USNA Class of 2028 Waiting and Speculating

A1Janitor said:
Her record got her the LOA. She would have gotten the LOA and the appointment if the mid didn’t write that.
Click to expand...
I think my DS's report from SLE was part of him receiving the VP nom. He was nominated for candidate of the week and also received another award at SLE. He was rejected in February because he lost his slates. Then given the VP nom two weeks ago. His FFR said it was due to "intangibles." It remains to be seen if he will be appointed, but he is back in the hunt.

Also, it counted as his FFR interview, so it has to mean something.
 
Last edited:
gniyji said:
each case is different -- we really don't have enough data to draw a picture.

How many SS turned down and also turned down in application (some SS turned down decided not to continue or USNA decided not to roll over to application)

How many SS accepted and then turned down in application

How many SS turned down then accepted in application

We really don't have the data to make prediction.

But it can be true if a candidate got turned down (due to lack of competitiveness), it is likely to get turned down for the same reason in application. -- this statement can be very true.
Click to expand...
I’m really not invested enough to dig this deep into the tea leaves 😊. There’s enough an applicant can do between a NASS/STEM turn down and their application to increase their odds of acceptance/change the trajectory….as well as not every NASS/STEM participant will earn an appointment. As you said - there isn’t enough data to draw a correlation. And, honestly, I was just chiming in to say it works both ways. I’m not here to argue a point one way or the other. It’s like high school baseball - you’ll drive yourself crazy trying to figure out why a line-up is a certain way & then changes without reason & then goes back & then kids get moved up and down in the batting order & then & then & then. I see no point in trying to figure it out/determine the algorithm. That’s for Admissions to take care of & based off of the SAF experts it would have already been done if it was possible. I’m just along for the crazy roller coaster 🎢 ride….
 
Aksel2028 said:
I believe this is an "Urban Legend" that has been debunked on this Forum.
Click to expand...
It will be naive to think they don’t “watch” you during STEM and NASS, your paperwork stays in their files. I remember there were lots of applications for both camps and it was quite competitive. Both are a recruiting tool but I know it works both ways. Does it determines acceptance, not at all, but is definitely a part of the picture. A puzzle of many parts that takes 3 - 4 years to come together as “your profile”
If I remember correctly, all the kids get a “candidate number” after NASS some follow with the application process some decide to do otherwise.
 
momofnavygirl said:
My daughter got a message and a text message about her report from her mid at NASS with a very nice story about her and her attitude during that week ...also ranking her a five and saying she's a type of person that the academy would like. She copied and pasted it and put it in her file. She got an loa and she got an appointment. I think it had to help a little bit.
Click to expand...
You are a 100% correct! My mid’s case was similar. Once again, it does not determine admission, BUT definitely a part of the puzzle.
 
A1Janitor said:
Because it is part of their training.
Click to expand...
Okay. So you create a report and grade someone for training purposes but why do you have to put it in the file?

I am of the opinion, based on my personal observations, that if someone goes to NASS and doesn’t standout above the crowd then that probably would have no impact on the admissions. However, if someone is noticeably unfit or exceptionally fit for the academy then that gets noted somewhere in the file. Again. This is strictly my personal observation.
 
mike1979 said:
Okay. So you create a report and grade someone for training purposes but why do you have to put it in the file?

I am of the opinion, based on my personal observations, that if someone goes to NASS and doesn’t standout above the crowd then that probably would have no impact on the admissions. However, if someone is noticeably unfit or exceptionally fit for the academy then that gets noted somewhere in the file. Again. This is strictly my personal observation.
Click to expand...
Or? In this case either the exceptional, or unfit performer will be picked out during the regular application cycle process. And they are.

NASS is stated to be an awareness tool by USNA. And internally, is a training block for Midshipmen.

IDK the statistic but it’s a small portion of the admitted class, that even attended NASS. It’s not a competitive candidate program. It’s a ‘spread the awareness’ program. As well as training Midshipmen how to be future Officers.

There are geographic areas of the country that won’t even have representation at NASS. BC there are areas that are not the target of NASS.

I recall you have a Mid. Perhaps they will be a detailer and you can speak to them about their paperwork piece.
 
DD1 went to NASS and AFASS and received offers of appointment to both Academies.

But, she did not attend AIM or SLE and also received offers of appointment to both Academies

Shouldn't she have been turned down by USCGA and USMA?

The reason that you see a correlation between attendees and admittance is that those kids have already literally put their money where their mouth is. They are motivated to fully complete the application process. I don't find it at all surprising that 35-40% of eventual appointees went to summer seminar. The document referenced earlier in this thread stated that 2,250 Class of 2015 Candidates went to NASS. That means that only 1 in 5 NASS attendees joined the class. That doesn't seem like an outsized percentage to me.

As for performance at NASS influencing the chance of admission, I don't buy it. As others have said, the detailers are not qualified to provide reliable assessments as far as an HR decision is concerned, which is essentially what we are discussing. The only objective advantage that DD1 received was completing her CFA during NASS, which was also used for USAFA and USMA.
 
gniyji said:
on USNA webpage, they list NASS as competitive --- that is the fact. When you get it turned down -- it means you are not competitive for this application -- logically it makes sense. Right ?
Click to expand...
No where on USNA's website is the Summer Seminar listed as competitive. They have a minimum criteria for for HS Juniors for a limited number of openings for 3 seminars. Maybe competitive in the sense of first come first served with the correct criteria met. Your DS's strength of application & slate are competitive. I don't presume to know, but I do understand more. As hard as it is to accept, there's something in your DS's application/interview/essay that got him this far, but not far enough. Perhaps I'm wrong, but not going to SS did not result in a TD. An overwhelming number of appointments were made to applicants that did not go to SS for whatever reason. It seems the admissions process worked his application as long as they could.
Trying to equate two things that are not equal is a futile way on the SAF to find answers you may never find. Short of picking up a phone and asking someone who may have the answers you seek.
I understand he has an appointment to USMA, which is outstanding. Best of luck to your DS
 
gniyji said:
We believe USNA just does not like his profile (we truly believe so) but his stats are so perfect -- they just kept him on pending long enough to make him feel better.
Click to expand...
I am curious,,,what about his "profile" did USNA not like ?

Not going to debate any particular point (and this thread calls for speculation, so speculate away), but I've been involved in this process long enough to know that there is no one sitting in Admissions saying let's hold this one out a little longer so they feel better about the TD. The Admissions Officers I've met and worked with over the years are conscientious, and really understand the impact their decisions have on Candidates.

Finally, for anyone watching this thread for gouge on applying next year or in the future ...there is so much misinformation going on in this "speculation" thread that I am not going to even try to address it.
 
gniyji said:
on USNA webpage, they list NASS as competitive --- that is the fact. When you get it turned down -- it means you are not competitive for this application -- logically it makes sense. Right ?
Click to expand...
It is competitive in the sense that there are more applicants that desire to participate in NASS than there are available slots. So, yes, NASS applicants are competing for a spot at the summer program and, yes, the application for NASS does serve as a preliminary application for the admissions process in general. However, the decision on whether or not an applicant for NASS gets a spot, does not translate to an assessment of a candidate's qualification for an offer of appointment. If you had a person with the highest WPM score of any applicant ever, but that applicant was from a family with three other Mids, and from a town or school with outsized representation at the Yard, it is quite possible that the applicant would be turned down for NASS.
 
gniyji said:
on USNA webpage, they list NASS as competitive --- that is the fact. When you get it turned down -- it means you are not competitive for this application -- logically it makes sense. Right ?
Click to expand...
Competitive in that there are a limited number of slots, with many applicants. That said, the selection process is not necessarily based upon the same criteria as the Admissions criteria. USNA is trying to attract bright young candidates, who may or may not have a desire to attend USNA to NASS. The kid with great tickets who lives outside Gate 1 at USNA and has spent his life attending USNA and wants to attend USNA more than anything isn't the target audience. In contrast, my nephew -- a very bright scholar /athlete , received an unsolicited invite to NASS a few years back (he was referred by a guidance counselor), attended NASS and decided USNA wasn't for him.
 
AlwaysRunning said:
fwiw to future applicants:

My kid was told by a rising firstie that a specific detail would be included in the report to admissions. I doubt the firstie was lying about the report.
Click to expand...
They do write a report. I have heard admissions speak to the report. As stated, NASS does not count for points. Some kids melt down, aren’t great team mates or even more egregious things with stating terrible things. Again, extremely rare, but you are talking 16-17 year olds all over the country and getting taken out of their comfort zone. NASS alone will not get anyone into USNA. Just like a BGO interview. The report is an item that can help to fill in gaps and paint the whole picture of a candidate. NASS not only helps expose those to USNA who may not have considered it, but also encourages candidates to pursue and complete their applications.
 
Aleks said:
they do in the sense that cadre writes a report on the kids and that goes into the admissions file
Click to expand...
Yes, my squad leader met with everyone in my squad and asked us a couple of questions about our interest in the academies at NASS. My BGO also attended NASS and saw his file when he had done his BGO training...his squad leader said he was "too loud"
 
FutureAcademyDad? said:
DD1 went to NASS and AFASS and received offers of appointment to both Academies.

But, she did not attend AIM or SLE and also received offers of appointment to both Academies

Shouldn't she have been turned down by USCGA and USMA?

The reason that you see a correlation between attendees and admittance is that those kids have already literally put their money where their mouth is. They are motivated to fully complete the application process. I don't find it at all surprising that 35-40% of eventual appointees went to summer seminar. The document referenced earlier in this thread stated that 2,250 Class of 2015 Candidates went to NASS. That means that only 1 in 5 NASS attendees joined the class. That doesn't seem like an outsized percentage to me.

As for performance at NASS influencing the chance of admission, I don't buy it. As others have said, the detailers are not qualified to provide reliable assessments as far as an HR decision is concerned, which is essentially what we are discussing. The only objective advantage that DD1 received was completing her CFA during NASS, which was also used for USAFA and USMA.
Click to expand...
In my DS experience the kids in his group ranged from enthusiastic to being completely not interested. This was especially evident in the events where participation was not mandatory. NASS and CVW are great opportunity to observe candidates and their interactions. Why would academies ignore that?
 
I’ve always viewed NASS as an opportunity for high schoolers to help determine if USNA is a good fit for them, not for USNA to determine if you are a good fit (that all comes later). Yes, there is a write up afterward but that just becomes one small piece of who a student is. I would think red flags would be more of a concern, but all the many components of a USNA application help flesh out the complete person (and their WPS).

For so many Americans today, military service and service academies are completely absent from their every day or family lives. It’s a huge undertaking to fully explain it. And as everyone here knows the application process is a grueling, time-consuming, and emotional few years. Candidates need to understand what they are getting into now and in the future. NASS is one of those pieces.

It also helps for those trying to decide between different SAs and service branches to get a little taste of the culture. It is not an interview, not an internship, and not a test. NASS, CVW, STEM, sports camps, and Inspire are all carefully cultivated opportunities to step into the world of USNA as an outsider to see if it might be a good fit for you.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top