<p>My only claim is how URMs score as a group, and it's FACT. Go cross eyed all you want, but stop denying fact!!!</p>
<p>Actually...your claim is that people who get into Yale with socres below 1400-1450 (depending on which post of yours people read) are ALL URM & those that recieve tips. It is also true, as a group that whites score less than Asians. Yet, you single out URMs. If that is true, then Yale should be predominently Asian. If that is not the case, then whites as a group also recieve a tip in admissions.</p>
<p>FACT. If I was confident that Yale did not use a holistic approach to admissions, I'd have to say that Asians get screwed the most. Luckily, I do not think so. Funny how you align whites with Asians. You would be right, IF we were talking about FACTS, in absence of holistic individual admission.</p>
<p>What was your SAT score again? Must have missed the answer because I was a special talent admit...Right?</p>
<p>I'm so glad to know that you have no problem being racist, as you make judgements about group affiliation rather than based on individuals and their particular characteristics. Wow, my friends in Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal would be stunned. Amazing.</p>
<p>Blaineko, I'd be insulted if there was any logic here. FACT, it is harder for an Asian to get into an ivy than any other group. Whites come next. Racist? Really, just a realist. There are quotas for everyone. Published? No. Just an amazing coincidence that the number of Asians, whites, blacks, hispanics, ect. are static at every ivy! If your friends would be stunned, they have the same ability to interpret data as you do. Don't like this reality? Apply to State schools, private schools can do whatever they want, and they clearly do!</p>
<p>Canuck:</p>
<p>As evidenced by all your posts and the responses you illicit (looking at all your treads), it is obvious that you are minsinformed--even people in or who have worked in Yale's admissions office disagree with you. And, yet no SAT scores??? Wow, yet again.</p>
<p>You have benefitted from being from Canada, so you have no place to talk if you want others to believe that if you are not URM, that you must be brilliant and score above 1450 to get into an Ivy. The percentages speak for themselves (ie. middle 50%ile as used by college guides). Just like your saying ED does not help, that is false. Look it up, call the admissions offices at all eight schools, look at websites, etc....Just because you maybe a work-study worker in the admissions office DOES NOT mean that you know the inner workings of the admissions office.</p>
<p>Maybe, I should call and ask for you in the admissions office, as the Canadian work-study worker who has said all this about Yale, that they have quotas (which are illegal) and that they use a different set of standards to judge Asian applicants than all other groups. Maybe then we'll get the FACTS. Wow. And, yet still no SAT scores. Must have been a special admit that only got in because you're from Canada. That, I can buy.</p>
<p>To quote Ilovepoker on Canuck's ED thread:</p>
<p>Canuckeh...for some reason is trying to scare the living hell out of everybody. It's true in general minorities and athletes make up the lower end of the academic spectrum at ivy league schools, but it's not in as significant numbers as he would have you believe. Basically, if you the high scores, the high gpas, the good recs, the good essays, and some decent extra-curriculars you have a decent shot at any school. If you follow canuck's argument to its logical extension the top colleges are evidently made up of only kids who have done absolutely extraordinary things and URMS, athletes, legacies. I'd say these people make up 50% of most schools...the other 50% is your average really solid applicant who has a lot to offer but hasn't yet cured cancer. ED helps...enough with the scare tactics.</p>
<p>Feel free to call, really. I invite all the "locks" to come back and tell me I'm wrong in May. I wish everyone the best, but I stand by my thinking. What school are you at Blanko?</p>
<p>Like I said in other posts, I'm applying to Amherst, Williams, Swarthmore, Bowdoin, Middlebury, Haverford, Colgate, Connecticut C, after taking a couple of years off after hgih school because of a severe illness in my familty.</p>
<p>I did get into Yale & Columbia as a first-year. UPenn negged me, while Carleton waitlisted. Got into other non-Ivies: UChicago, Northwestern, Duke, Pomona, Johns Hopkins. Why? Does it make a difference?</p>
<p>Also, I did not ever say that anyone was a 'lock' for any Ivy. Thus, I'm pretty sure that admissions patterns for most of the people I've responded to will be close. It is not always enough to just have grades and scores without showing dedication and depth in extra-curricular activities, and decent recs and essays, but it isn't so difficult that excellent students without additional tip factors will be displaced by URMs and special admits, like you seem to think. Nor, do I believe, based on reading primary and secondary sources, that ED is of no help--like you claim on another thread. ED/SCEA does help with respect to higher admissions rates.</p>
<p>Again, SAT scores?</p>
<p>These guys are too critical...you have a great chance at Yale</p>
<p>I think Surfer has a chance at Brown, where he used ED to his advantage. :)</p>
<p>Last comment: Please post true results in May.</p>
<p>Yes, pleeaasssse.</p>
<p>Blaineko, if you had named your schools in the first place, we would have had a very different conversation. You are talking 20 plus percent admit schools, which are a far cry from HYPMS. Yes, 1450s are in the serious running at Williams et al. Different story entirely. Competitive, but far, far less so. Even I got into Williams and Swat my first time around.</p>
<p>canuckeh, it appears you have nothing constructive and positive to say.</p>
<p>SO STOP TROLLING!!!</p>
<p>Canuck:</p>
<p>I did not actually ask about my chance, but responed to the original post. I think I've been realistic about my chances. I'm pretty sure I'll get into a good LAC. The admissions rate at Amherst is 18%, Williams 18%, Bowdoin 24%, Middlebury 25%, Haverford 29%, etc...At Upenn it's 20%, Stanford at 13%, Columbia at 11%, Dartmouth at 18%, Brown at 16%, Cornell at 31%, Harvard at 10%, Princeton at 10%, and Yale at 11%.</p>
<p>I have gotten positive feedback from Dartmouth & Columbia but would like a smaller school, thus the LACs. Like I said before, I got into Yale & Columbia the first time around but not UPenn. I was also waitlisted at Carleton, even though it is statistically easier to get into than some of the Ivies. That is why grades and scores do not always insure an admit letter, nor does having a tip factor gurentee a positive response (went to school in Hawaii).</p>
<p>At Upenn, Cornell and Dartmouth, admissions rates are about the same as the LACs that are at the top of my list this time around. While I believe I have an okay shot at some of the Ivies, I am only attracted to two smaller ones (Dartmouth and Columbia). Because size is an issue with me, they are not included on my list. In fact, Williams and Dartmouth are very similar, and attract the same pool of students--admitting 18% of their applicants. While Columbia accepts a smaller percentage, the admissions office wrote that since I was accepted once, it is more than likely that I will be accepted again during the early round, and also have a good chance in the RD round.</p>
<p>I guess you are the lucky one, as I would have traded my Yale & Columbia acceptances for a space at Amherst, Williams, Swat, etc...I still think that there are people with lower scores than myself that are a better fit for some of the schools. I do not begrudge them for it. I believe in a diverse class, and I still believe that some URMs got in on their own merits--without needing a push. If I did not believe that, then the better schools would then, necessarily, promote prejudice by not using a holistic method to pick students.</p>
<p>Again, just my 2 cents.</p>
<p>Pathetic, let me be positive! All you guys with 1450s and leadership of a high school club are in to HYPMS!! Locks, man! I'm PC and feel good, be happy now and suffer from reality in April!! Pathetic! I should have realize based on what I saw when I got here that the CC way is to say you're in. OK, you're all in! Hey 1250s, they'll recognize you're special!</p>
<p>Canuck:</p>
<p>That is not true, either. Some of the 1450 scorers will get into some of the Ivies, if they ensure that their recs, essays and grades are excellent. Depending on whether one uses ED/SCEA chances go up statistically. It surely will not help a 1250 SAT scorer unless they are athletes, legacies, and rich kids--since most URMs get in during the RD round. More often than not, the ability to compare finanical aid is an issue for URMs.</p>
<p>I for one, being a Republican, am not into political correctness, nor do I believe in being unrealistic, especially when I give advice to others. If I think they have little chance, based on stats and ECs, as well as special tip factors, I'm not shy about saying so. I don't need to be PC to be able to give an educated opinion reguarding a persons chances at a particular school.</p>
<p>It is when someone says that a <1400 SAT score means that the person is a URM, that I'd have to disagree. Obviously, there are URMs that score above that threshold. And, there are Whites and Asians who score below <1400 that have gotten into some Ivies, including Yale. Thus, it is not necessarily true that an applicant with such scores would not get in, though it becomes less likely depending on the whole application.</p>
<p>I concur with kryonme, you (the original poster) are a strong applicant. </p>
<p>canuckeh, I repeat, you are a know nothing twit who is wasting other people's time with pointless blather. If you wish to provide verification of your supposed inside admissions knowledge, disclose your identity and I shall contact the nice people at Yale Admissions (I believe that is where you said you are working part time while an undergrad) and ask them if your views are reflective of their own stance. Otherwise bug off.</p>
<p>the next person to complain about how a 14xx is barely even adequate for admissions to any school better not bother saying so. Quite frankly, such as score range is more than adequate and will not be held in a negative light. For that matter,in all the various SatII's a 700+ can only held in a positive light. (except the chinese satII where most of that test takers are native speakers and an 800 is about 75th percentile)</p>
<p>Twit, Schemer, surely describes one with your thinking. Do contact Yale. Yes, it is where I am. And yes, they will surely encounage pathetic candidates such as yourself to apply so that the admission rate can keep going dowm. Fools like you ensure this.</p>
<p>I laugh at you, you who are quick to evaluate those who you do not even know. You do not even know who I am, yet you judge me thusly.
Let me put it thusly, I am among the intellectual elite of my school, which is among the most elite high schools on the planet ( 6 nobels, 5 pullizters, and a turing award among the alumni, as well as the creator the latex typesetting system, are but a few of the accomplishments of alumni), I am currently self studying and independently pursuing my own research at the graduate level, in an area that of the entire faculty of Yale, only Professors Hudak and Shao of the computer science department have any real familiarity with. I am a memorable person, one who is notable at every program that I have previously attended. I do not care if I am not accepted at one particular school or another when it comes time for colleges to evaluate me, as such a decision will be in large part a result of determining that the school's personality does not mesh with my own. </p>
<p>surely by the time one is in college, one learns not to make bald assertions about that which one does not know.</p>
<p>whatever, i'm cooler than both of you</p>