2014 profile

Status
Not open for further replies.
The goal of a SA is to produce military officers, so they need to select for potential. As the Sup mentioned during his talk, none of these kids are ready to lead right now. Admissions may have reason to think a minority kid has more potential than another kid - even with lower scores or grades. So looking at performance in the fleet is a better measure of success than looking at SAT scores.
Click to expand...
win!
 
DevilDog said:
I forgot, there is no history of intitutional exclussion in the history of this country.
Click to expand...
Ahhh! Now I understand. We should discriminate against a group of non-URM students that are blameless for previous injustices by rewarding URM students that were not the victims of those institutional exclusions. Thanks for 'splainin it.:rolleyes:
 
aglages said:
Everything? Including admissions standards? Or are your peers not your fellow applicants?
Click to expand...
Your peers while in high school are not your fellow applicants. Your peers are those in the same age group who have a similar environments and similar opportunities as you. This is why class rank is important. It tells admissions how well you have performed amongst your peers.
Once you get to USNA - your classmates are your peers.
Once you get commissioned and into the fleet or your branch - those with the same rank/job as you are your peers.
 
Just_A_Mom said:
Your peers while in high school are not your fellow applicants. Your peers are those in the same age group who have a similar environments and similar opportunities as you. This is why class rank is important. It tells admissions how well you have performed amongst your peers.
Once you get to USNA - your classmates are your peers.
Once you get commissioned and into the fleet or your branch - those with the same rank/job as you are your peers.
Click to expand...

I repeat my previous argument when this came up a few weeks ago...it is impossible to for Admissions to know what the people above you in "class rank" took for classes if they aren't also applying. My son took the most difficult classes possible, while others ahead of him in class rank took library/office aid, work study, band and choir (these are easy A's at our school).

Kat
 
kmaidaho said:
I repeat my previous argument when this came up a few weeks ago...it is impossible to for Admissions to know what the people above you in "class rank" took for classes if they aren't also applying. My son took the most difficult classes possible, while others ahead of him in class rank took library/office aid, work study, band and choir (these are easy A's at our school).

Kat
Click to expand...

Correct. However, they do know that your son took the most difficult schedule available to him. They also have access to your son's school profile. This tells the academy how the individual school grades and if/how they weight their grades as well as the average SAT's in your school. If your son's school weights courses and he did well in his courses then it should wash out, or he might even gain in rank.
Class rank is only one part of the admissions criteria.
 
Just_A_Mom said:
Your peers while in high school are not your fellow applicants. Your peers are those in the same age group who have a similar environments and similar opportunities as you. This is why class rank is important. It tells admissions how well you have performed amongst your peers.
Once you get to USNA - your classmates are your peers.
Once you get commissioned and into the fleet or your branch - those with the same rank/job as you are your peers.
Click to expand...

Here's my concern. The military academies are designed to provide the toughest and most challenging academic experience that a high school graduate can be thrust into. If to meet social engineering goals the Navy is selecting applicants of ANY color, ethnicity, or personal background who do not have the necessary study skills, self-discipline, and mastery of essential subject matter (Math and English, especially) to meet the challenge, then one of two things--or both--is likely to happen: either the Navy is setting those midshipmen up to fail, or the Academy must relax the academic standards sufficiently to get these midshipmen through it. I don't believe either consequence is a good thing.
 
The consensus of the social engineers on this thread seems to be that standardized test score results and GPAs do not reflect potential success in the fleet. Then let's replace these criteria with truly meaningful criteria. What should we use?
 
Farleigh85 said:
The consensus of the social engineers on this thread seems to be that standardized test score results and GPAs do not reflect potential success in the fleet. Then let's replace these criteria with truly meaningful criteria. What should we use?
Click to expand...
Yards per carry?:cool:
 
Farleigh85 said:
The consensus of the social engineers on this thread seems to be that standardized test score results and GPAs do not reflect potential success in the fleet. Then let's replace these criteria with truly meaningful criteria. What should we use?
Click to expand...

Test results and GPA reflect the ability to do the Academic work at the Naval Academy.
Since the Naval Academy (and other SA's) is a combination between Academic work and leadership development they look for a mix of the two.
Hence, the point system and the existence of prep schools.
It's also a reason why a kid with a 1350 SAT might be chosen over a kid with a 1520 SAT.
 
I believe it was with the Class of 2013 that the "whole person" concept began and SAT/ACT scores became only one factor in the whole person score. I believe this is the reason you can't find the range of scores for the Class of 2013 or Class of 2014 and if the Academy continues to use the whole person concept,, then you won't find it for future classes.

I believe if you look at the composition percentages, it tells you what the Academy thinks is important now.

Athleticism is still a very big part of the equation.

The Academy is educating future leaders so I believe leadership experience is another a big part of the equation.

The Candidate/Midshipmen has to perform/succeed in the classes required by the Academy. Academic performance is yet another big part of the equation.

Overcoming extenuating circumstances is still another part of the equation.

As the mother of an "official" candidate for the Class of 2015 from a very competitive, racially diverse area, I would like to think the "whole person" concept levels the playing field and that everyone has an equal chance of admission based on his/her whole person score.

GoNavyMom
 
What everyone needs to realize is that the purpose of the Naval Academy is solely to meet the needs of the Navy. At present, the needs of the Navy is greater diversity.

And as several have pointed out, the whole person multiplier includes a lot more than just one's SATs.
 
Like Profmom11, I recall the first time we had access to the gpa/sat scores was at Plebe Parent Weekend on the power point, just have to wait a few more weeks for the goods.
 
The "whole person" concept has existed for quite a few years. SAT/ACT scores are but one factor and always have been. USNA believes they are a predictor of one's ability to do college level work. This is why, for college students, the scores don't matter and, what does matter, is how well you do in the plebe college courses.
 
Mongo said:
What everyone needs to realize is that the purpose of the Naval Academy is solely to meet the needs of the Navy.
Click to expand...

What is the purpose of the United States of America having a Navy?
 
Just_A_Mom said:
The article was in the Navy Times. This is about the same time table as other years. Maybe this is just 'old news'.
Click to expand...

No, no, no! Every news report on TV that covered 2013's I-Day and every news article mentioned that they were the most diverse class in academy history. This was on DAY ONE.

Where do you think the media got that information? They were fed that information from the Naval Academy! At the time, the Naval Academy was apparently very proud of this achievement.

I have seen just about all the I-Day news coverage and read many of the articles for the Class of 2014. Not one mention that 2014 trumped 2013 in diversity and is the new record holder.

So far, this information, for the most part, has been on Navy-only websites and publications - and belatedly so at that - not widely read by the general public.

Again, I'm wondering why the Naval Academy is not trumpeting this as much as before. Shouldn't they be even more proud - just as they seemed to be with the Class of 2013?

No! They are not. In the context of the World Series color guard scandal ... the Superintendent's agenda-laden recruitment scandal ... and the Bruce Fleming articles - the Naval Academy seems to be sitting this one out.

And yet, the Naval Academy DENIES that they give minorities priority consideration in admission and disputes Bruce Fleming's claims. I don't believe that's true. I guess I could be wrong. But I bet I'm not.

Does anybody really believe that?

Further, I don't see how this has anything to do with ACT/SAT scores. To me, it's about picking the BEST candidates whether that happens to result in 10% minorities, 35% minorities, or 90% minorities.
 
Memphis9489 said:
No, no, no!
Click to expand...
Yes, yes, yes! The Navy Times article shows that USNA PAO made the news release, same as last year. The fact that no one picked up on it and decided it was newsworthy is because it is indeed old news, just as JAM stated. Or are you adding manipulation of the news media to Adm Fowler's list of 'sins'?

The Academy has stated ad naseum that they targeted historically underrepresented congressional districts to obtain the diversity goals they were seeking. Do you feel that the federal law is incorrect in that all districts should be represneted if there are qualified candidates in those districts who wish to attend? Or are these districts somehow undeserving?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top