<p>I've been looking around the site and it seems like everyone that got into Harvard, Yale, Brown, Princeton, and the other Ivies are super geniuses. I'm not dumb or anything; I have a 3.9 right now and I'm taking 2 honors classes this fall. I just think there should be a balance between being the top in your class and having FUN. I guess it's whatever floats your boat and if you like studying and spending every weekend doing volunteer work for your resume, go for it. I'm just wondering if the Ivy League schools let in the "average smart kids"?</p>
<p>No they don't. Is that a 3.9 weighted, cause if so, that is pretty low for Ivy admissions. Only one girl ive ever met got into an Ivy with < a 4.0w, but she was one of the best runners in the nation, and like the best in california. Shes goin to Brown.</p>
<p>What Ivy's look for is, being super smart (2100sat+) and having like above a 4.0w by a good amount. Usually lots of honors and APs. And being either super crazy in some area of volunteer work, scientific (or other relevant)research, or being the best at something in the state or somethin like that.
Its what separates the Ivys (and Stanford and MIT) from other great schools like JHU, UCHICAGO, etc. Ide say for the most part, just about all kids at top 20 schools are just as smart goin in, xcept, some are more gifted in areas besides academics.</p>
<p>Legacy is the name of the tune....... Look at our dear beloved president.... any chance he got into Yale and Harvard on his own merit ?</p>
<p>college admissions are getting more and more competitive. "Average smart kids" just dont cut it anymore at ivies. Not saying they don't get in, but i think it's uncommon. You need something that amkes you stand out among myriad qualified students competing for the same spot.</p>
<p>You don't have to be a super hero, there are some people who get into ivies with simply near perfect grades and test scores, they just have to present their ec's very carefully and show their "normal" personality in their essays, which others lack.</p>
<p>They don't admit "average smart kids" as you defined yourself. You need to have (near) perfect scores, challenging course loads, and good grades just to get your foot in the door. Then on top of that to get admission you would need excellent focused ECs, a myriad of awards, usually volunteer work, glowing recommendations, and a great essay.</p>
<p>Of course, none of this applies for the unusually talented musicians, athletes, dancers, etc, or legacies, faculty brats, developments.</p>
<p>mbj: admits during Geo W Bush's day were just different. However, don't assume that graduates during that time aren't spectacular contributors to society as a whole. Remember: John Kerry's grades were on par as George's.</p>
<p>The Ivies were in a different age then. Thank Kingman Brewster and others who have made the Ivies truly great institutions.</p>
<p>ha, I actually think John Kerry's grades were lower than George Bush's. I think it was something like...George Bush College Average:75, John Kerry College Average:72. I remember reading about it once in TIME Magazine's "Numbers" section, but it was a while back.</p>
<p>Most people who get in are either increbibly intelligent or they are dedicated and passionate enough to be the best.</p>
<p>Actually I read this book about harvard that this one guy got in with a 2.7 gpa. No joke but the guy was a bigtime baseball player.</p>
<p>No, they don't let in the "average smart kids," but most colleges in the U.S. would be glad to admit such students.</p>
<p>As for legacies, from what I've seen as an alumni interviewer for Harvard, the legacies at Harvard are as good as are the nonlegacies who are accepted. I've seen plenty of legacies rejected that other places -- including Stanford (where one URM legacy I know who was rejected by H ended up) -- happily accept.</p>
<p>Given how admission standards have increased everywhere over the last 10 years, I doubt if anyone has been admitted to Harvard in recent years who had a 2.7 average, no matter how great they are at sports. Harvard rejected Olympic gold medalist Joey Cheek a couple of years ago.</p>
<p>^I don't know what year he was accepted. I'm assuming it was in the past few years considering the book came out this year.</p>
<p>Nonsense. Getting into the ivies requires more than being a superhero. There is the factor called "luck". No wonder the term crapshoot is used to describe the admissions process to any of them.</p>
<p>When you have students with perfect scores that do not get in...how can u expect an "average smart student" to do it ? The whole process has gotten ridiculous because these schools are looking beyond being 'bright". Presenting a "good case" with ECs, 'compassion" etc, will not cut it either.</p>
<p>They will fill their classes with whoever they need that specific year. It is just like building a mosaic and what I find discouraging is that there is nothing you could do about it.</p>
<p>If you have two people with fairly identical credentials, fairly identical "presentation" in their applications, etc.... but one plays violin, the other the flute and they need a flute player that year.... The flute player will get IN. What could the other person have done to "improve" his/her chances??? Absolutely NOTHING. That's crapshoot.</p>
<p>It is painful, it is frustrating and more troubling, it is the extent to which these schools go taking their admissions ambassadors on road shows trying to atract even more applicants while making it seem.......possible.</p>
<p>Yes, HYPMS only admit superheroes. The 7000+ undergrads who attend HYPMS and thousands of other Ivy League students are all super geniuses who've published research, built nuclear reactors and participated in the Olympics. </p>
<p><em>Sarcasm</em></p>
<p>No, of course not! Think about it! Are there even that many geniuses in the nation? Perhaps 200-300 "academic admits" who are the top scholars of the next generation, but not all of them will apply to Ivy League schools + Stanford/MIT. You don't need to be a super genius but you need to be more than the "average, smart kid." You need to be passionate about learning, both in and out of a classroom setting. You need to display yourself genuinely and of course, you need a little luck.</p>
<p>Dude, what are u talking about?? You have missed the point completely.</p>
<p>"You need to be passionate about learning, both in and out of a classroom setting. You need to display yourself genuinely and of course, you need a little luck."</p>
<p>I find this comment sooooo overused because it sounds good but it is sooooo stupid!! That could be EVERYBODY who applies and knows how hard it is. You need LOTS OF LUCK....not A LITTLE LUCK.</p>
<p>Students being accepted to Princeton and rejected from Harvard. Or accepted to Dartmouth and rejected from Yale. Or accepted to Yale and rejected from Brown. The is no rational other than building a mosaic or a puzzle, and you have no control over whether you are that missing piece or not. ( and you can not even plan on becoming the "piece" either )</p>
<p>My GPA was only 3.57 and I got into Ivies; in fact, was only rejected by 1 school. Be yourself.</p>
<p>So.... u got lucky. With a mediocre GPA you had something else in your application that they wanted to have. </p>
<p>"Be yourself"....wow. Deep, insightful...slap slap..</p>
<p>Not sure why the absurd obsession with the Ivys. I know many guys in my profession ( law ) and down on Wall Street who went to the Ivys....nothing special about many of them. They get layed off, overlooked on promotions, involved in office politics just like everyone else...... If I was going off to college now, I would want to work hard but also enjoy myself, too.....otherwise, what is the point ? It is not all about money, trust me.</p>
<p>You don't have to be super smart or talented if your parents are likely to contribute major bucks to the school, have political connections, or connections to Hollywood - anything that would work to the advantage of the school. The strings that people like the Bush's pulled in George's day, still apply today...probably even more so. But that shouldn't keep you from applying where you want to - you never know what will happen. Just balance your applications with match and safety schools as well as the reach.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I find this comment sooooo overused because it sounds good but it is sooooo stupid!! That could be EVERYBODY who applies and knows how hard it is. You need LOTS OF LUCK....not A LITTLE LUCK.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What you think of the comment is irrelevent. And maybe with a little pondering, you'd be lucky enough to realize that it is not stupid. You have no idea how many thousands of applicants each year try to recreate themselves into the "model" applicants, the so-called "superheroes." They worry so much about what colleges want that they become afraid to try new things and take risks. Take a look around CC. There are people asking for what AP classes to self-study in order to rack up AP awards, questions about what extracurriculars to join to make themselves stand out, if work experience is more impressive than volunteer hours, etc. Sure, a lot of people who apply may have the test scores and grades, but the passion? No, don't think so. I'm not going to debate you on how much luck is needed because frankly I don't know how you'd measure luck.</p>
<p>Just to clarify...
it's a 3.9 unweighted, 4.1 weighted
i've also been playing junior olympic volleyball for 5 years and for one of those i played up in minneapolis which is around 75 miles from where i live. i love volleyball and i plan to play through high school, would that and some great test scores help me stand out?</p>