USAFA Class of 2023 Appointment Thread

justdoit19 said:
BBBRRRTT said:
Those are some amazing stats for sure. I know the feelings you are experiencing all too well. I disagree with many that say to vent on this forum is bad. I actually think it shows the real deal, and quite frankly I know what you are feeling, pain, anger, disappointment. One of the first instincts for a parent is to want to fight for their offspring. I say wear the anger on your sleeve and vent it out, I know I did, and it felt great. I got banned for six months, and you know what that was fine, and probably a good thing. Much better than keeping it bottled up. I know this will probably annoy some on the forum, but in my opinion, I think you are correct about the secrecy issue. Some general stats for districts could be shared to the public, with no detriment to the overall mission. A little more transparency of the process is probably not a bad thing.
Click to expand...

Honest question: what is meant by ‘more transparency’? I have heard this before but don’t know what it actually means in regards to a service academy appointment. Don’t we know general statistics (ie how many an MOC can have appointed)?
Click to expand...
Just a simple spreadsheet posted on the USAFA website with the following....all the districts in the nation, number of nominations, number of appointments, perhaps a column showing the number of recruited athletes from each district, you could have a column that indicates the number of presidential nominations, superintendent nominations, military kids nominations, etc. The public deserves to see the information, they are in fact funding this academy with their tax dollars. Anything less, and of course you will have people questioning the process. It's a simple concept..... transparency and you have less people questioning the process, no transparency and you will have plenty of people questioning it.
 
Dr. Strange Love said:
justdoit19 said:
BBBRRRTT said:
Those are some amazing stats for sure. I know the feelings you are experiencing all too well. I disagree with many that say to vent on this forum is bad. I actually think it shows the real deal, and quite frankly I know what you are feeling, pain, anger, disappointment. One of the first instincts for a parent is to want to fight for their offspring. I say wear the anger on your sleeve and vent it out, I know I did, and it felt great. I got banned for six months, and you know what that was fine, and probably a good thing. Much better than keeping it bottled up. I know this will probably annoy some on the forum, but in my opinion, I think you are correct about the secrecy issue. Some general stats for districts could be shared to the public, with no detriment to the overall mission. A little more transparency of the process is probably not a bad thing.
Click to expand...

Honest question: what is meant by ‘more transparency’? I have heard this before but don’t know what it actually means in regards to a service academy appointment. Don’t we know general statistics (ie how many an MOC can have appointed)?
Click to expand...
.
Transparency meaning "Full Disclosure" on how the Admissions process works …. #'s in every category …. Formulas …. Metrics.
.
Admissions … theirs' is a Hard Heart-Wrenching Job. It is not my job, thank goodness ….
.
Click to expand...
I agree they have a very big job. I think someone on here today or yesterday mentioned 10000 or 7000 applicants. That's a lot of data, but after putting all that work into it, whittling out all the highly qualified from the ultra highly qualified, you would think they would want to share a little of the generic info to the public to show, yeah we really are looking at everything and here is the data to support it.
 
justdoit19 said:
BBBRRRTT said:
Those are some amazing stats for sure. I know the feelings you are experiencing all too well. I disagree with many that say to vent on this forum is bad. I actually think it shows the real deal, and quite frankly I know what you are feeling, pain, anger, disappointment. One of the first instincts for a parent is to want to fight for their offspring. I say wear the anger on your sleeve and vent it out, I know I did, and it felt great. I got banned for six months, and you know what that was fine, and probably a good thing. Much better than keeping it bottled up. I know this will probably annoy some on the forum, but in my opinion, I think you are correct about the secrecy issue. Some general stats for districts could be shared to the public, with no detriment to the overall mission. A little more transparency of the process is probably not a bad thing.
Click to expand...

Honest question: what is meant by ‘more transparency’? I have heard this before but don’t know what it actually means in regards to a service academy appointment. Don’t we know general statistics (ie how many an MOC can have appointed)?
Click to expand...
I just noticed the "MOC can have appointed" portion of your statement, that's the part that I often wonder about. That's the portion I think would be interesting to see, the delta between the "can" and what really exists in the cadet ranks. Perhaps the data exists, and someone can just point me to the link online. I would love to look it over sometime.
 
BBBRRRTT said:
justdoit19 said:
BBBRRRTT said:
Those are some amazing stats for sure. I know the feelings you are experiencing all too well. I disagree with many that say to vent on this forum is bad. I actually think it shows the real deal, and quite frankly I know what you are feeling, pain, anger, disappointment. One of the first instincts for a parent is to want to fight for their offspring. I say wear the anger on your sleeve and vent it out, I know I did, and it felt great. I got banned for six months, and you know what that was fine, and probably a good thing. Much better than keeping it bottled up. I know this will probably annoy some on the forum, but in my opinion, I think you are correct about the secrecy issue. Some general stats for districts could be shared to the public, with no detriment to the overall mission. A little more transparency of the process is probably not a bad thing.
Click to expand...

Honest question: what is meant by ‘more transparency’? I have heard this before but don’t know what it actually means in regards to a service academy appointment. Don’t we know general statistics (ie how many an MOC can have appointed)?
Click to expand...
Just a simple spreadsheet posted on the USAFA website with the following....all the districts in the nation, number of nominations, number of appointments, perhaps a column showing the number of recruited athletes from each district, you could have a column that indicates the number of presidential nominations, superintendent nominations, military kids nominations, etc. The public deserves to see the information, they are in fact funding this academy with their tax dollars. Anything less, and of course you will have people questioning the process. It's a simple concept..... transparency and you have less people questioning the process, no transparency and you will have plenty of people questioning it.
Click to expand...

I don’t know the candidates, their numbers, or the admissions decisions. So this isn’t a specific discussion about anyone - no offense is meant to anyone.

Reducing this to statistics doesn’t seem quite right to me.

For instance, what if a candidate has great academics but comes across as arrogant in the interviews? Or if a candidate has average numbers but shines in other areas.

Statistics can be a starting point. But it doesn’t give us the decision making that went in to creating the statistics.

Someone might be better than the average, but not better than another on his slate.
 
A1Janitor said:
I don’t know the candidates, their numbers, or the admissions decisions. So this isn’t a specific discussion about anyone - no offense is meant to anyone.

Reducing this to statistics doesn’t seem quite right to me.

For instance, what if a candidate has great academics but comes across as arrogant in the interviews? Or if a candidate has average numbers but shines in other areas.

Statistics can be a starting point. But it doesn’t give us the decision making that went in to creating the statistics.

Someone might be better than the average, but not better than another on his slate.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much for this.
 
A1Janitor said:
BBBRRRTT said:
justdoit19 said:
BBBRRRTT said:
Those are some amazing stats for sure. I know the feelings you are experiencing all too well. I disagree with many that say to vent on this forum is bad. I actually think it shows the real deal, and quite frankly I know what you are feeling, pain, anger, disappointment. One of the first instincts for a parent is to want to fight for their offspring. I say wear the anger on your sleeve and vent it out, I know I did, and it felt great. I got banned for six months, and you know what that was fine, and probably a good thing. Much better than keeping it bottled up. I know this will probably annoy some on the forum, but in my opinion, I think you are correct about the secrecy issue. Some general stats for districts could be shared to the public, with no detriment to the overall mission. A little more transparency of the process is probably not a bad thing.
Click to expand...

Honest question: what is meant by ‘more transparency’? I have heard this before but don’t know what it actually means in regards to a service academy appointment. Don’t we know general statistics (ie how many an MOC can have appointed)?
Click to expand...
Just a simple spreadsheet posted on the USAFA website with the following....all the districts in the nation, number of nominations, number of appointments, perhaps a column showing the number of recruited athletes from each district, you could have a column that indicates the number of presidential nominations, superintendent nominations, military kids nominations, etc. The public deserves to see the information, they are in fact funding this academy with their tax dollars. Anything less, and of course you will have people questioning the process. It's a simple concept..... transparency and you have less people questioning the process, no transparency and you will have plenty of people questioning it.
Click to expand...

I don’t know the candidates, their numbers, or the admissions decisions. So this isn’t a specific discussion about anyone - no offense is meant to anyone.

Reducing this to statistics doesn’t seem quite right to me.

For instance, what if a candidate has great academics but comes across as arrogant in the interviews? Or if a candidate has average numbers but shines in other areas.

Statistics can be a starting point. But it doesn’t give us the decision making that went in to creating the statistics.

Someone might be better than the average, but not better than another on his slate.
Click to expand...
I agree A-1, there are the wild card items that can't be clearly listed in number metrics, those viewing the statistics would have to understand some assumptions, for instance that arrogant interviewers would be evenly distributed though out the country.
 
BBBRRRTT said:
patriot23 said:
DS was told he did NOT get an appointment. Very Grueling and worthless 2 years. The entire process is clouded in secrecy. It lacks clarity and transparency. The process does not choose the most qualified (its just a fact), however it seems to favor states, districts, ethnicity, and gender. Shameful!
For those who question my DS resume i will net it out for you

34 ACT
1480 SAT
4.71 GPA
10/10 On AP exams (8 of them 4 or higher)
3 sport athlete
HS Leadership, Student Govt
All State In academic bowls
thousands of hours of volunteer hours

CFA Scores
5:39 Mile
17 Pull ups
65 Push ups
93 Sit ups
93' on basketball throw
8.13 on shuttle

Spent a year at a Military Prep School, where he achieved highest possible ranking
Had 2 nominations to USAFA from Congress
Hand written Letter of Rec from a 2 star General
Pilot Qualified

these are not worthy of an appointment? I say shame on USAFA and its phony processes!

During 2 years in the Portal. Never had a single face to face meeting with an ALO! Navy and USMA came to meet him 2 or 3 times each, he wanted USAFA, and didnt end up with a nomination to USNA or USMA
Click to expand...
Those are some amazing stats for sure. I know the feelings you are experiencing all too well. I disagree with many that say to vent on this forum is bad. I actually think it shows the real deal, and quite frankly I know what you are feeling, pain, anger, disappointment. One of the first instincts for a parent is to want to fight for their offspring. I say wear the anger on your sleeve and vent it out, I know I did, and it felt great. I got banned for six months, and you know what that was fine, and probably a good thing. Much better than keeping it bottled up. I know this will probably annoy some on the forum, but in my opinion, I think you are correct about the secrecy issue. Some general stats for districts could be shared to the public, with no detriment to the overall mission. A little more transparency of the process is probably not a bad thing.
Click to expand...

I appreciate everyone's opinion, comments, support, frustration and information shared on this forum. While I understand patriot23 frustration and disappointment, I felt it was disrespectful to all the young men and women who probably worked just as hard as your child and were given an acceptance. Reading multiple threads, I am in complete awe of all their accomplishments. Congratulations to all of you who have been given an amazing opportunity to serve our country. YOU ALL DESERVE YOUR APPOINTMENT.
 
A1Janitor said:
BBBRRRTT said:
justdoit19 said:
BBBRRRTT said:
Those are some amazing stats for sure. I know the feelings you are experiencing all too well. I disagree with many that say to vent on this forum is bad. I actually think it shows the real deal, and quite frankly I know what you are feeling, pain, anger, disappointment. One of the first instincts for a parent is to want to fight for their offspring. I say wear the anger on your sleeve and vent it out, I know I did, and it felt great. I got banned for six months, and you know what that was fine, and probably a good thing. Much better than keeping it bottled up. I know this will probably annoy some on the forum, but in my opinion, I think you are correct about the secrecy issue. Some general stats for districts could be shared to the public, with no detriment to the overall mission. A little more transparency of the process is probably not a bad thing.
Click to expand...

Honest question: what is meant by ‘more transparency’? I have heard this before but don’t know what it actually means in regards to a service academy appointment. Don’t we know general statistics (ie how many an MOC can have appointed)?
Click to expand...
Just a simple spreadsheet posted on the USAFA website with the following....all the districts in the nation, number of nominations, number of appointments, perhaps a column showing the number of recruited athletes from each district, you could have a column that indicates the number of presidential nominations, superintendent nominations, military kids nominations, etc. The public deserves to see the information, they are in fact funding this academy with their tax dollars. Anything less, and of course you will have people questioning the process. It's a simple concept..... transparency and you have less people questioning the process, no transparency and you will have plenty of people questioning it.
Click to expand...

I don’t know the candidates, their numbers, or the admissions decisions. So this isn’t a specific discussion about anyone - no offense is meant to anyone.

Reducing this to statistics doesn’t seem quite right to me.

For instance, what if a candidate has great academics but comes across as arrogant in the interviews? Or if a candidate has average numbers but shines in other areas.

Statistics can be a starting point. But it doesn’t give us the decision making that went in to creating the statistics.

Someone might be better than the average, but not better than another on his slate.
Click to expand...

Agree...I believe a candidate should represent much more than his/her stats....that would be a very narrow view of his/her potential.
 
BBBRRRTT said:
I agree A-1, there are the wild card items that can't be clearly listed in number metrics, those viewing the statistics would have to understand some assumptions, for instance that arrogant interviewers would be evenly distributed though out the country.
Click to expand...

As a career Naval Officer:
The truth is your DS/DD is joining the military where all of their promotions will come through selection boards that occur behind doors. They will know the “boxes they need to check” for promotion but the higher they get in rank, the more often they will see that there are people who were fully qualified but did not get promoted and there are people who appear to be not as qualified as another but still get promoted.

This always happens behind closed doors with people desiring more “transparency” but there is little......only statistics. This is the way of the military. Me and my DS had this long conversation before he applied. It is better that they learn this now rather than when they are up for O-5/O-6 in 15-20 years.

This is their career field of choice and the world that they are signing up for. There is good reason for a lack of “transparency” and we can’t expect the military to conform to our expectations for selection. It’s their system.

My message to DS was: it you’re selected, be grateful, if not, you have 24 hours to be frustrated, then shake it off and move on. Fortunately he was selected....this time.....but he’s prepared for the day he is not.
 
First post so be gentle:
A1Janitor said:
For instance, what if a candidate has great academics but comes across as arrogant in the interviews? Or if a candidate has average numbers but shines in other areas.

Statistics can be a starting point. But it doesn’t give us the decision making that went in to creating the statistics.
Click to expand...

Let's say I design autopilot software, and %50 of my designs result in the plane losing control. %50 are successful though!

But, I'm a nice guy and I interview great! Do my stats really matter after all? Aren't you glad that they hired me instead of that nerdy math wiz that had the 4.0 gpa? I did throw an awesome fastball!

My point is that the "Stats" (GPA/ACT/SAT) are all things that the DD/DS worked hard for and should not be easily dismissed/overlooked.
 
Why are people treating selection to the academy as it is an entitlement? The board knows what they are looking for and we (outsiders) don’t. We can argue about accolades and test scores until Jesus returns and it won’t matter. Selection is not a right of the student, it’s an opportunity. We as parents have created the sense of entitlement in our children.
 
ShawnR said:
First post so be gentle:
A1Janitor said:
For instance, what if a candidate has great academics but comes across as arrogant in the interviews? Or if a candidate has average numbers but shines in other areas.

Statistics can be a starting point. But it doesn’t give us the decision making that went in to creating the statistics.
Click to expand...

Let's say I design autopilot software, and %50 of my designs result in the plane losing control. %50 are successful though!

But, I'm a nice guy and I interview great! Do my stats really matter after all? Aren't you glad that they hired me instead of that nerdy math wiz that had the 4.0 gpa? I did throw an awesome fastball!

My point is that the "Stats" (GPA/ACT/SAT) are all things that the DD/DS worked hard for and should not be easily dismissed/overlooked.
Click to expand...

What we don’t know ... the stats of the other guys on the slate.

My son means the world to me. And of course I am so very proud of him and his stats. As I bet all parents of these special kids are.

My son was very lucky to get appointed to the naval academy. And we think his stats are very good - admissions told my son that he was considered a top candidate by the academy.

But we also realize that there are people with better stats that don’t get in. Does that mean the ones with better stats deserved it more? I don’t know that to be true.

It’s a fallacy to assume someone else that got in was a worse candidate. It’s especially troubling to have people think it is because of race, or some other improper motive.

There are a ton of great stats out there.
 
TeddyPlus4 said:
Why are people treating selection to the academy as it is an entitlement? The board knows what they are looking for and we (outsiders) don’t. We can argue about accolades and test scores until Jesus returns and it won’t matter. Selection is not a right of the student, it’s an opportunity. We as parents have created the sense of entitlement in our children.
Click to expand...
Can I just say I love how you cut right through the crap! Everybody should have had a dad like you!
 
ShawnR said:
First post so be gentle:
A1Janitor said:
For instance, what if a candidate has great academics but comes across as arrogant in the interviews? Or if a candidate has average numbers but shines in other areas.

Statistics can be a starting point. But it doesn’t give us the decision making that went in to creating the statistics.
Click to expand...

Let's say I design autopilot software, and %50 of my designs result in the plane losing control. %50 are successful though!

But, I'm a nice guy and I interview great! Do my stats really matter after all? Aren't you glad that they hired me instead of that nerdy math wiz that had the 4.0 gpa? I did throw an awesome fastball!

My point is that the "Stats" (GPA/ACT/SAT) are all things that the DD/DS worked hard for and should not be easily dismissed/overlooked.
Click to expand...
Shawn R, that autopilot software analogy is priceless. I wish I was a word-smith and thought-smith like you!
 
ShawnR said:
First post so be gentle:
A1Janitor said:
For instance, what if a candidate has great academics but comes across as arrogant in the interviews? Or if a candidate has average numbers but shines in other areas.

Statistics can be a starting point. But it doesn’t give us the decision making that went in to creating the statistics.
Click to expand...

Let's say I design autopilot software, and %50 of my designs result in the plane losing control. %50 are successful though!

But, I'm a nice guy and I interview great! Do my stats really matter after all? Aren't you glad that they hired me instead of that nerdy math wiz that had the 4.0 gpa? I did throw an awesome fastball!

My point is that the "Stats" (GPA/ACT/SAT) are all things that the DD/DS worked hard for and should not be easily dismissed/overlooked.
Click to expand...

RE: Stats - I get it but there are things called intangibles. Leadership isn't about being chosen/elected a leader but rather your effectiveness as a leader. Sure you aced your ACTs and got elected President of SGA but can you truly lead a team and get them to meet their objectives. There are many kids whose stats are great and who are good leaders but let's face it there are also kids whose stats are decent but they are amazing leaders. That is an intangible. Letters of recommendation and word of mouth get the word out on these.

I work for one of the largest companies in the world and manage a lot of people. There are brilliant people who work for me that went to Stanford, Yale and other top schools, but I've also got folks who went to no name schools that are better leaders. They just got 'it". The military needs all sorts to run their org from smart whiz kids to grunts to strong effective leaders. The folks who make the selections know this and are looking for a class demographic that fits all the categories to staff the worlds greatest military. This means that some of those whiz kids who aced the ACT won't be selected while a kid who got a 25 does get selected. Why? We don't know but I can only speculate it's to fit all the needs of the service and a need that a 35 ACT kid couldn't meet while that 25 ACT could.
 
TeddyPlus4 said:
Why are people treating selection to the academy as it is an entitlement? The board knows what they are looking for and we (outsiders) don’t. We can argue about accolades and test scores until Jesus returns and it won’t matter. Selection is not a right of the student, it’s an opportunity. We as parents have created the sense of entitlement in our children.
Click to expand...
Thank you!
 
ShawnR said:
First post so be gentle:
A1Janitor said:
For instance, what if a candidate has great academics but comes across as arrogant in the interviews? Or if a candidate has average numbers but shines in other areas.

Statistics can be a starting point. But it doesn’t give us the decision making that went in to creating the statistics.
Click to expand...

Let's say I design autopilot software, and %50 of my designs result in the plane losing control. %50 are successful though!

But, I'm a nice guy and I interview great! Do my stats really matter after all? Aren't you glad that they hired me instead of that nerdy math wiz that had the 4.0 gpa? I did throw an awesome fastball!

My point is that the "Stats" (GPA/ACT/SAT) are all things that the DD/DS worked hard for and should not be easily dismissed/overlooked.
Click to expand...
I am not from admissions, but I believe the mindset they have is more along the lines of what did you learn from that, or how did you bounce back from that? Sure GPA, ACT, and extra-curriculars are taken into account, but at the end of the day your application is essentialy a sales pitch as to why the Air Force should invest their time and money into you. If I were in charge of hiring someone and had to choose between someone who always succeeded and had never failed before or someone who had failed a few times but had leared and improved from each and every mistake to ultimately succeed, I would choose the second candidate because of what their resilience and a experience says about them as a person that they don't just quit after a failure but they take what they learned and come back at it stronger and with a different perspective.

Not much butjust my $0.02.
 
4BravoX1 said:
I am not from admissions, but I believe the mindset they have is more along the lines of what did you learn from that, or how did you bounce back from that? Sure GPA, ACT, and extra-curriculars are taken into account, but at the end of the day your application is essentialy a sales pitch as to why the Air Force should invest their time and money into you. If I were in charge of hiring someone and had to choose between someone who always succeeded and had never failed before or someone who had failed a few times but had leared and improved from each and every mistake to ultimately succeed, I would choose the second candidate because of what their resilience and a experience says about them as a person that they don't just quit after a failure but they take what they learned and come back at it stronger and with a different perspective.

Not much butjust my $0.02.
Click to expand...

Exactly. This is why the academy stresses that they are focused on the “whole person” concept when considering a candidate. This is also a reason for the interviews in general. You bring your stats to life. It is where you can show how your failures have contributed to your growth as a student and leader. The intangibles BigPapa3 explained are often times more valuable than simply stats. If in an interview or letter of rec, all is done is regurgitate your stats in new wording, this does not do much to expand your application. They could just read your resume. But if you talk about your failures and hardships in your interview and writing portion, this gives the board insight in how you will overcome some of the seemingly insurmountable challenges that will be thrown at you at the academy.
I believe this is one of the reasons the academy uses the rolling deadlines as well.
Ultimately, I believe all those who have received their appointments have deserved it. And those who have not, do not be discouraged. (I understand that is difficult, but you are all amazing people to have even finished the application process)
 
No disrespect, but can we get back to the OP, of this being an appointment thread? My DD is still awaiting word, and would like to see if any new appointnents/status updates have happened which is difficult with the side conversations. Again, just bringing it back to the original post. Thanks y'all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top