<p>Curious, if the hypothetical student were so lacking in focus or intellectual passion such that the actual school were irrelevant, and only the statistical average of the student body were meaningful, can you blame the adcoms for not wanting that kid enrolled???</p>
<p>Give us some cues re: interests, types of books, political interests or not, and we'd be filled with helpful suggestions. In the absence thereof, everyone can just repeat that yes, U Chicago has lots of kids who love the life of the mind; Swarthmore has lots of kids with intellectual passion; Haverford is a great place for kids who love to learn for learning's sake; Wellesley has a hard-core intellectual component and its grads seem to do pretty well in the job market.</p>
<p>Your hypothetical student might well be a very strong candidate for a number of places filled with like-minded students but you seem to want to advance an argument which seems silly to me. Lots of unhooked kids get into great schools every year.... but each of them has something going for them beyond some stupid test scores, even if it's only a love of campy horror movies, Eagle Scouts, or a strong record of community service.</p>
<p>Of course you totally misunderstand me. I'm not talking about the Ivy League or prestige, never mentioned them. I'm talking about intellect and scholarship and I am using the only tools available to help others understand the level of kid I am talking about. You seem to want to turn this into something that it isn't. If you have better, objective measures than these to frame the discussion please offer them. Otherwise go get into an argument with some one else about the Ivy League.</p>
<p>I think it is sad that this hypothetical student hasn't found anything to be passionate about.
Passion, combined with hard work & determination will take you farther than just evidence of "book larnin".</p>
<p>As I have mentioned before- my D- with lower test scores, lower GPA, than what her school normally sees ( Reed college), but with a * passion*, was accepted over other students with higher numbers and less finaid need.</p>
<p>As I said in the beginning the hypothetical student has other non-academic interests that he is serious about, what they are is irrelevant unless we want to write a novel about this kid. The kid in this example does not want to pick his school based on those other interests but rather on the intellectual abilities of his classmates. Is it ok to pick a school based on fraternities and weather but not how smart your classmates are? What an anti-intellectual crowd!</p>
<p>curious14, it's unfortunate that you don't get what people are saying to you. Colleges and Unis are learning communities. Communities by nature have some cohesion to them, some set of defining characteristics. Simply being bright and intelligent could be said is prerequisite for any college or uni. All communities have houses. All colleges will have students. Your community will have single family homes, perhaps some multi-family homes, some businesses just like hundreds of communities across the country --after that it's about building the community, what kind of community is this, communities differ from city to city, state to state. This is exactly what admissions officers are trying to build and this is exactly what bothers people that don't understand the concept. For example, you might have a million dollars to spend on a house and you could arbitrarily pick some community in Manhaattan when really you'd be much happier plunking down your million somewhere where your nearest neighbor is 40 miles away. From the college and uni perspective it's also not dissimilar from a coach building a team. You need a few sociology majors, a few psych majors, a few math majors, some pre-law, some pre-med, a violinist and artist and a running back or whatever that particular college or uni feels their community is about. It's about you wanting the school and the school wanting you. No one can tell you what colleges are right for a mythical person that has no other defining qualities or characteristics other than a GPA and test score...probably hundreds would "fit" those scores, it's about the person that is applying and what kind of community they want and what they are about.</p>
<p>Actually, if curious pushed me to the wall I'd say go to U of Chicago. Probably the largest collective campus of intelligent people who are driven every waking moment in the pursuit of intellectual thought that I've ever encountered. There may be others like that, but they escape me for know.</p>
<p>I think such a hypothetical student does has a great chance at many schools in the top 20, maybe excluding HYPSM. I think there's too much emphasis on having to do something absolutely spectacular to get into these schools. My record was a lot like such a student's: 1560 on the SAT, #2 in my class, very strong academically, but not exceptional with ECs. I'm going to Penn next year. I think the important think for students like us is to show some personality on an application. Make sure the students gets very good recommendations to show that he isn't just a bright kid who breezes through school without effort or passion. Also, focus on creative, honest essay. And make sure he presents his ECs in way that shows that even though he may not have national awards, he works hard at what he loves. He shouldn't have any problem getting into a school with plenty of other like-minded students.</p>
<p>Thanks, but you are too smart (do you get that a lot) to match up with my hypothetical. The top quartile at Penn starts as 1520 so you were well into it assuming everthing else was consistent.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm talking about intellect and scholarship and I am using the only tools available to help others understand the level of kid I am talking about.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You were the one who defined this as an issue of sat and gpa -- you rejected schools where this hypothetical kids stats put him above average -- based solely on that criteria -- not on the supposed intelligence of their students EXCPET as measured by sat's and gpa's. </p>
<p>You are failing to accept what so many here are trying to explain -- that fit is an issue of more than sat's and gpa's -- the schools know that. And I repeat -- regardless of whether you are talking ivies or non-ivies (i just used ivies as an example where this type of logic is often seen on these boards) -- applicants often make the mistake of doing exactly what you are trying to do with your hypothetical -- look just at sat's and gpa's, and not "fit" and then wonder why they don't get accepted.</p>
<p>if you want to keep saying that the fit you want is other kids as intelligent as mr. hypothetical -- the problem is that YOU keep defining "intelligent" in terms of statistical criteria when in fact there is simply more to it than that -- but if anyone proposes a school that considers other factors, you fall back on its failure to meet your statistical criteria. Then when you are criticized for using those criteria to define intelligence, you say they are just the tool you are using to get across your point about how smart your hypothetical student is. Well either you are willing to accept that there are other criteria or you aren't -- if there are, you have to accept that mr. hypothetical may not get into the intellectual school of his choice because he doesn't meet those other intangible criteria.
nothing sad about it.</p>
<p>You will be happy at a school that is NOT one of the big prestige schools or high pressure/power school (including Cal Tech, Stanford, Harvey Mudd); Look at #11 -30 on the Princeton list and you will find great schools with great students who are enjoy the challenges, are not necessarily intensely competitive between them but self-driven competitive. Schools such as Tufts, Wash U, Emory, etc. What you need to ask yourself is: suburban/urban/rural; small/med/large; big sports/greek versus no emphasis on such; strict core curriculum versus open/creative; east/west/north/south; do you care if there are religious groups; do you want to do certain extra curriculars such as perform music/theater? There are several search engines online where you answer such questions about your preferences and interests and you will get a complete list of all possible schools. There are many, many to choose from.............some you have never heard of. One of these may be the perfect "fit". Take time and research and don't let the prestige/name factor sway you!</p>
<p>
[quote]
The top quartile at Penn starts as 1520 so you were well into it assuming everthing else was consistent.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>i'm sorrry, but i think that is a fallacy about selective admissions. knowing the top quartile of those admitted tells you nothing about those who were rejected!!</p>
<p>unless you want to assume that the 73% with over a 750 verbal overwhelmingly had imbalanced scores, one simply cannot assume that 1500-1600 gets you well in.</p>
<p>i think adf8 properly appreciates the other factors that helped get them in.</p>
<p>Let's imagine a statistical measure of intellect that is broad and captures intelligence, scholarly aptitude, and ability to very advanced academic work. Imagine a student who is in the top 1% of students using this hypothetical metric, has some serious non-academic interests but has no other hooks. Imagine that we know the distribution of the scores for this metric at every school. Now I repeat my original question where could a student who is in the top 1% go and be an average student (by this metric) and still get accepted.</p>
<p>You are not listening. We can't answer your question the way it is framed.</p>
<p>Most of the parents here have children attending the kind of the schools you seem to be asking about. So, why can't we make recommendations to you? Because you've given us nothing to work with.</p>
<p>I think the parents here would unanimously agree with me that our kids' SAT scores and GPAs had virtually nothing to do with why they were accepted and the next kid, with the same or better SAT scores and GPA, was not accepted.</p>
<p>Therefore, for us to sit here and throw names at the wall based on nothing but SAT scores and AP tallies is just pointless.</p>
<p>The first thing I would recommend for your hypthetical student is tell him to get the chip off his shoulder. There are a lot of colleges and universities with intellectual climates that would kick his ass, 1500 SATs or not. In fact, the students at many of these schools would intellectually kick his ass just for talking about 1500 SATs.</p>
<p>I am happy to have an argument about the validity of SAT scores but this is not it. This thread is about the hypocrisy of preaching fit when a large number of students, often the very brightest, don't agree with the parameters that many of you (and the colleges) insist fit be defined with. The student who is at this level but has not established one or more of these hooks, does not have the option of going to a school in which they will be truly surrounded by their intellectual peers.</p>