<p>I posted this in the Harvard section as well, but I think more people here would have experience with a variety of different schools so I thought I'd ask here as well. </p>
<p>Basically, I've been looking at the forums a bit and I've noticed that certain top colleges place more emphasis on certain parts of applicants. For example, Yale is rumored to favor the more "artsy" and "quirky" applicants, while Stanford likes the "young entrepreneur" vibe. Princeton is supposedly more "numbers" inclined and accepts more high scoring/high GPA applicants (with slightly weaker ECs) than its peers. </p>
<p>What are your thoughts about these "stereotypes"? Do you think it's true? If so, in your opinion, what quality does Harvard (and other top schools) appreciate the most?</p>
<p>(Before someone bites my head off, I know that there's a general consensus that diversity matters, and that each school is looking for a wide range of people. Nevertheless, I also understand that each school tends to have its own distinct culture, and sometimes these factors may play a role in the admissions officers' decisions.)</p>
<p>There are a few threads that covered this topic before. Search “college preferences” or something similar on CC.</p>
<p>But I think the general concensus can be summarized as this:</p>
<p>Harvard - ECs
Yale - artistic
Princeton - SAT, “numbers” like you mentioned
Stanford - more lenient than most schools on SAT scores and numbers. Will take URM and social background more into consideration
MIT - SAT, numbers (math and science obviously)
Cornell - class rank
Penn - class rank, legacy, leadership (Wharton - business ECs)</p>
<p>I think the special emphasis that colleges look for in applicants is a great way to tell the atmosphere of the school.</p>
<p>For exmaple, MIT and Caltech would be a very math/science-driven school, while Wharton (at Penn) would have a very preprofessional atmosphmere because it is a business school.</p>
<p>The particulars and tastes of an individual college probably helps select applicants that would “fit” at that school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I disagree with this. From what I’ve seen, MIT puts a lot of emphasis on the “soft factors”, such as essays, recs, and EC’s.</p>
<p>Your activities and grades are constant, so the only area that you can actually affect is your essay. Furthermore, these slight differences aren’t going to be very relevant in the long run.</p>
<p>These stereotypes don’t make any sense. Every school looks for well rounded applicants, and it definetley does not come down to school preferences.</p>
<p>^They want well-rounded class.</p>
<p>Wow, this is great news.
I have a chance for Cornell, Ptown, and Harvard, then.</p>
<p>Interesting analysis, AgentTwiddle.</p>
<p>These are, of course, oversimplifications but provide interesting insights nonetheless.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Like henrymoore said, schools are looking to build a well-rounded class. These means you don’t have to be superhuman, but you should look to develop one or a few specific talents/interests.</p>
<p>This thread is interesting. Look at the results threads. Search 2400.</p>
<p>Princeton and Stanford value test scores.
Yale and MIT do not.
Harvard seems neutral.</p>
<p>Early Action preferences are a little different though, with Yale and Stanford prioritizing URMs and athletes.</p>
<p>Personality-wise, I’d say Stanford likes more outgoing/daring people.
Sure Harvard values ECs, but don’t they all? ;)</p>