I have heard and agree with the opinion that developing a spike, as opposed to being well rounded, is the best way to stand out and get into colleges. The thing is, I am somewhat of a paradox. I am quite good at academics and have high GPA, test scores, and AP scores, but have no awards in things such as Future Problem Slovers or Math Team as I just joined these recently and my school doesn’t take them seriously. I love to read and have been obsessed with The Lord of the Rings (books) since 3rd grade but am no good at writing. I also love running since I started freshman year and trained for/completed a marathon last year (sophomore). I run Cross Country and now Track. Unfortunately I am not exceptionate at running, I am decent, not the best and not the worst. As you can see I am really well rounded naturally and can’t peak unless I give up something. I’m sure I could be a decent writer if I really put effort into it and I could be quite a bit better if I joined academic competitions but I don’t want to give up running.
This really presents a problem. Do I need to give up some things so that I can get better at others in order to get into schools that I would like to (Ivy League, U Chicago)?
Btw I would like to major in Chemistry, probably to teach in a college.
I’ve heard admissions officers say that they seek to create a well rounded class – and that includes some individuals who are well rounded and some who have special interests/talents etc. Either route is fine.
But do keep in mind that the schools that are top of your list have generally under a 10% acceptance rate and that many well qualified applicants are denied admission. So open your horizons and create a list of reach (including the schools noted above which are reaches for every unhooked applicant), match and safety schools that you would be happy to attend.
Thanks, I definetly have some other schools on my list. Those are my top schools but, as I live in KY, I’ll be applying to U.K., Centre, and probably Vanderbilt as well.