<p>From what you know about Princeton, is the following list correct? It sounds more like what a college would like to think of its admissions rather than how one would truly decide.</p>
<p>Very important admission factors:</p>
<pre><code>* Character/Personal Qualities
* Recommendations
* Rigor of secondary school record
* Talent/Ability
</code></pre>
<p>That does sound right... Obviously, this doesn't mean that a student with crappy ECs will automatically be rejected. You can compensate for that with other things, like extensive volunteer work, or extemely high test scores, etc.</p>
<p>I think this is a very touchy-feely kind thing. Standardized test scores are only considered? You can be THE most amazing person in this country in terms of personality and talent and character and there is no way you are getting into Princeton with a 1500 out of 2400. I think that most colleges try to make their admissions more fair than they actually are, because really? Choosing a class of ~2000 from 20,000 applicants is not fair no matter how you do it. I read an interview with a Princeton admissions counselor a few years back and he said that if he went through those 20,000 applicants he could "sculpt" 5 or 6 "amazing classes" from the same applicants.</p>
<p>Yeah...I always laugh when I hear schools (especially UChicago) saying they place very little emphasis on standardized test scores or GPA, yet their midrange is 700 to some ungodly high number. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>I actually think by categorizing standardized tests scores as considered, they mean "so long as they are in range." For example, I think they are trying to convey that an 800 has not much more influence than a 700, and that a mere 100 point advantage on a standardized test is not enough to admit one student over another. By categorizing recommendations and personality as the most important factors, I think they mean that an essay or a teacher rec. is substantial enough to make a decision between two applicants. Do you get what I mean?</p>
<p>Of course, but some schools I have spoken with try to act like they look at test scores/GPA last, as if they aren't the biggest factors of an application. That's bull: you typically must first be great academically and then have the character as well, not the other way around.</p>
<p>They also said something completely different on that big, general pdf document on their website...I looked at it five minutes ago and can't think of its name...</p>
<p>That's true. There aren't really any kind of laws mandating how any school selects its applicants because it would be difficult to prove discrimination based on any one factor (take Jian Li's case, for example). Therefore, a school can (and usually does) admit exactly who they want in any way that they want. If Princeton decided this year to admit people who were violin players and scored between 2000-2200 on their SAT, they could probably fill up a good portion of the class of 2011 with those people and nobody could do anything about it. </p>
<p>I just dislike that all the CB literature and sites like Princeton Review and such try to make the admissions process seem so just...as if if you do A B C you will probably be admitted...when in actuality you can only do so much and then hope for the best.</p>
<p>Yeah, I agree the basic rules of Princeton Review and such don't really apply to Princeton. Ordinarily, schools need to be somewhat honest about what kind of students they admit as a sort of advertisement, but Princeton gets the pool of applicants desired even if they were to put blood type as their only "very important" factor (NOTE: If anyone knows if it to be a factor, please contact me. I understand a full marrow transplant could take me right up through January).</p>