<p>I thought the original post was incredibly sad - and demonstrates the type of person who is most likely to not get into HYP or other top schools:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>takes limited data from CC (most applicants don’t post here) and makes a conclusion about the type of student that can be attracted to this school.</p></li>
<li><p>ignores a number of threads that say exactly the opposite.</p></li>
<li><p>ignores the data that many top students get into few or none of the top schools for a variety of reasons.</p></li>
<li><p>ignores the fact that discussion boards (any discussion board) breeds a certain pathology and obsession about top schools and perceived qualifications.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Adcoms aren’t stupid. They’re pretty good at identifying the students who are coached and/or have tutors. </p>
<p>It’s easy to dismiss an admissions decision as predicated on some predetermined criteria. But it’s not. It’s more art than science - with a number of students you’ve never met getting the “golden” admissions ticket soley for being normal, well-rounded and academically qualified. But someone, somewhere will try to attach a “tag” to them to explain why they, themselves were not given the same opportunity (jock, minority, urban, foreign, left-handed, …whatever).</p>
<p>I’ve been interviewing for more than 3 decades and I’ve recommended some students who didn’t fit the profile and suggested a “not-admit” to some who had stellar credentials on “the surface.” Adcoms look for passion, ability, and unique experiences. They look at overcoming an adversity, facing a challenge as well as academic prowess and test scores.</p>
<p>A student who designed robots from birth might be turned down at MIT while a student who loves science but also loves accapella choir might be chosen.</p>
<p>There is no set criterian. Only “fit” for the student body and a gut attempt to create a student body that has broad representation of many interests. And trust me - all institutions love the idea of molding potential. I recently heard a story about an applicant at a major school that admissions struggled over. After much soul searching, they took the risk. The student went on to be Valedictorian his senior year.</p>
<p>So limited data from a discussion board or from internet rating pages does not a definitive conclusion make. Sorry - I know many are searching for answers for why they didn’t fit. In a different year, the results might have been different since it changes with the individual mix of applicants each year. </p>
<p>But I’ll suggest something else - it is fair to say that someone who has worked towards a specific goal for many years (getting into Harvard, Yale, etc.) - who knows the personality of the school and their requirements and doesn’t wait until 11th grade to start their planning - is very likely to get admitted. Planning, preparation, and passion for a specific school often comes through on the application. </p>
<p>I love asking “Why MIT” in an interview. Because more often than not I’ll get a generic answer like “I like science” and “It’s a top school.” It’s the ones that have done their homework and then pursued courses and EC’s that fit the profile of the Institute that get my attention - and the Institute’s. (hint - if you think it’s limited to just math and science geeks you’re missing the big – and obvious – picture).</p>
<p>A lot of ordinary students DO matriculate. And a lot of extraordinary students do not. It’s just the way it is.</p>