<p>I’m applying to two ivies with a ~3.6 gpa. I am one of those people who had a terrible freshmen year (like 3.1) due to family circumstances, but my grades over the next two years were much better. So yes, there are people who apply to ivies with low gpas. But, if you are applying with a low gpa, you should also try to keep pretty low expectations.</p>
<p>Yes I am considering applying to one Ivy with a 3.5 gpa, and sorry let me make clear my question, do students with these gpas get into an Ivy? If there are some then can they post and make clear on certain aspects that they did.</p>
<p>Yes, some students with 3.5 gpas get in. They are likely to have a major hook such as being recruited athletes, large donors’ kids or students from very disadvantaged backgrounds of kids with an extraordinary talent. If you look on the various boards here for Ivy colleges, you can see the stats of some students who were admitted and rejected this year. Just being a URM isn’t likely to result in admission with a 3.3-3.6 gpa.</p>
<p>
Maybe not with the difference in gpa, but what about SAT score differences amongst the different races?</p>
<p>[Princeton</a> Alumni Weekly: A professor’s view of race and class on college campuses](<a href=“http://paw.princeton.edu/issues/2010/01/13/pages/3489/index.xml]Princeton”>A professor's view of race and class on college campuses | Princeton Alumni Weekly)</p>
<p>“All things being equal admission *officials argue that all things are never equal the authors say that an Asian student needed to score 1,450 on the SAT to have the same chance of admission as a white student who scored 1,310 and a black *student who scored 1,000.”</p>
<p>[Do</a> Elite Private Colleges Discriminate Against Asian Students? - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/mobile/articles_mobile/do-elite-private-colleges-discriminate-against-asian-students/index.html]Do”>http://www.usnews.com/mobile/articles_mobile/do-elite-private-colleges-discriminate-against-asian-students/index.html)</p>
<p>Sure – just as is the case of any applicants who have some kind of hook that colleges want, URMs can get into colleges with lower stats. However, plenty of URMs get in with stats equal or higher than elite colleges’ averages. </p>
<p>Being a URM doesn’t mean that one is guaranteed admission regardless of what one’s stats are. I know URMs – including Ivy legacies – who have been rejected despite having stats within the colleges’ ranges. This even included a Native American recruited athlete with scores of about 720, 780 (CR M). HIs gpa in a rigorous program was only about an unweighted 3.1. He was rejected by Harvard and went to state flagship, which wasn’t one of the country’s top publics.</p>
<p>I never even mentioned that I was a URM??</p>
<p>Since you posted on the “African Americans 2015 thread” and also started a thread called “Race in the mind of an African American,” I assumed you’re African American as am I.</p>
<p>Anyway, you have nothing to lose by applying to Ivies even if your gpa is between 3.3-3.6. The worst that can happen is that you’ll be rejected. If you don’t apply, you have no chance of being accepted. If you apply, just make sure you have realistic match and safety schools that you’d love attending, and make sure you apply to at least one school that you know you’ll be accepted to, know you would enjoy, and know you can afford.</p>
<p>I give that advice to everyone regardless of race or stats.</p>
<p>Oh carleton is my number one, I just want to apply just to see you know?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, the OP has nothing to lose by applying (except the application fee), but what if he or she is accepted? Does a student in this situation have anything to lose by attending, given that his/her high school preparation is not as good as that of most of the other students at the Ivy League school, who had higher GPAs? How much of an impediment would that poorer preparation be?</p>
<p>I’m just asking. This is not a situation that is familiar to me.</p>
<p>How do you know that I didn’t have better preparation compared to the others? I have taken tough classes and I know my work ethic is in par with students at top schools, yes college level work is different, but you can’t say I didn’t get much preparation simply because my Gpa is lower than the norm.</p>
<p>“Does a student in this situation have anything to lose by attending, given that his/her high school preparation is not as good as that of most of the other students at the Ivy League school, who had higher GPAs? How much of an impediment would that poorer preparation be?”</p>
<p>The Ivies and other top schools have the highest graduation rates in the country including for African Americans. At Harvard, the admissions dean has estimated that 90% of the applicants have the stats to be able to succeed (i.e. graduate) from Harvard. Such schools only accept students with the academic background, work ethic, and stats indicating that if accepted, they’d be able to graduate. This includes recruited athletes, legacies, wealthy donors’ kids, and URMs. </p>
<p>I don’t have the graduation stats for all such hooked students, though did find information that the Ivy League’s graduation rate for athletes is the highest in the country, and athletes graduate there at the same rate as nonathletes. <a href=“http://www.ivyleaguesports.com/whatisivy/index.asp[/url]”>http://www.ivyleaguesports.com/whatisivy/index.asp</a></p>
<p>However, the graduation rates of black students are the below, and in parentheses are the graduation rates of white students). Keep in mind that some students who didn’t graduate transferred to other universities including to other highly competitive ones…</p>
<p>95% Harvard (97%)
94% Amherst (96%), Princeton (98%), Wellesley (91%), Williams (97%)
92% Brown (96%), Yale (96%)</p>
<p>"Many academics and administrators will be surprised to hear that there are in fact a few selective colleges in the United States that report a higher graduation rate for blacks than for whites. Five of the nation’s highest-ranked colleges and universities actually have a higher graduation rate for black students than for white students. According to the latest statistics from Mount Holyoke College, Pomona College, Smith College, Wellesley College, and Macalester College, a black student on these campuses is more likely to complete the four-year course of study and receive a diploma than is a white student. JBHE has not been able to identify the reason for this anomaly at these five institutions, which is markedly inconsistent with nationwide statistics. But it is interesting to note that three of the five institutions are women’s colleges.</p>
<p>At some institutions the difference in black and white graduation rates is very small. Washington University in St. Louis has a 91 percent graduation rate for both blacks and whites. At Wake Forest University, Hamilton College, and Vanderbilt University, the white student graduation rate is only one percentage point higher than the rate for blacks. At Amherst College, Harvard University, Grinnell College, and Bryn Mawr College, the racial difference is only two percentage points.</p>
<p>At the Ivy League schools Harvard, Princeton, Columbia, Yale, and Brown, the black graduation rates are relatively high, and in all instances they are five percentage points or less below the graduation rate for white students. At Penn, Dartmouth, and Cornell, there is at least a seven percentage point racial gap in graduation rates."</p>
<p>[Black</a> Student College Graduation Rates Inch Higher But the Large Racial Gap Persists](<a href=“http://www.jbhe.com/preview/winter07preview.html]Black”>http://www.jbhe.com/preview/winter07preview.html)</p>
<p>“…his/her high school preparation is not as good as that of most of the other students at the Ivy League school, who had higher GPAs? How much of an impediment would that poorer preparation be?”</p>
<p>Without more info, we can’t assume the HS prep is poorer just because of a 3.6 GPA! A few conditions for having a 3.3 - 3.6 GPA that would not automatically indicate “poor preparation” - which have been noted on this thread and other similar threads:</p>
<p>Low grades Freshman Year. If a student had mostly B’s in their 1st year of HS, and mostly A’s sophomore and junior year of HS – they could be a 3.3 - 3.6 student. If they have taken a rigorous course load within their HS – they would not be a poorly prepared student.</p>
<p>Lopsided learner: A student with some A’s, but mostly B’s in Humanities, but all A/A+ in math science (or visa versa). As long as there are no glaring issues…like a bunch of D’s and C’s, especially in Junior year…or poor grades in very low-level classes…this student should have more than adequate preparation for an ivy or top level college.</p>
<p>Thank you:)</p>
<p>
And no one implied that. What never seems available, though, are comprehensive tables showing the stats for different “hooked” groups – URMs, athletes, legacies, developmental admits, etc. </p>
<p>Anecdotal evidence is one thing. Why do you think colleges seem to hide the statistics?</p>
<p>"Anecdotal evidence is one thing. Why do you think colleges seem to hide the statistics? "</p>
<p>Because the stats about hooked applicants are nobody’s business. What possible reason would colleges have for revealing that info?</p>
<p>
To put the rest the persistent perception that certain groups get into college with lower SAT scores, which is one of the few objective measures used in the college application process. Colleges often show stats by gender, so why not by race? Why do they show them by gender, hmm?</p>
<p>"To put the rest the persistent perception that certain groups get into college with lower SAT scores, "</p>
<p>It wouldn’t put that perception to rest. Certain groups do get into college with lower SAT scores. That’s true for groups like URMs, recruited athletes, people from low income backgrounds, wealthy donors’ and celebrities’ kids.</p>
<p>There’s no reason to reveal those stats. Not all URMs, etc. get in with lower stats than do others. Some URMs have higher stats than do most white/Asians.</p>
<p>When it comes to showing stats by gender, I don’t think that the LACs that favor guys show their stats reflecting that guys get in with lower stats than do the females. And why should the colleges reveal such stats? Those stats really aren’t anyone’s business.</p>
<p>No reason not to reveal those stats? No reason NOT to, in my opinion. Of course some URMs have higher scores than others, but their average scores are usually (always?) lower. The major newspaper in my area published an article on this phenonomenon some years back. What was striking was that URMs had average SAT scores over one hundred to over 200 points lower than others, according to race. The data was from public universities/colleges. </p>
<p>I think it would help students if they knew the truth about such things.</p>
<p>"I think it would help students if they knew the truth about such things. "</p>
<p>How would it help students to know average scores for URMs, athletes, legacies, rich donors’ offspring? Seems to me it would be setting such students up for ridicule and possibly getting lower grades and fewer opportunities than they deserved.</p>
<p>Also where would the reporting of subgroups’ scores stop? Why not have colleges also publish information about average scores of students from underrepresented states and regions, too, and also publish scores of students based on income level?</p>
<p>I would have no problem with the additional reporting.</p>
<p>Students who apply to (selective) colleges may not realize that the published SAT score ranges apply differently to applicants, according to applicant’s race (or other factors). They may not realize that the applications are placed in different piles. </p>
<p>I think the biggest score differentials are probably for athletes in certain Div1 sports (no surprise there) and URMs.</p>