<p>I don't think H should take anyone with a 1430, hook or not. Who cares about sports teams. Waste of money...</p>
<p>omg, how IGNORANT and utterly stupid can one be?</p>
<p>
[quote]
how IGNORANT and utterly stupid can one be?
[/quote]
So what do NCAA sports, for which they take 1430s, contribute? Nothing. I'm all for intramurals, which are played for the true love of the game. But buying "talent"? Absurd and unfair to those who can make the most use of an IVY education.</p>
<p>Mensa-What about a renowned, published writer with a 1400? Or Natalie Portman (although, for all I know, she had a 1600)? Or, hell, what about a IMO champion with a 600 verbal? Would accepting any of these individuals be "buying talent?"</p>
<p>yea, Natalie Portman was a Nat. Merit Scholar which means that her SAT must have been pretty decent. </p>
<p>mensa, maybe you can't see the value that things like NCAA sports contribute, but all these things factor into something called quality of life...something which I place high on my priority list.</p>
<p>And to be truly good at a sport, which I personally see as an amazing optimization of the human body, you have to work your *** off and be talented by the bucketloads. You don't have to be either of those things in order to get a 1500+ score.</p>
<p>are you really suggesting someone who gets a 1500 brings more to college than a 1430?...considering the difference is four or five questions on a TEST that seems pretty insane...</p>
<p>What I'm saying is that the smartest students can make the most out of studying with the smartest professors. If smarts matter so little, why is everyone competing to get into HYPS. For the food?</p>
<p>Some for the name, others because students simply want to study/learn with the best and brightest. Peer learning is not a myth.</p>
<p>correct, netshark, which is why they should go by grades and SATs instead of ECs.</p>
<p>I have no idea what this thread was like before, since i just skipped to the last page but all I have to say is WHOA WHOA WHOA hold on here! Okay, so an athlete with a 1430 shouldnt be accepted? Let's take it from my stand point. I started track my freshman year and I am - meh - decent at it. Not the best, but I should be able to compete in college. I have a 1280 SAT score. I got accepted to Harvard EA.
But wait.
I never mentioned my sports, I never even talked to the coach. I still haven't talked to the coach and I don't think he knows I exist. So... how did I get in if sports weren't it?
A person with a 1430 might bring more character and personality to the school than the next person with a 1600. If Harvard wanted a class of smart, emotion-less drones they could do that easily. They want good people.
I am not the smartest person in the world, and I have no problem saying that SATs weren't my forte... but I just got so unhappy about the post concerning the 1430. I am no 1600, but I am a hard-worker. I am glad they saw that, because before I got in not even I saw that about me. If you were to compare the 1600 person who spent the last four years worth of weekends in an SAT class to the 1430 person who spent their weekends becoming a leader as the captain of their team, or finding a way to do some community service, perhaps find a passion in filming to pursue, someone with personality and guts to go out there and do something.... who would you pick?
Think about it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I never mentioned my sports, I never even talked to the coach. I still haven't talked to the coach and I don't think he knows I exist. So... how did I get in if sports weren't it?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Californiacutie, are you perchance a URM?</p>
<p>Mensa: while I agree that grades/SATs matter a lot, ECs certainly make a great difference, for the same reasons as the above poster stated. </p>
<p>Harvard wants students who are talented, motivated, and most importantly, multifaceted.</p>
<p>i wish admissions officers could see how closed-minded some ppl were...character should be more emphasized in college admissions, that way, losers like posters who will not be named wont get in</p>
<p>yea I agree. I know several 1500+, 4.0 students who cry over a B on a calculus test and who just wouldn't cut it at HYP...on the other hand, some 1200 and 1300 scorers are some of the most talented, dazzling people that I've ever known.</p>
<p>.
[quote]
yea I agree. I know several 1500+, 4.0 students who cry over a B on a calculus test and who just wouldn't cut it at HYP...on the other hand, some 1200 and 1300 scorers are some of the most talented, dazzling people that I've ever known
[/quote]
Unfortunately, with SATs that low they just wouldn't cut it at HYPS either...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Unfortunately, with SATs that low they just wouldn't cut it at HYPS either...
[/quote]
you say that with such smugness. eww.</p>
<p>allure, it's just a fact</p>
<p>lol thats not true. i have a friend who gota 1310 on the SAT recruited athlete at harvard and hes in the top 10% of his class. mensa - SAT is an evaluation of nothing. sry</p>
<p>Shrek, at Harvard these days getting an A is more a reward for good attendance than for excellence.</p>
<p>mensa--just out of curiosity, are you a harvard applicant? the posts by you that I have read seem to be really really down on the big H.</p>