<p>gman</p>
<p>congrats! My son was accepted ea, too! We are just down the "road" from Dinuba!</p>
<p>Hey that's freakin awesome!!! Someone from the Central Valley! By any chance is your son from Buccanahn High School (I'm not sure if I'm spelling that correctly)??? I have a friend on my facebook as part of the Stanford Class of 2012 who is also from Fresno and it might be your son.</p>
<p>gman6855, even with that SAT score, your stats are something to envy. i wish you the best of luck, and i know that you'll be very successful at stanford and further on in life.</p>
<p>The OP had amazing ECs</p>
<p>
[quote]
The OP had amazing ECs
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So did students who were rejected, had substantially higher SAT scores, and weren't URMs.</p>
<p>Thanks for posting your full stats gman, they definitely show why you got accepted. You are involved in a ton of stuff and show tons of participation and enthusiasm for what you do. That and your clearly passionate voice (you can tell just by reading your posts) obviously came through and impressed Stanford's admissions officers. Congrats man and good luck next year.</p>
<p>congratulations and good luck at stanford</p>
<p>my stats aren't extraordinary by cc standards, and possibly by stanford's, but hopefully i'll receive acceptance...</p>
<p>This sounds callous, but no credit should be given here. This is simply AA at its finest and cheapens the accomplishments of those who had to put in the time to get high test scores to earn their acceptance.</p>
<p>@ Vissanik</p>
<p>Yea, very callous ... hopefully you didn't express the same arrogance on your apps as you have here. The only thing cheapening your accomplishments is your attitude. Chill.</p>
<p>A ~2400 SAT score neither creates nor indicates the Nelson Mandela's, Dalai Lama's, Caesar Chavez's, or Antonio Villaragosa's of the world. The score is a mere admissions factor, and if a student's potential outweighs the scores, then admission is deserved. gman's credentials obviously show potential leadership in the sense of actually making a difference, and he shows a dedicated interest in giving back to the community. It's certainly easy to pick out the cold, calculated, obsessed college-bound kids who blatantly disregard making a difference out of goodness and instead do activities in pure self-interest. </p>
<p>Vissanik seems to fit this category with the shallow notion that scores make or break an application, forgoing gman's other accomplishments and likely doing so simply because he is a certain ethnicity. </p>
<p>College admissions officers are more easily sniffing out the phony from the genuine. Better focus less on scores and more on at least appearing to be good and a leader of future generations.</p>
<p>Yeah. I agree with the66afghans. However, we honestly can't ignore that AA had some hand in admissions (obviously his ECs might still have gotten him in), and cannot pretend that many rejectees may have had more or equally impressive ECs. Anyways, gman deserved the admissions, 100%, and though I'd understand the bitterness of rejectees, you guys just have to accept the admissions process, since that's simply how it is.</p>
<p>I find it funny that those who don't think the OP got in on AA think it's preposterous that others might think that, and vice versa, when nobody knows for sure. For all we know, he could have been admitted because he was a qualified (non-statistically) URM. He could have been admitted on merits alone. We don't know.</p>
<p>But I still ask: what does the OP have that students with virtually the same (if not better) ECs/awards and a much higher SAT/GPA don't? I wouldn't try to judge how the OP got in by looking at his own isolated case -- I'd compare him to others.</p>
<p>I don't think that we should waste time scrutinizing why OTHER PEOPLE got in and should worry about ourselves...</p>
<p>
[quote]
A ~2400 SAT score neither creates nor indicates the...Antonio Villaragosa's of the world
[/quote]
</p>
<p>HAHAHAHAHAHAHA</p>
<p>Tell me you were being sarcastic</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't think that we should waste time scrutinizing why OTHER PEOPLE got in and should worry about ourselves...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why? Isn't the deadline passed? So worrying will get you nowhere.</p>
<p>However, figuring out why others get in can give future applicants more insight into its admissions.</p>
<p>
[quote]
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA</p>
<p>Tell me you were being sarcastic
[/quote]
He is Mexican, mayor of Los Angeles and a potential governor and senator. What is there to be sarcastic about? Or was the ellipses meant to encompass the entire quote? If so, despite being bombastic, SAT scores do not create or predict leaders, period.</p>
<p>He is a corrupt, disgraced politician who is a terrible mayor. Not really Nelson Mandela or Dalai Lama material.</p>
<p>CONGRATS!!! yeah to be honest your SAT is poor.. but you leadership in an array of activities really helped.. nice ECs :] DONT BE BITTER GUYS :)</p>
<p>SAT scores definitely don't predict the Antonio Villaragosa's of the world... who failed the bar exam 4 times</p>
<p>You cannot assume the OP got in due to AA just because he is a URM. I agree with KyleDavid that you also can't assume the opposite. </p>
<p>I believe part of the reason for AA is to give URMs an opportunity they might not have otherwise, and these opportunities may not be available for MANY different reasons besides color, including economic status, availability of quality schools, parents who have not attended college, need to work, etc. </p>
<p>I DO NOT believe AA should be used in order to give an "edge" to URMs who are NOT disadvantaged (economically, educationally, etc), and many URMs are no longer "disadvantaged." </p>
<p>However, in the case of the OP it is evident that not only is he "disadvantaged" in some respects, but also that HE HAS DONE THE VERY BEST HE COULD WITH VERY LITTLE.....I think this is HUGE. Also, that he is determined to "pass it forward" to others in his position. If we want everyone to (eventually) have equal opportunities, the inclusion of people like the OP in opportunities such as Stanford is crucial.</p>
<p>Finally, test scores are not the "be all and end all" of determining factors: some people just don't test well (for various reasons). I applaud the Stanford Adcom for recognizing a jewel in the OP, whereas others might have turned him away due solely to his SAT scores. </p>
<p>It's about quality, not quantity and numbers, and that it a good thing.</p>