Real talk,
Is a national award or a super prestigious internship necessary to be competitive for the tip top schools? I’m obviously talking ivies as well as Stanford, Duke, even schools like Pomona and Vandy. It seems like everyone is has some nationally ranked talent.
Thoughts??
There is no one thing or things you “need” for admission to a top school.
I get that but it seems on results threads that every accepted student has won some national award or some event where they received national recognition (like big deals- not nmsf) … I’m just curious if the stakes have been risen to that height @happy1
I know people who have been accepted to top schools without national awards.
Personally, I don’t think that any of us should care what it takes to get into a top 10 school. Find a few schools that are not top-20 and that are a good fit for you. If you want to apply to a top 10 school then apply, but don’t count on it for anything and don’t focus on it.
…And yes, I also know people who got into top schools without awards. Whether they should have gone to the top-10 schools is an entire different question, and varies from case to case.
@DadTwoGirls got it! I was just curious. Personally I dream of Stanford but ik it’s a long shot and pretty hopeless but I posted this more out curiosity to gain opinions than personal evaluation. Thanks for the response!
Not at all. That wouldn’t be a “holistic” student body. I have friends at Stanford and Pomona without any national rewards (or regional or whatever). Heck, I’m at Duke and I can’t think of too many with national awards. But I guess it also depends on how you define a “national award.” Something like National Merit is probably more common, but not something even the majority has. Harder awards, as I’m sure you can imagine, aren’t the norm.
DD got into JHU, CMU, and Northwestern, no national awards, just straight As in tough classes, SATs, good essay and modest ECs. Didn’t get into Stanford or MIT, but good enough 
@Proteus77 congrats! That’s impressive! Its just that I have viewed a few top schools results threads and it seemed like every kid had some “national poetry contest winner” or “international robotics champs”. Do you think results threads on cc are accurately represent the level of achievement of the top kids, or do you think it’s more the cc crowd that happen to be insanely successful?
No national award required. Ranked talent of some sort is definitely common though (and generally at a higher level). I went to Stanford without any major national awards and have many peers in a similar situation. However, everyone seems to have a distinguishing factor that would compel adcoms to admit them.
@Lagging curious, what was ur distinguishing factor? I feel as tho I personally have one but I have nothing really to prove it in terms of awards.
My ECs - I had no research experience, fancy internships or anything of that sort. My grades/scores were fine but nothing that outstanding. My application reflected a few things I’m passionate about through my involvement outside of class, recommendations and essays.
If ECs are your thing, in general it seems to be important to be at a “recruitable” level. E.g. I’d recommend asking yourself: “If my EC was a varsity sport, would I be recruited?” My EC was not a sport, but it seems to be a good threshold to use when considering the influence of ECs.
I have zero national award(unless National AP Scholar counts), no sport, no music, and I’m Asian. Still got into Dartmouth, Williams, and a few other schools.
@williams2021 damn why do you think you got in?
@Harpguy2022 I think my ECs and essays show that I am a good fit for a liberal arts education. You can see my stats in my CC comment section.
State awards are much more typical as in - won state forensics tournament, or state tennis champion, etc… It’s even better if you have more than one.
Not all “national awards” are created equal