<p>White female from MN </p>
<p>GPA: 4.3 W, School doesn't give UW
Rank: 3/350
Toughest course load possible, including international politics course over the summer at local U</p>
<p>Tests: (Weak, I know)
ACT: 29
SAT Math 2: 760
SAT Lit: 660
AP US Hist:4; World:4; Biology:4; English Lit:5; US gov: 5</p>
<p>EC's
Debate: 4 yrs, MVP, Captain
Speech: 3 yrs, Rookie of the Year
Internship at MN Senate
FBLA: 3 years, President, took 8th at national comp
Soccer: 3 years, varsity
Cheer: 4 Years, Scholar Athlete Award
NHS: 2 years
Mentorship program: 2 years
125+ hours of volunteer work- Medical research lab</p>
<p>Awards: a few school awards, nothing amazing</p>
<p>I want to go into politics, probably international. I know it's a long shot, but thanks for your time! =)</p>
<p>you're a well rounded candidate, the act could be higher, ecs are fine, nothing spectac, but you've got good leadership and good balance. if you're school isn't great you have a weak chance, if you're school is competitive, i think you have quite a decent shot, but your profile + wanting to do international politics is very par for the course for columbia admissions, you really need to find a way to stand out so the adcoms take notice.</p>
<p>isn't it the other way around. Being in a noncompetitive school which just sux with barely any AP classes means you have to technically self-study for the SAT 2 Subject Tests and the SAT's which almost every college requires</p>
<p>^I don't think you quite understood what I said. I said if her school is less competitive, then her rank and gpa aren't as special, this [if true] coupled with mediocre test scores, does not prove her capable of pushing the bar at columbia, thus lowering her chances.</p>
<p>yes i totally agree with you confidentialcoll, but if you have high test scores in a crappy school where everyone usually gets low test scores, you have a better chance of getting in because you were able to work hard enough to get into that caliber.</p>