless of their position in the national pool.
     
  16. DevilDog

    DevilDog Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    616
    Likes Received:
    47

    Sorry if you misundderstood me, but I never said you called the OP a Helicopter parent. I know it was someone else. The part regarding a friend of mine was true, and he did not deseve to be there even though he was very bright. He did nothing to distinguish himself in HS. Fortunately for him, his father had good contacts and that was how he got in. I still remember his going away party, and then partying with him the following week when he came home.
     
  17. SvcDad

    SvcDad New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    The final word? Ok... MY final word!

    You guys are posting to fast for me to have my final word!!!

    @DevilDog… Darn it, now Karm1 will say you are fighting my fights that my daughter should be fighting! :shake: Thanks for the support and slogging thru my long post…

    @ Kram1… The reason why they have those little emoticons is to deliver the expressive intent of the printed word… For example: a Smiley Face :smile: can represent S a r c a s m

    Since you are the only one to not get my point nor recognize I have provided a reasonably defensible position, along with you stating that being accepted at good engineering schools (Marquette, UW Madison, Minnesota, Pittsburgh and Purdue for my daughter) has absolutely ZERO to do with acceptance; topped off by the “helicopter Dad eating sour grapes” perfectly display who the real troll is in this discussion (@jasperdog – I had to get that one off MY back). You know Kram1, institutions outside of Kings Point actually ask for high SAT scores too! As to why she applied at so many schools – let’s not go into the psyche of an 18 year old female – I am unarmed :smile: (@Kram1 – the smile :smile: now denotes an attempt at humor)

    @cmakin… lol – you are just trying to bait me…

    @Packer… You are correct – Offers of Appointment and Accepted Appointments that occupy an allocated vacancy are completely different. Try a word search thru the entire 46 CFR and see if you can find the word “Offer” used in the context of this discussion… nope – nada…

    @4Kids… you need to re-read my post and the additional information provided below

    @Lynpar… I already covered this using California as an example in my 2nd post

    @jasperdog… No, I emphatically state that I am not a troll and 1) you have had a very cool (can a 53 year old engineer still use that term?) career 2) I appreciate your thoughtful response 3) the Knee Jerk comment was not directed toward you, I should have been more specific and you have to be less defensive… lol – Packer never said you stated “Sour Grapes” either. And 4) Your years as a field representative completely explains your familiarity with the Title 46. A federal document that I have become all too familiar with myself. Truth be told, we were late to the game because we only learned about Kings Point in a chance meeting with a KP alum in late February 2011, sigh. She got the additional nomination (besides her NROTC) and scrambled to complete her application by the March 1st deadline. She had already passed her DodMERB for the NROTC. She was immediately posted on the status website as ON-HOLD (we confirmed that that she was fully qualified by the USMMA as an Alternate Candidate). She remained as an alternate until shortly after May 1st when her status was changed to DENIED and a form letter was sent with the generic closing remarks.

    It has been confirmed that the only one of the Principals for our state accepted and the rest turned down their offers ahead of May 1st. The Academy did not offer additional app beyond the initial Principals and the remaining allocated vacancies went to other states. Yes, with an NROTC scholarship in hand, she has just completed her freshman year at one of those listed schools and will remain in their program. For the record, she had 740 on her verbal and a 640 on the math SAT. I wish her math had been a little higher, but it was good enough to get her approved by the MMA as a QUALIFIED ALTERNATE ON-HOLD and that is all that is needed in this discussion. It’s all good. She rolls with the best of ‘em…

    So why am I here? Because I just recently bumped into the same KP Alum that got my daughter going a year ago and we both griped and rehashed the outcome… We figured that as long as it is in the regulations, the Academy has to follow the rules. I know – crazy talk… But I’m stubborn problem solving engineer with a penchant for debate and I hold a grudge against a singular individual in the employ of KP along with his/her minions and compliant superiors. I don’t want to be too specific Ha – I know… “move on”… “get over it”… “Your daughter has and you should too!”

    Seriously ‘tho, the more I looked into it the more kids I found like my own… Designated by the USMMA as QUALIFIED ALTERNATE CANDIDATES ON-HOLD that were eventually changed to DENIED while vacancies allocated to their state were given away to other states, territories and/or Admin Appointments… Jasperdog, being a field rep, I know that you are familiar with the detailed Class Profile created each year by the Admin Office. It has much more detail than the class overview posted on the web. The respective state enrollments and alternates left on the bubble are easy to tally once you get your hands on the right document! Yes – I think that (44) States sounds great for the Class of 2012. The incoming Class of 2015, has (41) states enrolled participating. But looking at it thru my “personal perspective” (can’t deny it), I see (15) Qualified Alternate, On-Hold candidates denied a federally mandated vacancy that they should have been appointed for their under-represented states…

    I previously listed some of the numbers for the Class of 2015 but to reiterate, the top 10 states received (93) appointments above their quota of (76) for a total of (169) enrollments. Only (15) Qualified Alternate Candidates were denied appointments to their state’s allocated vacancies. Is finding or holding back (15) slots out of the (93) too much to expect of the Admissions staff? I assure you, those (15) kids (and yes Karm1, their parents) don’t think so. Note – I didn’t say only (15) Alternates were denied appointments. That number is (193). I am only talking about states that were denied the chance to merely meet their allocation…

    For the Class of 2014 the top (10) states received a whopping (144) additional appointments over and above their (78) allocated vacancies for a total of (222). Luckily (except from "the perspective" :smile: of the Qualified Alternate candidates left behind) only (7) kids missed out on allocations for their state that were given to another...

    Gentlemen, Gentlewomen and antagonists: My original question has been well debated. I really appreciate all the participants that added useful input. As to my daughter giving it another run after 2 years of college - we'll be talking about it as we review her year with NROTC. I don't personally have KP blood running through my veins so I perhaps I am less motivated than others to encourage her to make the jump. Besides, creeping up on 20 - she can make her own decision (Happier Karm1? :biggrin:) Well, like jasperdog I think this discussion has run its course as has my particpation... As I like to say in my business:


    “We have not succeeded in answering all our questions. The answers we have found only serve to raise a whole set of new questions. In some ways we feel we are as confused as ever, but we believe we are confused on a higher level and about more important things.”

    Best of luck and prosperity to you and yours :thumb:… SvcDad
     
  18. Lynpar

    Lynpar Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    723
    Likes Received:
    2
    So it turns out the FIRST advice we received about applying to KP ( class of 2015) has turned out to be the BEST advice we received.
    Apply early, very early. We heard it over and over and did exactly that.
    :thumb:
     
  19. Navy4ever

    Navy4ever Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2012
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am glad that's over

    I had to go read the CFR just to keep up:shake:

    DS reports next week to KP and he is excited. I can tell you that while we support his decision to attend the Academy we realize that his studies will be fast paced, rigorous and relevant to our nations demands. We hope that he has the stamina, fortitude and focus to see it through to the end...after all.. it is what he wants to do and he was one of the lucky ones to get the opportunity this year to do it:thumb:

    The roller-coaster ride is about to begin:wink:
     
  20. 4 kids

    4 kids New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know that SvcDad has thrown in the towel but he did tell me to reread the post and additional information so I thought I would give him some information he may not have had. @Packer and SvcDad, based on the letter of admissions, the candidate receives an "Appointment" from the Academy. It is up to the Candidate as to whether he or she accepts or declines the appointment.

    The denomination of the Academy's offer as an "appointment" is supported by the drafting of the regulation in question. The Academy is told the allotted appointments "first shall be made from among residents of each geographic area". Then, if the appointment(s) are not accepted, do it again... "from among residents of each geographic area " using almost identical language. If that does not work (appointments are not accepted), then the Academy is told to go to the national pool. Basically, it is a different game the third time around. If the reg was requiring the Academy to make an offer to the geographic area until it was accepted, then constituting the "appointment", it would state that the Academy is to make offers to the ranked list of qualified residents of each geographic area until all appointments are filled and, if the allotted appointments have not been filled after that, then the Academy can go to the national pool.

    And that result is the difference between a lawyer reading a regulation and an engineer reading the same regulation... which may be the reason (lawyers wrote and read the reg... not engineers) that your very accomplished and motivated daughter is studying at a fine college (based on your list) with (I think) a ROTC scholarship. Best of luck to her and I think she will be long past the two Kings Point bumps in the road in the very near future.
     

Share This Page