After the EA decisions, anybody got an idea of what Stanford is really focusing on?

<p>When people note an URM was admitted are you implying that these students are not academically competitive??? All the ones that I know who are going to Stanford are off the chart brilliant and can literally go to any institution they want. I think given the dearth of URM who can get into these top institutions (because of the lack of good high school that most URM have access to), those who are strong students and/or middle and upper class and virtually go to any institution they apply to. This is a good thing from my perspective.</p>

<p>collegeapp2007 - what gives you the impression that legacy weighs in so heavily. I'm very interested in this matter, but i cannot find any concrete data implying such a fact.</p>

<p>also - forgive my ignorance - URM? what is it?</p>

<p>URM - underrepresented minority</p>

<p>I think Stanford is truly looking for someone who is unique. I think I got in because I represented myself in my application. That is all you can do, be yourself and see if they like you. I love heavy metal and playing guitar, and I talked about it. I even quoted Ozzy Osbourne, funniest thing ever. lol. The thing about high scorers not getting in is due to the number of students with those scores who are applying. You are essentially competiting with the best of those students and not the rest of the pool. Racial status and socio-economic status also plays a factor. I was the first student in my school's history to even apply and get accepted to Stanford. Our highest acceptance at the school before that was UC Berkeley, I believe. My race might have played a role because I am half-Italian (Caucasian) and half-Mexican American, but my last name is easily Italian, so I don't think it gave me an advantage. All I can say is "stand out and be yourself."</p>

<p>"Stand out and be yourself" is a good advice. To many students are trying to say what they think colleges want to hear. As a result, they all sound the same, and extremely boring.

[quote]
The thing about high scorers not getting in is due to the number of students with those scores who are applying. You are essentially competing with the best of those students and not the rest of the pool.

[/quote]
That is a pretty silly thing to say. High scores do not hurt you in any way. They only help. But high scores alone are not enough.</p>

<p>nngmm, the poster didn't say that high scores didn't count, he/she correctly stated that virtually everyone who applies have high scores, so you have to demonstrate something unique about yourself. This is the critical factor that many applicants don't really understand. They tend to focus on how high their scores are. That is just ONE factor among many. You have to stand out, be unique, and have very interesting and engaging essays.</p>

<p>there's no formula, so people should stop looking for one. They are assembling a class with many different talents, interests, demonstrated accomplishments, academic focus areas etc. The reason person A got in is undoubtedly different from the reasons persons B, C and D got in. There's way too much extrapolation going on from single data points on all the college discussion boards.</p>

<p>I'm an asian male and I was accepted early. </p>

<p>The reality is, everyone has good grades, sats, and recs. Everyone writes "good" essays so I don't think that will separate you. Stanford is looking for someone that can make a difference at Stanford. </p>

<p>So then your next question is how do they know that? One word:PASSION. I'm not saying that stats aren't important, but the majority of the people at stanford have great stats. PASSION is more important. Passion for the school, an extracurricular activity, or a subject (intellectual vitality). I dont think it matters that you love bio, chem, econ, arts, whatever. I just think they want to see that you are truly passionate about what you do. If you're one of those people that just do things to pad your resumes then you will have a hard time showing this because you can't fake passion. </p>

<p>please excuse my grammar errors and lazy typing. it is very late and i am very tired.</p>

<p>hey heavy metal guitar god - you are right on the money. my application was also very honest and just very ME and unique. (also accepted SCEA)</p>

<p>Also - you give me faith in stanford - all the people i know who go there from my school (who got in in the past) kind of stink... but i am happy to know there are people going there who quote ozzie. I'm pleased to know that the student body isn't comprised of squares.</p>

<p>Thanks Dsalon, I really appreciate it. If you actually decide on going then you will see me there. Trust me, you will know who I am. I probably have hair longer than your mom does, lol. See you there man.</p>

<p>how exactly do you show passion</p>

<p>well, there isn't a formula, but some symptoms of it are
a) a degree of sustained focus over time
b) going above and beyond
c) what you accomplish in that area beyond just participation - as you know, accomplishment has many dimensions
d) do you show initiative to get something done there, come hell or high water
e) either single highly focused activity in that area (most common would be science research) or else engaged in multiple dimensions in that area but all with a common thread
... just some ways people's passions come through. There's no one answer, but it tends to be recognizable if presented well. </p>

<p>All too often, though, applicants fail to look for the common thread in what they enjoy doing, and present a long laundry list of activities, none of which is significant enough to do anything for them. For instance, in an application I was recently asked to provide feedback on, the student had about 10 line items for his ECs, spread across 2 partially overlapping tables. He would have been better off reducing it to 3 so that the whole added up to more than the sum of the parts ie: - a) sports b) international focus including international aid and justice and c) school activities and since (b) was really his main interest, he should have ordered them not by time spent but by priority to HIM which is what the common app asks for, but few students do.</p>

<p>And, I'll emphasize - on the EC chart, more is NOT better. A few items, that show sustained commitment accomplishment, which you can use the Additional Info to elaborate on, are much better.</p>

<p>I agree 100 percent with ailey. Stanford gives you many opportunities in their application to voice your passion and to tell them what really interests you. i think some students try to look well rounded but in the end they are diluting their true talents and passions. If you're truly passionate about something, writing an essay about it is easy.</p>

<p>For what it's worth:</p>

<p>I am wondering whether the fact that my D stepped outside her "comfort zone" may have been a factor: she decided to spend her last two years of HS at a boarding school across the country, and excelled there as well as at her first HS.</p>

<p>I also think her essays (which were so "her") showed a lot of intellectual vitality (she refused to let me help with her apps.) In fact, she loves learning almost any subject, and always took the most difficult classes, although she did earn a couple Bs.</p>

<p>Finally, I'm pretty sure her recommendations were amazing (i.e. her multivariable calculus teacher calls her the "shining star" of his class.) Comments from her teachers have consistently shown they love having her in their classes because she participates and is always prepared.</p>

<p>Stats were great, but not perfect. She definitely showed passion for two or three extracurriculars, including leadership roles.</p>

<p>And, in no way did we ever expect her to be accepted. In fact, as Ailey suggests, she decided not to get attached to any school until she had been accepted.</p>

<p>So Ailey, and others, would you suggest keeping to the given space for extracurriculars, and not using the additional information to list the rest? But rather elaborating on the ones that were listed in the given space?</p>

<p>^ yes, but as I said above, do think about how to group what you have done so that your key ECs do indeed lend themselves to a list that is short (say, 3-5 items). Then use the Additional Information section in the common app to elaborate on the 'EC themes' you have created, with more detail. </p>

<p>A short list of ECs each of which shows a lot of substance (as detailed in the additional info) is MUCH better than a long list of what looks like random items. </p>

<p>Believe me, once you take the trouble to do the grouping, and see how much more impactful your app is, you'll wonder why you ever did it different. :)</p>

<p>what if you have two different areas that you've pursued to a great extent, but it's made of... many smaller activities?</p>

<p>That is why grouping make sense. There is always one that stands out, that is why it's called passion. The activity that you spend any enormous time in. I don't know about you but when I'm passionate about any activity, that is what I do all day if I get a chance(between work and taking care of family of course).
Like my passion for CC. :)</p>

<p>^^ that's exactly when grouping helps the most. YOU do the work of figuring out the theme that links those smaller activities, and that's what your EC is, and all those smaller activities become the detail you provide to support that EC.</p>

<p>There is no one thing that Stanford wants, or else there probably would have been a book "Get into Stanford" and everything would be using it....It's through the various components of the application that they see if you would be successful there and bring some life to the campus!</p>