<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. The tremendous sweep of extracurricular activities at Harvard should give those mystified by the rejection of a math star some inkling of what the college is after.</p>
<p>If you are in the humanities or social sciences (2/3 of the Harvard student body), what is the likelihood of your participating in Intel or the Olympiads?</p>
<p>There are, however, students who are extremely good at math and sciences who are not eager to take part in competitions. I’m not talking about 800 scorers. One of S’s friends was able to take Math 25 as a high school senior. For those who do not know, Math 25 is only one level below the infamous Math 55. This allowed him to begin taking grad level classes in his freshman year. I don’t believe I saw his name in national or international competitions. But I’m sure that his performance in Math 25 must have impressed the adcom!</p>
<p>Well look at it this way, most of those IMO/BO/PhO and USAMO/BO/PhO qualifiers are bookworms that may not contribute as much to a school as other, more well rounded students. I mean seriously, are there any Olympiad qualifiers that are class presidents or recruitable athletes? How many truly excel at things other than academics?</p>
<p>
Well, for one, a school would highly benefit from having a large quantity of Nobel laureates and Fields Medal recipients, no? And these are the guys that do it.
Next to none, but there are prestigious accolades with focus on humanities as well, albeit less quantifiable.
Wow; that is impressive. But to be fair, there is a significant difference between the wide range advanced topics offered in Math 25 and the significant depth into high school-level topics offered in math competitions. Nevertheless, I’m starting to understand that these accolades probably aren’t as important for college admissions as I initially perceived them as being.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wait, hold up for a second, why don’t you just search for a certain DataBox’s stats, it will definitely relieve you of your ignorance 
And I’m sure that he isn’t the only Olympiad qualifier like that, there must be at least half a dozen in every graduating class.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Naw…Monstor, your original thoughts were correct, Olympiad qualifications are a big deal at colleges. I have several friends who have made the USAMO and all of them now attend one of Stanford, Harvard, Caltech, MIT, Princeton, and Yale. So it definitely does help. But that definitely doesn’t mean that all of them will be able to run the table.</p>
<p>My son is a IPhO medalist (not USA team) and an Olympic trial level swimmer.</p>
<p>Monstor:</p>
<p>You don’t know enough about Math 25 to decide how much of a difference there is between it and the knowledge required to excel at math competitions. An IMO winner would not, ipso facto, qualify for grad level courses right away. Someone who’s excelled at Math 25 would–as did that young man.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with this.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Pointing out that monstor and WhartonMaster are saying exactly the same (accurate) thing, in different words. Credentials like this are very impressive, but even the top credentials in and of themselves don’t create an absolute entitlement to admission anywhere.</p>
<p>Being a medallist from International Olympiads is a big booster,
but doesn’t mean almost guaranted to top schools like HYPSM,
especially Harvard, whether he/she is an American or international student,
as Harvard doesn’t discriminate international students.</p>
<p>3 Canadian guys, all of them were gold, silver, bronze of IMO, ICHO, IPHO and
mostly at least two times medallist, but all of them were rejected from Harvard.
and all chose MIT. Probabaly the reason why all were rejected from Harvard
was lacking ECs, volunteering, good essays, etc. </p>
<p>Based on my son’s experience, my guess is that they couldn’t have time
to do other ECs, volunteering, as much as they wanted, as they have to
prepare for the international test.
My son used to spend a whole day just to solve one chemistry problem
w/o doing one single thing.</p>
<p>It looks Harvard wants a kind of well-rounded person,
even though he/she is also a super star in academics.
Being a medallist might not be interpretted as “So 200-300 students are admitted solely on academic achievement”, unless he/she is a genious like a kind of nobel laureate.</p>
<p>My son was a gold medallist of ICHO in his junior and also silver medallist of ICHO
in his senior. If he didn’t spend time in a lot of ECs, volunteering, bunch of essay contests, etc., I’m pretty sure he couldn’t get into Harvard. maybe into MIT</p>
<p>And my daughter was not at all big winner in academic contests,
but she did a lot of ECs, volunteering and wrote excellent essays compared to my son.
She was also accepted to Harvard this year.</p>
<p>It might be case by case, but Harvard wants more well-rounded people
compared to other top schools, especially MIT & Caltech based on my 2 kids’ cases.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sorry if I was mistaken. Would you care to enlighten me, who is this DataBox you speak of and where do I find his/her stats?</p>
<p>
Actually JHS is right; my initial thought was that IMO was essentially a token for running the table, and what you said here is how I’m starting to feel about it now.
Just to clarify, that was not my intended meaning. I was saying that they are different forms of math coverage. Obviously a young USAMO student with mostly a pre-calc background would not have the knowledge to do well in Math 25 or grad-level courses; but vice versa, the student that you mentioned might not have the in-depth knowledge of pre-calculus topics that are required to succeed on USAMO-type problems. This particular example brought to mind this article: <a href=“http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Resources/AoPS_R_A_Calculus.php[/url]”>http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Resources/AoPS_R_A_Calculus.php</a> (I know I’m starting to drift off-topic here :))</p>
<p>Monstor:</p>
<p>Colleges are not looking for in-depth knowledge of pre-calc. In order to do well in Math-25, one has to have gone beyond MVCalc and LA. At any rate, I believe this young man did pre-calc in middle school. </p>
<p>The more important point is that academic stardom can be evaluated through different gauges than national or international competitions, even when such competitions are available. Not all students who might do well in competitions choose to enter them. Or else, their parents or teachers have no interest in preparing them for such competitions.To give an example, I know of one school district where participation in the Academic Decathlon is a real class. At my kids’ school, preparing for Acadec was a half hour before class once a week, and often not even that if the teacher in charge of Acadec had other priorities. Guess which school did better on Acadec? In the case of the humanities or social sciences, competitions such as IMO are not even available. It does not mean that academic stars do not exist in these fields. They just have to be identified using different criteria.</p>
<p>okay so here it goes
i am loking for a college or university that has a good translating and interpreting program.
i realy want to work for the United Nations or any other government organization.
i am taking spanish now in highschool…but i need to find a school.
also i want to know what my major should be.
i want to work internationally.
what other majors should i consider,since i want to work internationally.
i will really apreciate any suggestions
i reallly love languages and working internationally and also traveling
THANKS</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Next time try the search tool at the top of the screen…but here you go:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As you can see, his stats completely refute your original claim as he was both a olympiad qualifier and class president…</p>
<p>
I’m just saying that this is what the math competition essentially measures. There is little coverage of subjects at the calculus level and beyond, even on the USAMO.</p>
<p>That is quite true. That is why it is not a good idea to think that only those who compete on USAMO or IMO would qualify for the label of “academic star.” You would be surprised at the number of students who studied calculus in the 9th grade or even before.</p>
<p>I am so removed from math competition land that I didn’t even know that. But all of the math people I know who have gone to Harvard (five in the past five years) have been BC Calc in 9th grade types, and were not involved in math competitions as far as I know. (Some of them did Intel, though.)</p>
<p>I am by no means knocking USAMO or IMO! The problem-solving skills required to do well in such competitions are extremely useful.
I merely wanted to suggest that there are different ways to show unusual excellence in math. And when it comes to the humanities or the social sciences, competitions are not the best way to demonstrate excellence.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>From each year’s crop of US high school students, approximately: </p>
<p>8000 students took the AP Calculus BC exam in 10th grade
600 took the Calculus BC exam in 9th grade or earlier
200-300 continued to assiduously study lots of higher math by 12th grade
15-20 were likely contenders for the US IMO team during high school
6-8 made the IMO team during high school
1-3 made IMO before applying to college, have gold/silver medal
5-10 are likely contenders to ace the Putnam competition in college </p>
<p>The upper level problem solving credential is rare. Being a math scholar, is not nearly as unusual.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>That IS my point. When colleges seek out applicants who will excel in math in college, they have a much larger pool to choose from than just USAMO and IMO medalists. As well, it would be a mistake to think that all students who excel at math are interested in competing or that they attend schools that groom some students for competition. I used the example of Academic Decathlon, but the same can be said for most academic competitions. Take two Math Circles: the Bay-area one and the Boston-area one. The Bay-area one is known as an incubator of math competitors; the Boston-area one was started by the Kaplans who strongly discourage competition. The students who attend each Math Circle reflect the general philosophy of their respective circle.<br>
I believe that, in some ways, the non-competitive spirit of the Boston-area Math Circle encourages risk-taking. This allowed, for example, an 8 year-old to join a group of 13 to 18 year olds without fear of being shown up (she took her A-levels at the age of 10).</p>