<p>Cheers</p>
<p>Interesting article...thanks for posting XD</p>
<p>^ That article scares the pants off me!</p>
<p>The anecdote about the guy with a 1560/1600 who did cancer research, played 2 instruments in 3 orchestras, and published his own cookbook BUT GOT REJECTED makes me want to cry lol</p>
<p>I think the article was incredibly unhelpful. He speaks almost as if he knows which kids will get rejected, yet fails to provide any insight on how the interviewer can tell who will get in (or who should get in).</p>
<p>Obviously, people get rejected from Harvard. I would have liked to hear an interviewer's perspective on why, or who.</p>
<p>Perhaps I missed some subtle element?</p>
<p>^ Well he said he only knew one girl out of all the 40+ kids he interviewed who got in, so I don't think he could really offer any solid advice in that regard.</p>
<p>I think the point was basically: to look at how far college applications have come (he kept reiterating how unqualified he would look in today's applicant pool compared to 35 years ago) and to remind us all that we can still be awesome without being a member of Harvard '13 :)</p>
<p>Yeah, but that's always less impressive coming from a Harvard interviewer. It's like someone telling you that where you go to school doesn't matter, and then finding out they attend MIT or Yale or something. Out of curiosity, have you ever heard someone not attending a top-tier institution say that? I haven't, but perhaps other people have.</p>
<p>I just felt the article was a wasted opportunity; it would have been nice to hear more about what he notices in terms of personality (beyond they work hard and send thank-you notes).</p>
<p>I agree, I don't think this post was to help prospects with insights but rather show sympathy for the rejects in advance.</p>
<p>It doesn't help but it's interesting to read. I agree that it could have been more helpful and it scared me for an interviewer to basically say that most of the students were rejected.</p>
<p>To note someone famous that did not attend an ivy league college:</p>
<p>Best president ever: Reagan (Eureka college)</p>
<p>well...actually if you think about it...1/40 is 2.5%</p>
<p>but about 3.5/40 would constitute about 8.75% acceptance rate...
so +/- 2 or 3 people is really not so significant. If an interviewer sees 40 people and only 1 gets in, that is really not such a small number.</p>
<p>That's why our lives suck lol</p>
<p>Also, while these students in the article are very impressive, Harvard is not always looking for the most impressive applicant in absolute terms.
Plus, two instruments in three orchestras is not always the biggest deal. Isn't playing one instrument in the National Honors Orchestra or winning ASTA more impressive than playing two in your school orchestra, the school's honor orchestra, and a local community orchestra? I think it would be misleading to think that all of these students are absolutely amazing.</p>
<p>The intended audience here is other middle-aged parents, not applicants. It's about the interviewer experience.</p>
<p>Baelor, do note that the author doesn't say that the rejectees are going to SUNY Albany -- just that they aren't going to Harvard. Most of the Harvard applicants I've interviewed ended up at other top-tier universities like UChicago.</p>
<p>"have you ever heard someone not attending a top-tier institution say that?"</p>
<p>You hear it a lot at top law schools. And for people who get into top law schools, it's probably true. </p>
<p>"I would have liked to hear an interviewer's perspective on why, or who."</p>
<p>I think the article implies that he doesn't really see why, or who. Most of the kids are well-qualified, motivated, and nice...and most of them don't get in.</p>
<p>This article should not discourage anyone from applying. To students, please don't read this and change your mind about applying. Admissions is very holistic, and very unexpected at times. Also admissions is trying hard for economic diversity, and the financial aid is amazing.</p>
<p>From our family's experience, Harvard is a very nurturing place in a lot of ways, and a good portion of the students are chill, not competitive, and interesting to know. </p>
<p>Of course people can succeed without going to a school like this. This is a ridiculous question. But there should not be a sort of reverse snobbery either. Harvard is one of many fine schools, but it really is a fine school.</p>
<p>To what compmom said,</p>
<p>The best part about Harvard is that the students are not competitive but rather very down to earth. </p>
<p>I think that the article is in fact a somewhat realistic representation of what Harvard admissions are like, but the thing is that you have to understand that they have tens of thousands of interviewers. </p>
<p>My interviewer told me that I was the only one who got in that she interviewed when we met at the Harvard Club in NYC. But the thing to remember is that they see so many people that in their perspective, its a rarity to have more than one get in.</p>
<p>Funnily, this article actually encouraged me.
It affirms my (idealistic, perhaps na</p>
<p>"Baelor, do note that the author doesn't say that the rejectees are going to SUNY Albany -- just that they aren't going to Harvard. Most of the Harvard applicants I've interviewed ended up at other top-tier universities like UChicago."</p>
<p>Oh, of course. I'm not trying to say that; I apologize if it came across that way. It's just much easier for someone who went to Harvard to say that it doesn't really matter. Of course there are prominent people who didn't go to HYPS. But how many did go? How many presidents (Obama included)? How many top officials? It just seems like we mention the ones who didn't because they fall outside the norm.</p>
<p>"You hear it a lot at top law schools. And for people who get into top law schools, it's probably true."</p>
<p>And the top law schools take the most students from where? </p>
<p>"I think the article implies that he doesn't really see why, or who. Most of the kids are well-qualified, motivated, and nice...and most of them don't get in."</p>
<p>Right, and that's what I wanted to hear more about. The article, in my opinion, was totally vacuous. It just didn't feel substantial, and it really could have been written by anyone. I would have just appreciated insight that he, and no one else, could give -- tell us more about those kids? What characterizes these achievers? How does he know they will do well elsewhere? How do they interview? etc.</p>
<p>I know the 1 girl he was talking about...ever hear of the particle accelerator in Switzerland? She helped design it.</p>
<p>I think it was a lovely article; it is meant to encourage future parents to calm down, allow their children many paths, and to realize that Harvard should not be the goal, but a life well lived should be.</p>
<p>"Ever hear of the particle accelerator in Switzerland?"</p>
<p>The one that broke down? :)</p>
<p>The author of that article went to Harvard in the 70's. He took the SAT cold (like many if not most at that time) and got a very high score. He got 100 less than what he thinks is the cutoff for Harvard today. He may not be aware of the 'recalibrating' that the SAT has undergone since his time....his score then was probably at a far higher percentile than the corresponding score today. </p>
<p>He took an AP class (much rarer in that era) and got a passing grade! I am not sure how many 5's and 4's were given out in that time, but I suspect there were many fewer than today. I bet he was taking 'the most rigorous curriculum' available to him. </p>
<p>He was also from a solid blue-collar background. </p>
<p>During the summers: >>> I dug trenches for my local sewer department during the day, and sold hot dogs at Fenway Park at night.>>></p>
<p>If an otherwise well-qualified applicant listed those E.C's on his common application even today, I suspect he would attract the attention of the adcoms.</p>
<p>Is the application process more competitive today? Undoubtedly. But it appears that Harvard is still looking for some of the same characteristics in its applicants.</p>
<p>How do people get opportunities to design the particle accelerator or do research for cancer?</p>
<p>It sucks that most of us don't get to do amazing stuff like that, and it's not even our fault. And thus we wont get in to an ivy. i found this article depressing.</p>