<p>Once a candidate obtains a nomination, what are his chances of getting in? Statistically, they look pretty good, as only about 2000 who are qualified get nominations and 1500 appointments are offered. Or is there more to it than that?</p>
<p>Around 4000 noms. 2000 3Qs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Once a candidate obtains a nomination, what are his chances of getting in? Statistically, they look pretty good, as only about 2000 who are qualified get nominations and 1500 appointments are offered. Or is there more to it than that?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>More too it than that. Assuming you don't receive a principal nom and/or have an LOA and nom (and most do not), you go into a national pool. Whether you get an appointment depends on how well you stack up against the competition nationally and, to some extent, where you live. Generally, it is easier to receive an appointment from a less populous state or region w/in a state than from a populous one. The admissions standards are the same. But USNA works very hard to ensure geographic diversity. Thus, if the choice is between equally qualified candidates fom North Dakota and Maryland, the nod may well go to the person from ND because there just aren't as many qualified candidates with noms from that state.</p>
<p>The above said, being 3Q'ed and having a nom (or more than one) is a huge step toward receiving an appointment and obviously vastly improves your odds of receiving one. But, it's not guaranteed and I have seen 3Q'ed students with multiple noms who do not receive an appointment.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don't know if I can agree with you here. Federal law requires all qualified alternates to be selected solely on order of merit. Unless these two were exactly equal in points and were right on the cutoff point, they both would be appointed.</p>
<p>When you get a nomination, your chances look much better. If you consider that 4300 nominations are given out annually and about 1500 receive offers of appointment, that's a little better than a 35% chance of receiving an appointment. When the admission rate is 14%, I'd rather have the nomination in hand and pray than no nomination since no nomination equals no appointment.</p>
<p>If you are 3Q'd and have a nomination, then you are a prime candidate right now.</p>
<p>yeah, if you look at the stats from 2011 about 3800 candidates got noms, of that number about 1800 were triple q'd, and of that number about 1500 received appointments.</p>
<p>Applicants and Nominees
Applicants (includes nominees)........................ 12,003
Number of applicants with an
official nomination....................................... 3,827
Nominees qualified scholastically,
medically and in physical aptitude................ 1,893
Offers of admission.......................................... 1,419
Admitted.......................................................... 1,202</p>
<p>Which means there were 474 3Q'd candidates with nominations who are not in Annapolis this year, so have a backup plan.</p>
<p>My blue and gold officer called and said that only three candidates in his area have completed their packets. One is a recruited athlete, and he said that my scores were higher than the other guy's. How often does the admissions board meet?</p>
<p>^^^^^
The admissions board meets on Thursdays.</p>
<p>Your chances if you apply? As good as anybody else.</p>
<p>Your chances if you don't apply? zero</p>
<p>usnahopeful2012, just keep in mind that the academy doesn't go strictly based on scores...they have to think about what will be best for the navy, like minority percentages (one of my pet peeves, but they want an officer corps that mirrors the enlisted ranks) and medical qualifications.</p>
<p>Interesting comment . . . tell us more about why you disagree with the notion [is that what you mean by a "pet peeve"] that the officer corp should mirror the enlisted ranks.</p>
<p>He probably disagrees b/c of the same reason I do. It is utterly ridiculous to turn down better qualified candidates just for the sake of having a minority. When you think about it, it just another form of discrimination. If the minority is more qualified or as qualified, then great. But I think it is wrong to turn down someone because just to get a minority.</p>
<p>That's the same company line the Supe used with the Visitors Board a few weeks back. He added that his regime WILL enhance minority enrollment at the Academy. Should be interesting to see how he plans to accomplish that, given 3.5 years and counting. </p>
<p>While on the surface the mirror notion seems to offer some conventional sense, lots of people sorta shakin their heads to the affirmative, when one begins to examine the premises essential to take such a posture, well it seems to fade into PC trivialities and realities. I'm sure Supe and the Gang have to spend a lot of time pondering that one. Can a Samoan sailor only "relate" to a Samoan senior? Perhaps it's a failure of the enlisted ranks to mirror the officer corp? I get the point, but then again, I'm not sure I do. But it's one of those topics that will not be answered.</p>
<p>usnahopeful.
In order to maintain consistency in your beliefs, would you extend that same logic to athletes, legacies, prior enlisted, and all others who receive "preferences" based on who they knew or from what family they come? That is, should others, who have no connection to the Academy or do not further its athletic mission but are otherwise "more qualified" for admission--whatever that means--be denied admission simply to make room for one who does have a connection?</p>
<p>In your opinion, should admission come down to a simple score on a standardized test?<br>
If not, how do you determine that a non-minority candidate--who was turned down--is "better qualified" than a minority candidate who was admitted?</p>
<p>This is an age-old discussion for which there is no simple answer. Marmadillo, however, seems to have an issue with the Navy trying to affirmatively increase the ranks of minority officers. I am trying to understand his/her logic.</p>
<p>Last time I checked, there wasn't a legacy box, I openly admit that since it didn't pertain to us I might have overlooked...just b/c you are a legacy doesn't mean you can get a pres. </p>
<p>Do I believe that the most qual candidate should get the slot b4 the one with connections...YES</p>
<p>The SA is to educate future military leaders, not to win football games. Do you believe the foundation of the academies was created for anything else than to serve in the military?</p>
<p>Should it come down to a simple score on an SAT...NO! The SA has a good selection process by using the theory of the candidate as a whole which includes CFA, medically, scholastic and an outside source (BGO/ALO/MALO) that has an understanding of the academies needs.</p>
<p>BTW I thought the case that the Supreme Court regarding UMich stated affirmative action cannot give points for race in determination of selection</p>
<p>Bullet: You are correct that the U. Mich. system of awarding 20 "admissions points" to minorities in undergraduate admissions was overturned by the Supreme Court. However, the U. Mich. law school was allowed to consider minority status as part of their admissions process.</p>
<p>CNN.com</a> - Narrow use of affirmative action preserved in college admissions - Dec. 25, 2003</p>
<p>All I'm saying is that everyone should be on equal footing in the admissions process, regardless if they are white, a minority, or "well-connected". I am not sure how exactly to determine if a candidate is "more qualified" than another, but the admissions board does, and whoever they find to be more qualified should get an admission before someone they deem less qualified.<br>
If the admissions board goes and looks at candidates' admission packets and, using the "whole person" concept, determines who is the best, shouldn't the top candidates get admission, regardless of race or "connections?" How would you like it if someone with a lower GPA, lower ACT score, and fewer extracurricular activities than you was admitted instead of you just to meet a minority requirement?
I'm sure the Navy can stand for its sports to suffer a little bit if it means having a better officer corps. </p>
<p>In short, no one should get a preference. Even if the athletes have a different "preferred" method of getting in, every athlete, regardless of ethnicity, should have equal access to that method. And as far as legacies, it is absolutely unjust to prefer someone for admission because of whose son they are.</p>
<p>There are minimum requirements to attend the SA. If you meet these requirements, you are eligible to attend. That means that in theory, a person with a 1600 SAT is no different than a person with a 1400 SAT. The key to any admission is being qualified, getting the nomination, followed by the appointment. There will be people attending who had a lower GPA or a lower SAT or fewer varsity letters, or fewer ECs, but they are qualified and meet the minimum standards. That is the bottom line. It is objective, but this is the system and it has worked well. Your entire career in the military will be based on an objective evaluation of your performance, via Fitness Reports. These objective reports are submitted by your Commanding Officer. Your selection to various service schools, assignments and promotions will be based on these evaluations. Everyone will have a different set of these evaluations written by different people which will be further reviewed by selection boards who will make the determinations of who is to attend an advance school, be selected for a Department Head, XO or CO tour, and who will be promoted. It is all objective, but it is fair. Will there be requirements to mirror the whole Navy? Yes. Is it necessary? Yes. This is the Navy you are choosing to be a part of, and it is the best Navy in the world.</p>