<p>So after meeting with a couple of Harvard reps, this phrase kept popping up. They said, "Sure, being well-rounded is nice, but we appreciate a gifted student who's 'well-lopsided.'"
Does Stanford have a similar philosophy?</p>
<p>Now, I would say I'm a well-lopsided guy. At least half of my most intensive ECs involve some sort of presentation or public speaking (e.g. Mock Trial Attorney, prolific actor, Nationally ranked in Speech, etc). In academic terms, I adore the humanities. I made an 800 on the SAT II Lit test (insanely tough curve, some say THE toughest), but only a 700 on Math IIC. I believe my essays will reflect my writing ability as well.</p>
<p>Now is a 700 on Math II passable for Stanford or other selective universities, considering the fact that I may make As in high school math, but it's definitely not my passion?</p>
<p>Or should I retake and aim for a 750+?? </p>
<p>Thanks, everyone!!</p>
<p>I think anything above a 700 is in the competitive range for SAT IIs. I heard somewhere a 720 isn't all that different between a 750, and same with 750 and 780. The fluctuation is just based on a few right or wrong questions.</p>
<p>What speech events do you do? I'm a speechie too.</p>
<p>Stanford definitely has a similar philosophy. I would wager that it actually has more well-lopsided students than well-rounded ones. It looks for passion and intellectual vitality, which are often seen in focused applicants (though obviously in others too). From Stanford's admissions site:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Our job is to assemble a “well-rounded student body”, and we know such a group will include both well-rounded students and what we call “angular” students, those who truly excel at one or two activities. Merely being involved in many clubs is not what is most important; your depth of commitment in whatever you do interests us the most.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Application</a> & Supplement : Stanford University</p>
<p>This article might be helpful:</p>
<p>Colleges</a> focus on ‘angular’ students | Admission Sync</p>
<p>A 700 is fine. MIT even says that anything with a 7 in front of it is good. I daresay Stanford has a similar approach. It'll be obvious, also, from other parts of your application that you're more a humanities person (e.g. your SAT II lit score). I find this particularly useful:</p>
<p>
[quote]
On the subject of SAT scores, [the previous admissions director] added: "I always viewed them the way a drunk uses a light post: more for support than illumination."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Wow, thanks guys! I love it when competent CC members give me advice that's actually practical and helpful haha</p>
<p>@alfred: last year was my novice year (since it was my school's first year with a funded program) and I did almost every interp event, and one debate (not including OO).</p>
<p>SO: OO (which I got 18th nationally in, 1 cume point away out of 10 rounds from making the top 14). DI, Duo, Duet, Prose, Poetry, Impromptu, and then Extemp. Haha, needless to say I had zero free time during tourneys, always being triple-entered in every time slot.</p>
<p>hookem: nice! I'm doing OO for the first time this year (senior year, but I've done speech since frosh year). PM me if you want to talk more? I"m always looking for advice, so if you have any, I"d be glad to hear it! And congrats on the 18th at nationals!</p>
<p>ah! my good friend got 1st in OO 2 years ago at the Kansas national tournament :)</p>
<p>holy crap he's a legend, then.</p>
<p>By the time I got to quarterfinals (top 32 in the country) I was so interested in every single person's speech haha. At that point, everyone rocks. I hope adcomms realize how hard it is to get to that level!!</p>