<p>These are my friend's stats, he was wondering his chances. he is a junior, and these are his stats, you can look mine up if you think i'm lying.</p>
<p>Extracirriculars:
-Rec Basketball 2 hours a week
-MUN around 2 hours a week also</p>
<p>Volunteer Work:
- Volunteers at Library every Saturday for 2 hours
- Tutors students in math for around 4 hours a week</p>
<p>SAT & Testing:
-took PLAN last year got 29/32 (around 33 on ACT predicted)
- PSAT - 198
- SAT II - US History - 720
AP US History test - 5</p>
<p>My friends seem to think that he is so smart that if he writes and explains why he didn't do any extracirriculars then they will understand. I know this isn't the case, but tell me if i'm wrong!</p>
<p>Colleges:
- University of Oregon
- Claremont Mckenna
- Georgetown
- Yale
- University of Boston
- Whitman
- Amherst
- UPenn</p>
<p>yeah, thats totally wrong... unless hes got a really good explanation... at least for CMC, no leadership means no admission</p>
<p>in at all except penn yale gtown amherst cmc... those are all reaches with no ECs... gtown less so, but with no ecs tough schools are tuff cuz there are plenty of applicants like your friend with ecs</p>
<p>maybe he should shoot for michigan? michigan admission is almost all statistics and your friend would clearly get in there</p>
<p>Well writing to explain why he didn't do many ECs implies that he DID have a reason not to do many. There are valid reasons out there. "Didn't feel like it" or "was studying" don't count for much in this game, but it doesn't mean there are no good excuses. Also, as important as ECs are (both in admissions and in general), it's still <em>school</em> and your friend's academic stats are top-notch. Also, many (not all!) schools only ask about title/description of ECs and don't care about hours/week, so that will make things look a bit better.</p>
<p>One of the downsides is that some of the schools you list have distinctive "personalities" and your friend's application has nothing to show that he fits in to their atmospheres. Even if he WOULD fit, it's generally ECs that prove so. A CMC applicant is very likely to have a varsity sport, perhaps student government participation, maybe some political/business-related ECs, and so forth. It doesn't necessarily make this person a better fit or a better candidate, but it does make him a more OBVIOUS one. Your friend's stats, though they are very strong, lack a lot of "Hey! Remember me! Look at me again!" power, which is necessary when your application has to stand out from a pile of thousands of other 4.0-ish students' apps.</p>
<p>Above all: your friend is only a junior. He's got almost a year before applications are due, so I'd say get movin'.</p>
<p>I predict that with a 33 on the ACT, and with that class rank, that the applicant will have a good chance at some of those schools, just based on academic potential.</p>
<p>The only leadership is have is "Editor-in-Chief:School paper". My SAT's are math 670/writing 670/CR 710. SAT II's: World History 760/ Math lvl2 640.</p>
<p>Seriously... almost all the applicants (of course, I'm exaggerating, but say at least 70%) to Penn & Yale have 4.0 (and some even 5.0) and at least 2000 SAT. Leadership is actually not hard... did he try to run for any position in any club or organization?</p>
<p>your friend obviously did participate in some EC's, and it they might happen upon a leadership position in one of them which is really what they need. Colleges like to see committed over the long term to one specfic thing, including CMC. In response to the paper Editor-in-Chief, you have a strong commitment to one thing. As a yearbook EIC myself, it is definately a positive!! If ur gpa and sats are up to par you should be fine.</p>