<p>There are just no guarantees here. Those schools hardly go by statistics - your numbers DO put you as a "contender", but you're going to rise and fall based on your essays, recs, and demonstrated interest in science and technology. And when I say demonstrated interest, I mean very serious demonstrated interest, especially for MIT and CalTech.</p>
<p>I'm sorry that this wasn't more conclusive ... but not a whole lot stands out (yet). Your application will really need to shine for you to get admitted. Show your distinguishing characteristics in your essays. Recs will need to be superb for these sort of schools. If the jigsaw comes together, you'll have good chances.</p>
<p>Or you could be a recruited athlete/legacy/URM, or have a very special talent. Then you'd have great chances at being admitted, even just by stats.</p>
<p>Why can't you reveal any of these? I don't understand why you can't divulge what languages you speak on the side, or what special programs you do. Maybe if people have heard of them, we could better assess your chances, but if you don't tell us anything, we can only say vague and general things.</p>
<p>being frank, as of now, your EC's and gpa suck in order to get into MIT, Caltech, Yale and other top notch schools... seems like you havent taken many higher level courses... a 3.86 weighted is too low.. should be much higher for those schools you want.. sorry if it seems harsh but it is the truth esp when you are considering those schools..</p>
<p>3.86 is his Unweighted, but then again is 3.8 and up in the top 1% of your class? Some of the huge public schools have such inflated gpas, where there is 20 4.0's, then it will look bad as compared to an elite school that had a 3.9ish as a top gpa. At stanford the average GPA is only 3.8 or something, but majority of the students are definately in the top 5%, and more in the top 1-2% than the 3-5% range.</p>