Academic index

[belly]

<p>If you've read "A of Admission," you probably are familiar with the academic index. Michelle Hernandez said that if you are on the high end of the academic level (8,9), your chance of getting in is roughly 80-90%. But why do I see all these people with perfect sat scores and ranking and everything get rejected?</p>

[Ghostt]

<p>Because Michelle Hernandez was wrong, misinterpreted, or too vague.</p>

[Remote]

<p>Because scores alone just get you into a first round of consideration by an admissions panel. There’s so much more to it than scores and rankings.</p>

[belly]

<p>

Because scores alone just get you into a first round of consideration by an admissions panel. There’s so much more to it than scores and rankings.

She made a statement saying that 90% acceptance rate if you have a 9 academic stat</p>

[LoremIpsum]

<p>That book is quite a few years old and admissions have gotten to be much more competitive. Five to ten years ago, admission rates were much higher (double current rates in some cases) and perfect stats were a lot rarer. Nowadays a lot of students retake their SAT/ACT several times and a 2400 superscore over 3-4 attempts is a lot easier to get that a single sitting 2400.</p>

[stressedouttt]

<p>^ She was making a generalization. I doubt that would be the same for ALL colleges. And she was obviously wrong for top schools.</p>

[Acuraman93]

<p>Because if you have 30,000 students with perfect scores and GPA’s and only a few thousand spaces, you will have to reject qualified applicants simply because there’s not enough room.</p>

[Remote]

<p>Just to clarify, I’m talking about top tier schools (HYPSM, Ivies, Duke, Amherst, etc) in my last post. At <em>most</em> colleges in the US, they would kill for people with great stats and motivation. There are colleges who literally emailed me and said that I was accepted without even applying yet just because I was an NMS Finalist. Once you get to the top schools though, grades and scores are not even close to enough.</p>

[belly]

<p>

That book is quite a few years old and admissions have gotten to be much more competitive. Five to ten years ago, admission rates were much higher (double current rates in some cases) and perfect stats were a lot rarer. Nowadays a lot of students retake their SAT/ACT several times and a 2400 superscore over 3-4 attempts is a lot easier to get that a single sitting 2400.

</p>

<p>She revised it just last summer</p>

<p>

^ She was making a generalization. I doubt that would be the same for ALL colleges. And she was obviously wrong for top schools.

</p>

<p>She said it would work for Ivies as well</p>

<p>

Because if you have 30,000 students with perfect scores and GPA’s and only a few thousand spaces, you will have to reject qualified applicants simply because there’s not enough room.

</p>

<p>I don’t think there can be that many people with perfect scores, GPA, AND Test scores</p>

[Remote]

<p>There are really that many kids with perfect or nearly perfect SAT and SAT II scores and GPA. Seriously.</p>

[moneyp]

<p>I don’t think it is that applicable now as so many kids are AI=9 now. My ds was one and was not able to enter any ivy despite having good ecs and leadership plus gpa and sat.</p>

[glassesarechic]

<p>She may have recently revised the book, but she doesn’t work in admissions any longer, and hasn’t for quite some time. I imagine that the AI “requirements” have been inflated, as have the EC rankings. Dartmouth admissions officers–which Hernandez was formerly–commented this year that they had to adjust their admissions standards mid-application season because of the caliber of the applicants; Amherst reported similar changes in their NPR segment.</p>

[LoremIpsum]

<p>

There are really that many kids with perfect or nearly perfect SAT and SAT II scores and GPA. Seriously.

</p>

<p>Perfect SAT IIs are easy – about 10% of the test takers in Math II and Physics get 800’s. There were about 425 perfect SAT scores last year and 600 ACT 36’s (35.5 and above). But add in SAT superscores, SATs over 2350 and ACT 35’s and you have a fair-sized group. Let’s keep in mind that only a fraction of the HYPSM admits need near-perfect stats in order to compete. The standard is much lower for athletes, URMs, legacies, developmental candidates and the sons and daughters of our Congressmen.</p>

[yaintime21]

<p>An 8-9 has 1600s, 36s, 5s, 800s, 4.0s in all places along with being the top 5 in the class, stellar teacher recommendations, top awards, and essays and ECs which scream intellectual curiosity, not a 33 there and a handful of 5s and pretty good recs or ones with top scores but kind of “eh” on their fervor for information. THESE are 8-9s, and they are rare. 8-9s, I have to repeat, MUST be passionate about gaining knowledge, not just good at scoring a 2400.</p>

[moneyp]

<p>yaintime, your definition is a little too strict. check Hernandez’s book…she has the formula there to calculate the AI. You can also try to check her website. It has the AI calculator.</p>

[Acuraman93]

<p>

I don’t think there can be that many people with perfect scores, GPA, AND Test scores

</p>

<p>I’ll give you that, but have you seen how small the class sizes are? Stanford anticipates its freshman class to be 1722 students. There are definitely more than 1722 people with 4.0’s and 2400s. Also, if you have someone with perfect stats and no EC’s vs. someone who has done some really remarkable EC’s with slightly less than perfect stats, who are they going to accept?</p>

[Ghostt]

<p>

There are definitely more than 1722 people with 4.0’s and 2400s.

</p>

<p>This assertion is definitely incorrect.</p>

[Acuraman93]

<p>^ </p>

<p>

Stanford, like many of its peer schools, has had a record number of total applicants – more than 32,000. Regardless of arguments over whether too much preference is given to one category over another, thousands of students are going to be turned away, and there is no doubt that the vast majority of them could have met the demands of a Stanford education. We could, for instance, have filled incoming classes four or five times over with applicants who achieved grade point averages of 4.0 or greater.

</p>

<p>Source: <a href=“http://files.e2ma.net/37634/assets/docs/rick_shaw_rea2010.pdf[/url]”>http://files.e2ma.net/37634/assets/docs/rick_shaw_rea2010.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>I was actually being generous. They get ~7000 students with perfect stats.</p>

[yaintime21]

<p>The site also says that subjective information are a part of the AI, and for your true AI you need to e-mail her with that information.</p>

[Ghostt]

<p>The thing is, there are ~500 people who score 2400 on the SAT annually.</p>

<p>These 7000 students Stanford would be able to admit don’t all have “perfect stats” just because they have perfect GPAs.</p>