Principal Nominee with TWE

Mom_of_many said:
Christcorp said:
It's brought up quite often, that the academy is a bit ambiguous when it comes to acceptable GPA's. SAT/ACT scores are pretty self explanatory. They list minimum scores. But GPA; CAN'T BE that clear cut. I know many want them to be more specific, but it's simply not possible.

Imagine; 4 students applying. 4 different schools. ALL 4 have a 3.7 gpa. 1 has the 3.7 and is in the IB program. The 2nd is only taking AP classes. The 3rd applicant with the 3.7 is in a small town school with almost NO AP classes; no honor's classes; no IB program; so is taking the basic state minimum required classes. (BUT, is taking online COLLEGE CLASSES on the side). The 4th applicant has ALL of the IP, AP, honors classes available; However, they have CHOSEN to to take the state minimum required classes for graduation.... and has a 3.7 gpa.

Do you see the problem? The 4th person, has NO INITIATIVE to take the most challenging classes; even though they were available. NOT the type of student the academy wants. The 3rd student had no option to take better classes; but they went ABOVE AND BEYOND and took college classes. Can you see how a 3.7 means one thing to one applicant and means something else to another?
Click to expand...
My DS is one of the 3.7 GPA with 1420 SAT in a small town. He drives 20 miles to the community college in another small town, and is completing 27 dual college credits with 4.0 college GPA. He earned a nomination but wasn't selected.
We're a middle income but supersize family so his plan B isn't easy, either enlist or work his way slowly through college. One of his brothers scored 99 on the ASVAB and is an ELT on a nuclear submarine, so I know my home school program is adequate.
I know my DS will succeed wherever he goes because of his character and grit. I can see the difficulty in choosing.
Click to expand...

Fellow homeschool mom of many too :) Best of luck to your son!
 
Pima said:
TexasAggie204 said:
You can disagree, but it's what we heard time and time again...wherever and whenever we met with admissions officers at colleges (again, not just SA's) within a 5-6 hour driving radius, the admissions people we quite vocal in saying that they were:

1. Familiar with our (public) high school by name (Brand)
2. Had prior experience with students who graduated from said high school (presumably favorable)
3. That would have a positive influence on their admission decision

Also, I wouldn't say very rarely a family/student doesn't have a say with where they attend HS. I would say nearly all people in our town choose to live in the town because of the school system. This is VERY common where we live, and in our part of the country in general. I grew up in the South, and many other places in this country, and it's much less prevalent down there.
Click to expand...

I agree with TexasAggie204. I also agree with Christcorp too. To me it comes down to you may not have that option. We were in the military. There were times we were stationed at places that they had 2 or 3 hs. in the county. There were times that where we were stationed they had 15 HS in the county.
~ In our county 50% of our HS's are magnet, but each one is different. There is an AICE/Cambridge program HS. a dance magnet, an arts magnet, a computer/IT magnet,, a foreign language, a STEM, an environmental, and I am sure I missing some more. Our county is very dense. You must meet the requirements to be accepted to any of them, but from 1 end of the county to the other you are looking at 20 mins drive. Just as CC stated you are on your own for driving the child. However, many parents with children in the program carpool. My neighbor took the kids to school, I picked them up.

I agree with TexasAggie204 regarding where they live when you are talking about suburban living. We bought and sold 5 homes over 14 yrs due to PCSing (military moves). I was a realtor. I followed the old adage when we purchased homes. LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION. Smallest home in the best school district was always better than the bigger home in a less than stellar school district even if they were the same in price. My boys shared bedrooms until my eldest was 9. Why? because we could only afford that size in the better school district. When we moved to VA, it became even harder bc I knew that if we stayed for the 3 yrs., I would have 1 in HS (9th), 1 in middle (7th) and 1 in elementary (5th). I had to basically do a ven diagram to find an area where all 3 would be attending the best schools within my budget, oh and add into the fact it had to be close enough for Bullet to commute to the Pentagon. To this day I will say there was nothing I liked about that house, except it's location.

I get the big picture that not everybody has that ability, but I also get that some do have that chance. As a realtor, I don't have enough fingers and toes on my body, and everyone elses body in my family to count because buyers want the bells and whistles, the bigger house. It is only when I pull up the school reports that they pull back the reigns. The house size no longer is number 1 priority. I have seen people buy fixer uppers just to be in that school district. I have seen people buy townhouses over single family for the same reason. I have seen people love a home and community amenities, close to work, only to look at the school district and say NOPE.

OBTW TexasAggie204. 8 out of 20 yrs Bullet served was in NC. It was prevalent there. People knew that although in the county there were 4 HS., they knew how each ranked out. The homes in the area with the top HS school flocked there. Homes sold at a much faster pace than the number 2 HS. Christcorp, fyi, that town had no magnet schools which supports your position.
Click to expand...

We had a very similar situation growing up...9 schools for me in 12 years; mostly in the South (Texas, Virginia, etc.) Parents sacrificed big time to have us attend school in Arlington, VA when we were stationed there. I remember feeling like the poorest kid in the whole school, but it was a phenomenal school district. Very progressive and a great education to be had. Granted, many folks in rural areas don't have so many options. I went to college at A&M with a kid from South Texas that had like 35 people in his graduating class. He also had earned 5 varsity letters as a Senior in HS.

Which brings us to athletic participation: No chance of multiple varsity letters in multiple sports in our current HS. In fact, our boys basketball coach insists the boys "specialize" in basketball (basically tells them not to play other sports), by the time they're in 10th grade. I read these parent comments about the number of varsity letters, etc. their kids have and think; "not in our school". Too many kids with talent/ability; marginal players get cut; not everyone on the team gets a letter, etc. Again, it's the suburbs where the youth sports programs are "juiced", kids get private coaching for basically everything they do, practice year-round, etc.

Different levels of athletic and academic competition certainly exist in different districts, population centers and geographic regions. Same for performing arts, etc. based upon our 4 kids experience as well. It is what it is; but the people who are "in the know" at these SA's an universities, definitely know that it's not a level playing field that exists out there for making 4.0's, 4.5's and all of those numbers that didn't even exist 20 years ago.
 
There is a public high school by us in which ALL of the varsity hockey players train year-round (summer leagues, dry-land training, etc). To make the team, you have to be "known" by about 3rd grade. Basically, no way they could be on the team and participate in another sport. Granted, you make varsity you will get a D1 scholarship and you are almost certain to be drafted pretty high up in the NHL amateur draft. In fact, there is a freshman in this high school who already committed to a D1 powerhouse. They have a club team for non-varsity players that could probably compete pretty well in the state league. High school sports can be all out of proportion.
 
Pima said:
Some posters here will state their wcgpa, and not their uwcgpa.
The last I recall the weight value for an AP course is 4.5 This is why many older posters here place little value on that area when they come on and say my cgpa is 4.6. We immediately know that their wcgpa will be re-worked via USAFA since they top out at 4.5, thus, 4.6 has to be on at least a 5.0 goal or maybe even a 6.0

They also take into account the grading scale. For example is it a 7 pt scale or a 10 pt scale? A 92 on a 7 pt scale is a B+, but on a 10 pt scale it is an A-. There are tens of thousands of high schools. So for that scenario, the student's cgpa drops just for the fact that it was a 7 pt scale. USAFA uses a 10 point scale, or at least they use to use that scale.
~ I know this because my DS's uwcgpa and wcgpa jumped up. Our school used a 7 pt scale on 4.5 weight.

The actual algorithm nobody knows, but you can see they use multiple aspects.

I would also add that it is important to look at the wgpa. You have stated that your DS had a uwcgpa of 4.0. That is something to be proud of, and many posters would be going OMG, amazing. Older posters, such as myself, will leave that alone, bc I don't know the rigor of his class schedule, and the school profile.
~ 4.0, top 18% rank and only 3 APs under his belt as a senior when the valedictorian will have 9 and doing jump start (dual enrollment) are 2 different things. It still is impressive, yet the rigor now is not as impressive.
~This is also where the school profile comes into play, which nobody here can see. Does the school hand out A's like candy on Halloween?
Click to expand...

@Pima Appreciate your taking the time to reply. Without sharing too much out of respect for my son's privacy, he did take rigorous courses. 9-10 college classes while in high school. STEM courses, freshman English, and the type of courses recommended candidates take. No downtime classes. Got straight A's. Our school does not have AP courses. He also had great standardized test scores, well above the average scores USAFA reports in the class profiles.

I can't find the thread but the posters were talking about the GPA on their USAFA portal, not their own calculated wcgpa or ucgpa, and some of them had a high weighted GPA above 4.0. Even they couldn't figure out how it was calculated. We certainly don't begrudge their achievements as we do not know what's in their application file. What perplexes us is most colleges will give added weight to dual enrollment classes similar to an AP or IB class, but it does not appear he had any weight added to his GPA by USAFA. If the college courses added weight he too would have had above a 4.0 and that would have made a difference in his WCS. We live in a competitive district so it all matters.

I believe it was @USMA 1994 who said in another post that is why college re-applicants get a boost in their WCS, because they have college courses on their application the second time around.

Does the admissions counselor calculate the WCS?
 
Last edited:
For all of the input you see above, GPA by itself is not used in the equation. The portion of the WCS for high school performance is some combination of school profile, students's class schedule and class rank; basically what types of classes are offered, what did the student take and how did they perform in relation to others in similar classes (this is where GPA comes in). The link also talks about adjustments based on school profiles.

https://www.academyadmissions.com/admissions/the-application-process/academic-performance/#PAR

I do not think anyone know the exact details of who calculates the score, but I think that it is a pretty safe assumption that the admission teams enters all of the candidates information into a computer system that generates a score. After the score is generated, the same admission team will review the number and basically give it a "QC" check to make sure it seems correct.
 
USMA 1994 said:
For all of the input you see above, GPA by itself is not used in the equation. The portion of the WCS for high school performance is some combination of school profile, students's class schedule and class rank; basically what types of classes are offered, what did the student take and how did they perform in relation to others in similar classes (this is where GPA comes in). The link also talks about adjustments based on school profiles.

https://www.academyadmissions.com/admissions/the-application-process/academic-performance/#PAR

I do not think anyone know the exact details of who calculates the score, but I think that it is a pretty safe assumption that the admission teams enters all of the candidates information into a computer system that generates a score. After the score is generated, the same admission team will review the number and basically give it a "QC" check to make sure it seems correct.
Click to expand...

Makes sense...
 
FireflyMom said:
With the USAFA they don’t notify candidates if they are 3Q like the other academies , which is what’s so frustrating and different than the other ones .
Click to expand...

As CaptMJ noted in her post, USNA does not notify it's candidates if they are 3Q'd.
 
ders_dad said:
There is a public high school by us in which ALL of the varsity hockey players train year-round (summer leagues, dry-land training, etc). To make the team, you have to be "known" by about 3rd grade. Basically, no way they could be on the team and participate in another sport. Granted, you make varsity you will get a D1 scholarship and you are almost certain to be drafted pretty high up in the NHL amateur draft. In fact, there is a freshman in this high school who already committed to a D1 powerhouse. They have a club team for non-varsity players that could probably compete pretty well in the state league. High school sports can be all out of proportion.
Click to expand...
That is quite a hockey program. What is that high school?
 
Bracken said:
That is quite a hockey program. What is that high school?
Click to expand...
Bracken - pretty sure I remember you are from MN so I'm pretty sure you know which school I'm referring to. They wear green and gold and as my sons have jokingly say (they have friends there so I can say this), Every Day I Need Attention.
 
MMShape said:
Yes. I meant what the standards are for meeting minimal academic requirements are hard to pin down. Is it a 3.5 GPA? A 4.0? Is it a minimum of 1300 on the SAT? A 1400?
Click to expand...

The trouble with concrete standards is that there is a hard cap on the number of spots and no set boundaries on the number or quality of candidates that may apply in any given year. A 1375 may do it one year, but fluctuations in the difficulty of the SAT or the quality of the 2021 graduating class might raise the average. If not as many kids apply the average could drop. The competition level dictates the minimums, so they can really only say "You're in the game" and not much more.
 
StPaulDad said:
MMShape said:
Yes. I meant what the standards are for meeting minimal academic requirements are hard to pin down. Is it a 3.5 GPA? A 4.0? Is it a minimum of 1300 on the SAT? A 1400?
Click to expand...

The trouble with concrete standards is that there is a hard cap on the number of spots and no set boundaries on the number or quality of candidates that may apply in any given year. A 1375 may do it one year, but fluctuations in the difficulty of the SAT or the quality of the 2021 graduating class might raise the average. If not as many kids apply the average could drop. The competition level dictates the minimums, so they can really only say "You're in the game" and not much more.
Click to expand...

The minimum standards are not published but they do not change year to year based on the applicants. The academic standards are a combination of test scores and grades and they are looked at as a body of work, not just numbers. Any one number may or may not be disqualifying but it would depend on all other academic factors. If one area seems a bit low, they will look at other indicators to try and determine the academic readiness of the candidate. The entire admission's process is trying to evaluate if a candidate has the potential to be successful. The will attempt to qualify everyone who applies as there are many other factors that go into the equation with the biggest is slotting against available openings from nomination sources.

The class averages may change slightly year to year but we have to keep in mind that this is not a National Competition. Applicants from areas that may not be as competitive will still be admitted with potential lower test scores and class ranks.
 
USMA 1994 said:
The minimum standards are not published but they do not change year to year based on the applicants. The academic standards are a combination of test scores and grades and they are looked at as a body of work, not just numbers. Any one number may or may not be disqualifying but it would depend on all other academic factors. If one area seems a bit low, they will look at other indicators to try and determine the academic readiness of the candidate. The entire admission's process is trying to evaluate if a candidate has the potential to be successful. The will attempt to qualify everyone who applies as there are many other factors that go into the equation with the biggest is slotting against available openings from nomination sources.

The class averages may change slightly year to year but we have to keep in mind that this is not a National Competition. Applicants from areas that may not be as competitive will still be admitted with potential lower test scores and class ranks.
Click to expand...

I've read and appreciated all the comments but I think there's still a perspective missing. Somehow somewhere, legislation (I'm guessing) gave MOCs the opportunity to designate a candidate a principal nominee, ie this one candidate was the one the MOC wanted to represent their district that year.

Our MOC had a Committee our DS interviewed with on the MOC's behalf; and this committee was made up of all former SA grads. So all these people look at our DS and said he's the strongest one of the bunch that year because he was designated the principal nominee. They did this seeing our DS's full file, test scores, GPA, etc. My only point is that without some specific education by the SAs to all these people involved in the nominating process on what minimum academic standards they expect candidates to meet--the tool of a principal nominee cannot be fully utilized by a MOC.
 
MMShape said:
I've read and appreciated all the comments but I think there's still a perspective missing. Somehow somewhere, legislation (I'm guessing) gave MOCs the opportunity to designate a candidate a principal nominee, ie this one candidate was the one the MOC wanted to represent their district that year.

Our MOC had a Committee our DS interviewed with on the MOC's behalf; and this committee was made up of all former SA grads. So all these people look at our DS and said he's the strongest one of the bunch that year because he was designated the principal nominee. They did this seeing our DS's full file, test scores, GPA, etc. My only point is that without some specific education by the SAs to all these people involved in the nominating process on what minimum academic standards they expect candidates to meet--the tool of a principal nominee cannot be fully utilized by a MOC.
Click to expand...

Aren’t SA minimum standards met through becoming an official candidate? One is not elevated to candidate stage without meeting SA standards early on, in the pre-candidate phase.
 
justdoit19 said:
Aren’t SA minimum standards met through becoming an official candidate?
Click to expand...
No. If an MoC noms, than they move over to candidate from applicant. You don't immediately move from applicant to candidate in the PCQ phase.
 
MMShape said:
USMA 1994 said:
The minimum standards are not published but they do not change year to year based on the applicants. The academic standards are a combination of test scores and grades and they are looked at as a body of work, not just numbers. Any one number may or may not be disqualifying but it would depend on all other academic factors. If one area seems a bit low, they will look at other indicators to try and determine the academic readiness of the candidate. The entire admission's process is trying to evaluate if a candidate has the potential to be successful. The will attempt to qualify everyone who applies as there are many other factors that go into the equation with the biggest is slotting against available openings from nomination sources.

The class averages may change slightly year to year but we have to keep in mind that this is not a National Competition. Applicants from areas that may not be as competitive will still be admitted with potential lower test scores and class ranks.
Click to expand...

I've read and appreciated all the comments but I think there's still a perspective missing. Somehow somewhere, legislation (I'm guessing) gave MOCs the opportunity to designate a candidate a principal nominee, ie this one candidate was the one the MOC wanted to represent their district that year.

Our MOC had a Committee our DS interviewed with on the MOC's behalf; and this committee was made up of all former SA grads. So all these people look at our DS and said he's the strongest one of the bunch that year because he was designated the principal nominee. They did this seeing our DS's full file, test scores, GPA, etc. My only point is that without some specific education by the SAs to all these people involved in the nominating process on what minimum academic standards they expect candidates to meet--the tool of a principal nominee cannot be fully utilized by a MOC.
Click to expand...
Very true MMShape! And the MOC's who do interviews get to meet with the candidates in person and can delve into their background a little more knowing where they came from in their district, and making the choice of who they feel will be best represented at the academy. Seems as though with the academy, you are just a number, a WCS.
 
I will not speak for all of the individuals who support the process but I have the opposite perspective of the principal nominee process. The MOC panels are widely diverse across the country and who knows what they know about current admission standards. Some may be knowledgeable, some know enough just to be dangerous, while others are clueless. They spend 10-15 minutes with a candidate and in my opinion it is just window dressing. They typically do not dig into a candidates background and the initial impression goes a long way. Admissions looks at these candidates for 12-18 months and they are supported by BGOs/ALOs/FFRs that spend countless hours working with candidates. I would trust that the evaluation done by admissions is considerably more thorough than that done by a MOC panel. I know it is disappointing for a candidate with a principal nomination to not get accepted, but I would trust that their were numerous people who agreed with the assessment in the admissions process.
 
MMShape said:
USMA 1994 said:
The minimum standards are not published but they do not change year to year based on the applicants. The academic standards are a combination of test scores and grades and they are looked at as a body of work, not just numbers. Any one number may or may not be disqualifying but it would depend on all other academic factors. If one area seems a bit low, they will look at other indicators to try and determine the academic readiness of the candidate. The entire admission's process is trying to evaluate if a candidate has the potential to be successful. The will attempt to qualify everyone who applies as there are many other factors that go into the equation with the biggest is slotting against available openings from nomination sources.

The class averages may change slightly year to year but we have to keep in mind that this is not a National Competition. Applicants from areas that may not be as competitive will still be admitted with potential lower test scores and class ranks.
Click to expand...

I've read and appreciated all the comments but I think there's still a perspective missing. Somehow somewhere, legislation (I'm guessing) gave MOCs the opportunity to designate a candidate a principal nominee, ie this one candidate was the one the MOC wanted to represent their district that year.

Our MOC had a Committee our DS interviewed with on the MOC's behalf; and this committee was made up of all former SA grads. So all these people look at our DS and said he's the strongest one of the bunch that year because he was designated the principal nominee. They did this seeing our DS's full file, test scores, GPA, etc. My only point is that without some specific education by the SAs to all these people involved in the nominating process on what minimum academic standards they expect candidates to meet--the tool of a principal nominee cannot be fully utilized by a MOC.
Click to expand...


I think the struggle that I have is that if you are designated the Principal by MOC, it just seems that enough people have looked or reviewed your file that they would know that their nominee is competitive. I agree that some on the committee may not be knowledge but some have to be. It just seems that someone on that committee would have seem enough kids to know that the person they named as principal is competitive. In some districts a former BGOs/ALOs/FFRs are on the committee. I'm sure it happens, but I would be a bit surprised if I were a Principal and did not get a nomination.
 
^ I suppose it's possible that no one on the slate was competitive, but the principal nominee was the best of them. Not saying that's the case, just throwing out a hypothetical.
 
Susan707 said:
MMShape said:
USMA 1994 said:
The minimum standards are not published but they do not change year to year based on the applicants. The academic standards are a combination of test scores and grades and they are looked at as a body of work, not just numbers. Any one number may or may not be disqualifying but it would depend on all other academic factors. If one area seems a bit low, they will look at other indicators to try and determine the academic readiness of the candidate. The entire admission's process is trying to evaluate if a candidate has the potential to be successful. The will attempt to qualify everyone who applies as there are many other factors that go into the equation with the biggest is slotting against available openings from nomination sources.

The class averages may change slightly year to year but we have to keep in mind that this is not a National Competition. Applicants from areas that may not be as competitive will still be admitted with potential lower test scores and class ranks.
Click to expand...

I've read and appreciated all the comments but I think there's still a perspective missing. Somehow somewhere, legislation (I'm guessing) gave MOCs the opportunity to designate a candidate a principal nominee, ie this one candidate was the one the MOC wanted to represent their district that year.

Our MOC had a Committee our DS interviewed with on the MOC's behalf; and this committee was made up of all former SA grads. So all these people look at our DS and said he's the strongest one of the bunch that year because he was designated the principal nominee. They did this seeing our DS's full file, test scores, GPA, etc. My only point is that without some specific education by the SAs to all these people involved in the nominating process on what minimum academic standards they expect candidates to meet--the tool of a principal nominee cannot be fully utilized by a MOC.
Click to expand...


I think the struggle that I have is that if you are designated the Principal by MOC, it just seems that enough people have looked or reviewed your file that they would know that their nominee is competitive. I agree that some on the committee may not be knowledge but some have to be. It just seems that someone on that committee would have seem enough kids to know that the person they named as principal is competitive. In some districts a former BGOs/ALOs/FFRs are on the committee. I'm sure it happens, but I would be a bit surprised if I were a Principal and did not get a nomination.
Click to expand...

I will offer up some of the possibilities why a Principal nominee may receive TWE.

I don’t recall all of the requirements to the letter, so feel free to correct my hypotheticals!
The Principal nominee was deemed most competitive of all those interviewed at the time of the interview....but not necessarily qualified for admission.

The SA application doesn’t need to be completed prior to MOC interview. It’s possible something in transcripts was later discovered by SA board that were a DQ either not available at time of MOC interview, or just missed by them?

Criminal background check no go?
Failed DODMERB
Poor grades “senioritis “ leads to DQ?
Failed CFA?
Just to name a few possibilities.

Definitely feel for a rejected Principal Nominee!
The curtain is long and dark in the Admissions board room . Many unknowns leave us to speculate the whys and why not me ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top