<p>Overall Harvard has about 6% chance for RD. Minorities, legacies, recruited athletes, and people with geographic diversity all are on the higher end of this. Throw in TASP, RSI, Siemens, Intel, etc. winners who are all admitted at much higher rates as well. </p>
<p>This probably brings down the admit rate for a White, Non-Legacy, Non-Recruited Athlete, non-award winning (in RSI, Siemens, etc) New Englanders down to around 1%, no?</p>
<p>Let's get some actual, cited numbers in here before we start any analysis.</p>
<p>Excuse me. Harvard is 5.5% RD. You won't get hard data beyond that. My analysis certainly seems at a mimimum ballpark (probably something like .5% to 2%)</p>
<p>yea im just as screwed as you.</p>
<p>"White, Non-Legacy, Non-Recruited Athlete, non-award winning (in RSI, Siemens, etc) New Englander"</p>
<p>That's me. :)</p>
<p>That's me also... I bet the .5-1% for white, non-legacy, non-recrutied, non-award winning new englander is correct.</p>
<p>So if you get in, you'll know you were 1/100</p>
<p>man I should have done RSI...i didnt realize how big it was during junior year.</p>
<p>Oh man, that's me as well. 1%? I mean, I didn't really feel like I had a shot before, but now... 1%?</p>
<p>I'm a White, Non-Legacy, Non-Recruited Athlete, non-award winning (in RSI, Siemens, etc) Californian, which is just as bad. We're all in the same boat...and when it smashes onto the charibdis-like rocks we'll all drown together. Happy thoughts.</p>
<p>Come on, Amherst! Don't let me down!</p>
<p>Being from California is probably slightly less horrible than being from Massachusetts. ;)</p>
<p>That slightness comes from the condition of the weather less than it does the geographic desirability for Harvard. I'm still doomed, I just have sunny weather afterwards :)</p>
<p>being a man probably brings it up slightly over being a woman, i'd bet
so it could be worse for some of us</p>
<p>
[quote]
This probably brings down the admit rate for a White, Non-Legacy, Non-Recruited Athlete, non-award winning (in RSI, Siemens, etc) New Englanders down to around 1%, no?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I know a white, non-legacy, non-recruited athlete, non-award winning Californian who was accepted to Harvard EA.</p>
<p>Let's see...6%...that's about what, 1,300 people who are accepted. How many athletes do they need to recruit? Maybe a few freshmen for each team. Keep in mind that many brilliant people are also great athletes. Okay, so let's say 100 people are accepted only for athletic abilities. (I don't think it's this many) Next legacies: how many people who have legacies are even applying regular decision? Most apply EA. And how many of those even have what it takes to be admitted? But for argument's sake, let's say that 50 people who are admitted have legacies. Okay, awards...there are only a few really prestigious awards...and how many finalists do each produce? A few. And many of them don't apply to Harvard. And many apply EA. So for argument's sake again, let's say 50. Published writers? So rare they shouldn't even count. But let's say that 20 are admitted to Harvard.</p>
<p>Hey guess what...1080/1300 spots are still left!! And since the majority of students at Harvard is of caucasian descent, I would say that the chance of admission is hardly 1%.</p>
<p>Please stop freaking out and posting inane posts on the Harvard forum. You knew a long time ago that you probably aren't going to get in. Suck it up and deal.</p>
<p>Wow, that's 1 percent more of a chance than I realized I had.</p>
<p>Thanks for notifying me.</p>
<p>now imagine if you were asian.</p>
<p>vicissitudes,</p>
<p>the fact that a majority of harvard atendees are caucasian has no bearing on the fact that caucasians have lower acceptance percentages
to illustrate:
1000 caucasians attend
1000 non caucasians attend
100,000 caucasians apply
50,000 non caucasians apply
1 % of caucasians were admitted
2 % of non caucasians were admitted
see how that one works?
it keeps going all through the numbers! even if it was 99.99% white, the acceptance rate could still be higher for other races (and probably would be, since these schools are so hot for diversity these days)</p>
<p>as a side note, 1080 divided by the probably 40ish thousand that applied is about 2.5 percent overall, which isn't that far off from the 1 % everyone is quoting here. (the big gaping hole in that math is that harvard accepts more students than they expect to attend, like all colleges do, but i was just illustrating a point)</p>
<p>moted.</p>
<p>I am a non-white, legacy, recruited athelete that is not from New England and has national achievements to my name. What are my chances?</p>
<p>chances are you'll be one thin envelope richer in 11 days, like the rest of us :)</p>
<p>seriously though, good luck to you and everyone else
go wasps!</p>
<p>I'm a Korean, Non-Legacy, Non-Recruited Athlete, non-award winning (in RSI, Siemens, etc) Californian, which is just as bad.</p>
<p>how low are my chances? is it better than 1%?</p>
<p>pvodenski: A majority of caucasians apply and attend. Harvard tries to diversify the campus by keeping the numbers of different ethnicities somewhat similar to that of ethnic groups in the nation. Just because URMs are admitted with a lower standard doesn't mean that the percentage of caucasians admitted compared to those who applied are SIGNIFICANTLY lower.</p>
<p>And where did you get 40,000 from? I used an estimate of 22,000 from last year's regular decision pool, and took 6% of that to get 1,300.</p>
<p>1080 / 22276 = 5%</p>
<p>So let's say that your chances are LESS THAN HALF...that's still over 2%, not 1% geez. And keep in mind that the OP only made the chances of getting admitted significantly smaller by being so specific. Well let's see, if I live in Alaska then my chances must be 0.0001% since they only admit 5 people from Alaska every year! The fault with this logic is that if you take all the admitted white, non-legacy, non-recruited athlete, unpublished New Englanders and divide that by the number of all applicants who fit this description, your chances will be much higher.</p>