Admission Factors Outside of Numbers

Applying to College
81

<p>Dude, people make judgement based on your actions. Since this is an internet forum, your actions are words posted on the internet. Ergo, people judge you based on those words.</p>

<p>But, anyway, what kind of scores are you talking about? I haven’t read the entire thread, but are you a B+ student or a C- student? Exactly what makes you more innovative and creative? Give us some facts, dont just say you have low grades but are creative. We need statistics. </p>

<p>And, you should look at admissions to top tier schools like Harvard this way: the price of admission is 4 years of hard work and excellent grades in high school. While yes there are other factors, some kids did the work and paid the price, and got in. Others, just as smart or creative or whatever, did not do the work and so did not pay the price. So, if I assume you to get like 3 A’s and 4 B’s, with good SAT’s but not stellar, and interesting extraciruclars, yeah it looks good. But there are HUNDREDS of kids with near perfect scores AND are creative and interesting. AND you have to compete with them to get in. </p>

<p>I hope you do well at whatever college you go to, but realistically, if I were you I would not expect a great letter from Harvard. But hey, who can fathom the inner workings of college admissions? Maybe you’ll get in. All I’m saying is don’t count on it, or act as though you deserve it.</p>

82

<p>

</p>

<p>I think this is the no 1 thing I’ve sensed through this thread - a sense of self entitlement because somehow the OP’s personality is SO much more ebullient, creative, intellectual than all the 30,500 students who apply to Harvard. </p>

<p>Fact is, there are students who may have even MORE compelling stories, have gone through even more trialling circumstances than mere cynicism or laziness AND who still have great grades and numbers. Those academically successful students may be just as intellectually curious (and demonstrateably so with research abstracts, or international prizes). So why would you even try to characterize them as mere academic robots? To make yourself feel better? Well realistically, that’s not how it is, or how it works.</p>

83

<p>Also, you seem to think that no one is like you - no one thinks like you and no one is as creative as you. You have this “no one understands me” kind of thing going on. </p>

<p>But of course, that is a typical teenage reaction. So, maybe we all shouldn’t judge him/her so harshly, and just realize that he/she is a teen who wants to get into an Ivy League without working hard. That’s pretty normal. </p>

<p>But what is not okay is thinking you are entitled to get in anywhere just based off some “innovation” which colleges have no evidence for.</p>

<p>At this point I’m not really sure what this thread is about anymore - you seem to understand you won’t get in yet you keep getting angry at people who say it to you.</p>

<p>If you provided a GPA, for example, as another poster recommended, perhaps someone could give you more advice. Of course there are admissions factors outside admissions, but if you have straight Fs you will not be given a second look no matter what your recommendations are.</p>

<p>Just to second a previous poster, Reed is a GREAT school for intellectuals (as well as druggies)- I think about 70% of the undergrads go on to grad school. Pretty amazing, eh? That’s a whole lot better than the Ivies.</p>

84

<p>While I do absolutely love the continued barrage of comments regarding my attitude and ability, I’d very much enjoy pointing out that I have long since rescinded my words by way of apology and diversion of topic. I have already made a statement asserting that I do not consider myself better than all of the other applicants for ANY reason. Yes, I admit I feel like my state of mind is different from many, to assume that my mind set is the perfect mirror of someone else applying is stupid. While I say it is different, I did not say it is better. </p>

<p>As for thinking that nobody understands me, I would have to agree to a degree. I can’t argue successfully that there is any one person who is completely knowledgeable about who I am or how I think; even I can’t argue that I know myself in a perfect fashion. You’re acting like I’m a mold for some sort of cookie-cutter group of people that thinks he is different from the group, which I don’t recall asserting after I made the apology for sounding like I may have said that. </p>

<p>Again, I have explained that my issue with the work is that before my senior year I had no desire to go to any particular school. Now that it is too late to fix anything, I am angry at myself and blaming others. Quite convincingly obviously. It’s not that I want to get in with no work, it’s that I am now unable to do the work that I lacked the foresight to value. There is no great point to this thread unless people are still posting alternate options for people in situations similar to my own. For example, the people posting about Colleges that Change Lives and other options to still lead a successful life are what this post should have been, and should now be, about. </p>

<p>As a final note, I’m not so sure what’s hard for you to understand about my dislike for people telling me that I won’t get in to the colleges I honestly want to attend. If you wanted something, someone, etc. and somebody just kept reminding you that you’ll never see that realized, you’d just roll over and accept it? That doesn’t seem to be a difficult concept to understand. I mean sure, eventually you’ll have to move on, but it’s not the time before I’ve been told no, and it’s not at the moment I’ve been told no, it will be time when the time comes.</p>

<p>Edit: I always lie about that “final” anything part. This thread could also successfully be converted into a conversation concerning the idea of people changing, which after much thought in my free time today, I have provisionally changed my stance on. Another reason I don’t enjoy being told I won’t be accepted is because it feels as if I’m being punished for not knowing what I wanted, which as a person of a reasonably young age, is not entirely uncommon.</p>

<p>Edit(2): Edited for added pleasure to the eyes.</p>

85

<p>^Psst, a hint: paragraph more often, and put an extra line between paragraphs.</p>

<p>Like this.</p>

<p>I like reading long posts and I still find myself skimming yours because they are just huge blocks of text.</p>

86

<p>I know Keil, it’s a bad habit I have while typing.</p>

<p>:(</p>

<p>I’ll attempt to state my thoughts in a visually pleasing way.</p>

87

<p>I don’t feel like skimming through this thread again, but why do you think that you, for some reason, have more potential than any other kid (and you characterize people with high statistics as inherently being without potential) applying to Harvard? Where are your revolutionary ideas? Where is your groundbreaking research? Oh…you have none…You’re just another one of those lazy kids that think that they have some innate intelligence that no one else has…go figure.</p>

88

<p>I definitely love people who think they’re smarter than everyone else. They make you feel very comforting.</p>

89

<p>I love people who call me lazy and go on about how much smarter I think I am while refusing to read the part of the thread where I took back what I said.</p>

90

<p>^If you can show proof that I called you lazy then I’ll give you a million dollars.</p>

<p>Deal?</p>

91

<p>I never claimed that I wasn’t lazy :).</p>

92

<p>The lazy part was motion12345,
though you seem to be personifying the “refusing to read” part just fine.</p>

<p>:D</p>

93

<p>There’s a difference between reading useless crap and being lazy.</p>

<p>Maybe you should go try to read 7 pages worth of thread that’s full of crap that you don’t care about. Even that guy who graduated top of the class at Harvard won’t waste his time. But then I guess you’d still tell him “though you seem to be personifying the “refusing to read” part just fine” and call him lazy.</p>

94

<p>OP I think you may be misunderstanding the nature of holistic admissions at top schools (ie. Harvard/the Ivies etc). </p>

<p>I’m sure you’re aware that admissions is an aggregate of a number of factors. “Hard” factors - GPA/SATs/Academic prizes and recognition, and “soft” factors such as ECs/Teacher Reccommendations/Personal Essays/personal context - URM/low socio-economic status/rural etc. </p>

<p>While admissions are “holistic” in that all factors are looked at, and all factors are taken into account in order to create as realistic a picture as possible of the candidate, you’re mistaken in thinking that all the factors are treated EQUALLY. They are not. </p>

<p>The “hard” factors - as much as you seem to deem them irrelevant, are in fact the most heavily weighted factor in admissions, and essentially the most important thing “getting the candidate in the door” so to speak. If one’s “hard” factors were truly abysmal - then chances are, one wouldn’t even have a foot in the door in the first place, and therefore there is little chance that the “soft” factors will be given more than a cursory glance. </p>

<p>If one’s “hard” factors were slightly below average, then the adcoms MAY be swayed by the other factors. </p>

<p>But really, most applicatns to top colleges have great “hard” factors AS WELL as fantastic ECs/teacher reccs/ and essays. How do you expect to compete with that? When even those kids are not sure if they have a good chance or not?</p>

<p>You seem to single out the Essay as a sole factor in demonstrating potential. But that’s not even the only “soft” factor. What about ECs? Teacher reccommendations? If you were truly unmotivated in school up till now, what are the chances that you will have demonstrated great passion and commitment in ECs? How will your teachers conviningly advocate for you in their reccommendations?</p>

<p>The top schools have holistic admisions because they want to get candidates who have made THE BEST OF their perhaps limited circumstances or backgrounds, not candidates who have willfully dismissed their backgrounds and made no effort to make the best out of a possibly frustrating situation.</p>

<p>For example they want to see a kid growing up in a rural country town with few resources (and perhaps there will be no highly motivated, “intellectual” peers for such a student either!) but who DESPITE that, have self studied 7 APs, taken part in worthwile extracurriculars out of altruism and passion, AND have gained distinctions academically. </p>

<p>They’re looking for pro-active students who make the opportunities happen, who actively IMPROVE their communities, not passive students who sit back and bemoan their lack of opportunities.</p>

95

<p>

It is quite hard to understand your reaction considering in creating this thread you were actively seeking the advice of other CC members. Unfortunately, it seems that when people gave you knowledgeable and reasonable answers, you simply responded with bitter refusals to acknowledge any of the advice. As has been repeated several times in this thread, the fact is that your self-proclaimed “innate intelligence” will not, in any way, make up for a poor transcript and to worry over your chances of getting into a T20 school isn’t pragmatic.</p>

96

<p>Touchy touchy melin. I’ve read this thread several times to make sure I wasn’t contradicting myself too much.</p>

<p>There is no reason to get angry, I’m just saying I did retract most of the offensive statements I originally made. I just sort of assumed it would be important to understand the whole thread before making comments that contribute to the “useless crap”.</p>

<p>Also, I didn’t call you lazy, I implied it.</p>

<p>Lighten up.</p>

97

<p><self-proclaimed “innate=”" intelligence"=“” will=“” not,=“” in=“” any=“” way,=“” make=“” up=“” for=“” a=“” poor=“” transcript=“”></self-proclaimed></p>

<p>Well, if it did, then I wonder why people with 160+ IQ are actually still trying to get a 4.0 GPA LMAO!! They can just go around shouting “I got 160 IQ!” and get picked up by an Ivy League admissions officer. But then people don’t choose their IQ, do they? Any evidence that they earned their IQ by doing some crazy stuff during life before birth at another world or something? Since admissions try to be as fair as possible, giving advantage to people with higher “innate intelligence” seems very unfair, yeah?</p>

<p>Actually, if I were an admissions officer, I’d go biased against an applicant like that. I would just respond with, “If he’s that smart, why doesn’t he use his brain to pull up his GPA? There are a lot of people out there who could use that brain of his, but, even though he’s lucky enough to be born with one, he still wasted it. I’m jealous a hell. REJECT!”</p>

98

<p>@Shadowkitt
First off, I fully sympathize with you. You want intellectual stimulation, in addition to a healthy social life. Finding your high school quite boring and lacking students who are truly motivated by intellectual concerns, you look forward to become even more intelligent and well-read and hold dynamic conversations and intellectual debates with peers who are just as intelligent and well-read. You haven’t done well in high school because you were not engaged; that’s an explanation, not an excuse. And you crave the assurance not only that you can be accepted to a mid or top-tier private school, but that these institutions will be full of people who truly value intellectualism. Your deepest fear is two-fold: either you’ll only get into Podunk State where everyone drinks and no one thinks, or you’ll get to Harvard and find it’s nothing more than an old boys’ club for stupid, spoiled kids.</p>

<p>It’s an understandable concern, and to your credit you realize that the ultimate focus of university will be your education and betterment. But you also have to realize that once you’re actually there, you won’t care so much about that. You’ll just want to have a good time and you’ll balance academics and social life. The key is to go somewhere where most students are intelligent, and the faculty and academics are stellar. That way, you have the opportunity to avail yourself of intellectual opportunities, even though you won’t always capitalize on them.</p>

<p>As other posters have said, you can’t just look at HYPS. Even broadening your focus to all the Ivies is still too narrow. There are plenty of other schools that have just as many, if not more, intellectuals. You’re right that there aren’t a whole lot of schools where the majority of the student body is at a high intellectual level, but you might find you don’t need that as much as you think. You’re rebelling against the banality and stupidity you experienced in high school; if you go to a decent college, even if it’s not an “elite” one, you will still learn a lot and meet many engaging people. That said, I’d STRONGLY encourage you to consider the University of Chicago. It has a slightly higher admissions rate than the Ivies (on par with NYU, which is a great school if you like diversity and self-righteous pseudo-intellectuals) and they specifically seek out quirky and eccentric intellectual students. Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and Stanford are unbelievably difficult to get into, especially if your grades aren’t perfect and you don’t have good ECs or hooks. The other Ivies are also very difficult to get into, and even very qualified candidates have a tough time getting accepted. Amherst and Williams are hubs of intellectuals, but they’re also extremely selective. Maybe check out some other private liberal arts colleges, like Haverford or Hamilton. LACs certainly have a different feel to them than larger universities, but you may find what you’re looking for. Ultimately, though, don’t worry. There are plenty of schools that value what you’re looking for, and many of them are not impossible to get into!</p>

<p>That said, you can’t get into a school just because you want to (or even deserve to) go there. It’s very likely you won’t get into the Ivies or the other very selective schools you apply to. But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t apply! You have to honestly consider which schools you like, then consider which you have a reasonable shot at getting into, make a balanced list of 10 or so schools, apply to them (maybe EA or ED to your top choice if they offer it), and then hope for the best but expect the worst. Don’t succumb to delusional optimism (a fairly qualified friend of mine applied to all Ivies, plus Georgetown and Boston College; he was denied or waitlisted from all but BC) or pessimistic cynicism. And remember, as long as you make your list carefully, you’ll be happy wherever you end up. Your success and happiness in college is based partially on what college you attend (because that controls what opportunities you have), but moreso on what you do once you’re there.</p>

<p>Best of luck,
Peter</p>

99

<p>Thank you very much Peter. I feel like that is how most of this thread should have happened. (Though a little less particular to me, for the benefit of others. I am not, in this statement, shedding my responsibility for causing the thread to degenerate as it did.)</p>

<p>This post is so lovely in fact, that I might question it’s sincerity. Forgive my suspicions, I’m sure you understand why I feel that way. </p>

<p>I think, for once, I am without words for a reply. I can only say the favorable light shed on me is very nice, though probably undeserved. </p>

<p>Thanks again.
(Oh, and thanks to everyone else who posted equally useful and accessible information. I’m afraid I mention Pwoods’ specifically because I find a great deal of enjoyment in how it was written.)</p>

100

<p>It is a big world out there, and that is why there are many kids, either with potential or who work hard, who won’t be going to Ivies or other top colleges. There are already too many kids that have both potential and work hard.</p>

<p>But if you really do have the potential, do you really need an Ivy? People have made amazing achievements in their life with conditions far worse than supposedly low quality state universities.</p>