My most best ACT so far has been a 27, however I have a 3.9 unweighted GPA and am a full IB student. I have list of community services I have been dedicated to for years, I lived abroad for a year, and I am submitting Restrictive Early Action with, in my opinion, a really good fine arts supplement.
Has anyone ever known someone with similar stats who has been accepted? or will my score destroy my chances?
What sport are you getting recruited in?
According to the Common Data Set for Stanford (google it! Section C), 13% of those who applied with the ACT, scored between 24-29. Of that 13%, I’m betting 90% were hooked: Recruited athletes, URMs, children of wealthy donors or powerful parents. The other 10% are individuals with exceptional life stories - so exceptional that poor testing is being overlooked.
But the important question here is why would you want to attend a school where you are perhaps in the bottom 20% of the class academically from the start? Won’t that be unreasonably stressful? An academically challenging school where you are in the middle of the pack is likely to be a lot more comfortable.
Go for a school where you are in the top 20% of the applicant pool. Not in the bottom 5%.
In general, Stanford admits students who can be academically successful at Stanford without being “unreasonably stressful”, including admits with a ~27 ACT score. Stanford may not admit many students with this low test scores, but quite a few of them that do get admitted go on to do amazing things.
For example, in my opinion the most impressive and successful former CC poster I’ve heard of is probably MrTubbs, who is described at http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/425882-first-generation-urm-male-first-plan-messed-up-needs-your-help-p1.html . He received a 28 on his ACT and went to Stanford. At Stanford, he completed a coterminal masters with honors, interned at Google and The White House, was a Truman scholar and Rhodes runner up, started the The Phoenix Scholars which has helped hundreds of disadvantaged kids have similar college opportunities, received the highest award given to Stanford students (Dinkelspiel), become the youngest ever elected official of his home town during his graduation year, etc. He continues to make strides to improve his community today.
The lowest Stanford scores I’ve ever heard of were the ACT equivalent of a superscored 25/26 or non-superscored low 20s. She was also academically successful, finishing her bachelors+master in 4 years with honors. She describes her background and test scores at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8fHUSgpMBg . While in Stanford, and beyond she also made amazing strides towards improving her community.
I received the ACT equivalent of a score in the high 20s, split up as 800M/500CR. I was a double-coterm (simultaneously working towards 2 masters + bachelors). I finished the bachelor + 1st masters in EE in slightly less than 4 years with above average grades while still having enough to be on sports teams (not a recruited athlete), have part time jobs, also do the pre-med track, etc. Later after graduating, I started a successful, small Internet company.
Obviously the low admits above are not common, but the point is I wouldn’t assume that you need a score with a certain relation to the student body to be academically successful. Or if you have a low score in relation to the student body, you’ll be stressed; and a high score, you won’t be challenged. Instead other application criteria have better correlations with academic success, and Stanford looks at these criteria when making admissions decisions.
Answering the OPs question, yes some students are admitted in that range; but being admitted is highly unlikely unless the rest of your application is very impressive, which cannot be gauged from the post…
Data10 there are always exceptional individuals in every pool of applicants with low test scores, and yes, I trust Stanford to pick out those whom they think can succeed and add value to campus life. That 13% who were admitted are, I’m sure, well qualified to be at Stanford and will contribute as much, on average, if not more than the other admitted students. But encouraging vast number of kids with 27s to apply, hoping unrealistically for admission (and for eventual academic success like your own) is doing them a disservice. Those who really are exceptional, often know it and can articulate exactly why they should be considered despite their test scores (as in an extraordinary but lop-sided achievements and testing, to give just one example.) Most would be better served by applying to other schools. (Although, of course, more applicants, however unqualified, just helps Stanford’s ranking…not something to be encouraged either.)
My post stated,
“Answering the OPs question, yes some students are admitted in that range; but being admitted is highly unlikely unless the rest of your application is very impressive, which cannot be gauged from the post…”
I’m not sure how the statement above became “encouraging the vast number of kids with 27s to apply.” That said, according to the Stanford applicant profile stats, the admit rate for applicants with a 25-29 was ~half the admit rate for applicants with a 30-36 in this year’s class. That is a significant difference, but nothing to suggest you have to have a score above a 30+ threshold to apply if test scores are the only weak part of your application (instead of the more typical case of having grades, course rigor, LORs, out of classroom achievements, and similar that are in line with scores).