<p>What is one thing you feel that is really important to have for getting into stanford this year? If you were accepted, are there any particular reasons you think you got in?</p>
<p>Intellectual vitality?
Essays very important?
EC emphasized this year?
Class rank?
etc?</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>didn't over think application especially essays or try to misrepresent myself
stats put you in ballpark, essays show who you are</p>
<p>They're all important factors, but I think that in comparison with a few friends that were deferred/rejected, I think my ECs and intellectual vitality put me over the top.</p>
<p>I saw a huge number of URMs get accepted. My school's sole acceptance went to one.</p>
<p>I really think it was a passion for learning. Especially for me. I emphasized just how much I loved to learn new things and how Stanford could do that for me. It seems like they're shying away from uber high SAT scores...at least based on the decisions thread. Mine were great (2200), but not phenomenal for CC standards.</p>
<p>I just presented them ME. I didn't pander to the admissions committee and my app genuinely reflected my interests. They obviously liked that, since I got accepted. (And for the record, I'm white and male...so no help there.)</p>
<p>Obviously not SAT and GPA.
There dosn't seem to be a difference in decision for scores between 2100 and 2300.
As for GPA
almost everyone's is high.</p>
<p>I thought a strength of my application was intellectual vitality, but apparently not... (I was deferred)</p>
<p>The worst thing you could do is to think that you were deferred/denied because of some shortcoming in you. I am going to reproduce a post I put on another thread, on that issue - here it is</p>
<hr>
<p>I'm not a stanford admissions officer, of course, but at my daughter's school I have seen many fabulous students deferred/denied by Stanford. I don't think you should feel you fell short - it's just that they see so many ultra-strong students in the sciences esp, and given that they need to fill all majors, they can take only so many strong science students. </p>
<p>At my daugher's school last year, someone with an 800R/800 M/750 W, with 3 800s on his science SAT IIs and a major science award was WL at Stanford, and admitted to MIT. I've seen the opposite as well, though MIT is more likely to take super-strong-pure-science-few-EC people than Stanford. </p>
<p>So the real action to take is to apply to a large enough set of top colleges strong in your area of interest that the probabilities start to work in your favor, sincce you will have several independent outcomes. </p>
<p>Given the rather-random nature of outcomes for strong students at the very top-tier colleges, I am a firm believer in the notion that under no circumstances should one fall in love with a school until after you are admitted. There is so much bad advice about this, one would think admissions officers are matchmakers who are capable of plumbing the souls of applicants. They can't and they don't - so this is not about you or your accomplishments - you are still the same talented student you were yesterday. Get your other apps out, research the other schools, get enthused about several, and you are sure to have some great choices in April.</p>
<p>Well said, Ailey. I really like the statement about falling in love with a school before admissions (and in my case unfortunately, before the demands of my parents and their stingy and presitge-focused piggy bank).</p>
<p>echang08, how did you demonstrate your intellectual vitality? Essay?
Also what were your ECs if you can post pls?
I see other threads that one should show his/her leadership. How do you demonstrate that? I have lot of ECs - EMT paramedic, school club, Varisty Captain. Do I just list these clubs with positions held?</p>
<p>Yeah, my common app essay was pretty intellectual, and I spent last summer doing 35 hrs/wk paid research internship and the summer before that 40ish hrs/wk learning computer science at Harvard (the large time commitment came from the fact that it was an intensive/accelerated course and in addition to the lecture/section time we were given problem sets that took significant amounts of time). </p>
<p>My ECs were classical piano (for which I sent in a recording), Concert Choir (selective), CS team, Asian Student Union, varsity soccer, varsity softball, math team, etc. Several leadership positions.</p>
<p>Valedictorian from my school got deferred with a 36 ACT...</p>
<p>ya I'm sure as much as people would like to respond to this thread usefully - no one really can.</p>
<p>I'm sorry, but how does anyone know what they want?</p>
<p>you just can't know! Just because someone was accepted it does not mean that they are an expert in stanford acceptance - they just got lucky!!! So apply and if you get lucky great, and if you don't, move on, and go elsewhere and say "whateva maaaan" to stanford.</p>
<p>I wasn't married to Stanford, and got in and was ecstatic and surprised (to the nth degree) and it felt better (I'm sure) than expecting to get in - like many applicants who seems disappointed.</p>
<p>recs are underrated</p>
<p>yea recs are probably tipping factor.. and important.</p>
<p>I feel very strongly that what got me in was my well-roundedness and my intellectual vitality. I read my counselor's rec and I almost fainted-- it was that good. Although stats no doubt played a huge part, there are tens of thousands of people who have equal, if not better, stats than I do. It was the little things that you can't quantify in numbers that really matter. That showed through my essays and recs.</p>
<p>from the records of admitted v. deferred/rejected students, it seems they very heavily weighted legacy</p>
<p>Kid from my school got in. His stats are nothing special. However, being a recruited athlete definitely helps the process along...</p>
<p>From my school we had one URM, one legacy, and one math/science genius.</p>
<p>Would a sibling have any weight in the admissions process?</p>
<p>EDIT: Looking at the "legacies" thread, I guess not.</p>