<p>I'm sure that MOST of the people that apply to the top tier schools such as HYPSM are extremely qualified, but do you think some people apply just for the sake of applying, even if they really don't have a chance? Do you think that the 22,000 people that apply to Princeton or Harvard are all equally qualified? I'm trying to get a feel of my chances, and am just wondering if that 7 or 8 percent acceptance rate is really that accurate when taking things like this into account..</p>
<p>This is just off the top of my head so it might not be 100% accurate but I believe the number is that at least 80% of applicants are qualified.</p>
<p>From discussions that have been posted here, it seems that that number includes probably ALL of the top 10% and 2000+ SAT applicants, as well as athletic recruits, developmental cases, URM, and other interesting applicants.</p>
<p>The other, highly quoted statement you can reference is the idea that Harvard (or Yale or Princeton, etc) could drop their entire accepted applicants and still maintain the SAME selectivity and quality of their respective incoming classes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Absolutely; probably the majority.</p>
<p>I imagine that few truly unqualified applicants apply, but I imagine that many underqualified applicants do. This includes valedictorians from shoddy publics with low SAT scores, the classically well-rounded jock, the student with almost no extracurriculars, etc. Kids that are bright and likely to be successful in their own community but not movers and shakers or academic superstars. </p>
<p>From what I’ve seen at my school, people just don’t have a concept of what it takes to get into these schools. There’s not a big value put on SAT scores but on classroom success, which might be the healthier attitude but certainly not the one attitude that HYPSM takes. Typically, it’s the kids with slightly lower ranks but more compelling accomplishments and scores that get into top schools from my school–and yet people say “Well, he must have got in on luck. I think our valedictorian will get into an Ivy.” Strange.</p>
<p>I’ve seen the statistic floating around these boards… something like 20% or 25% of applicants at top tier schools like HYPS are considered under-qualified with 0% chance.</p>
<p>A good number of people do</p>
<p>If I were guesstimate, probably about 20% of applicants have no shot because they are severly lacking in one major category (i.e. gpa, test scores, Ec’s). I know some people who just apply just becuase its an Ivy. Someone from a school, who was like rank 2, with an 1800 SAT score and whose only EC was wrestling, applied just cause its “Harvard.” (@glassesarechic, my school is one of those shoddy publics, lol). But it’s still really hard to get into these top schools.</p>
<p>"I’m trying to get a feel of my chances, and am just wondering if that 7 or 8 percent acceptance rate is really that accurate when taking things like this into account… "
The reality is if you are NOT an athletic recruit, developmental admit, URM, or legacy, but ARE a top student with outstanding stats[ NMF type SAT’s at a minimum] your real chances at schools like HYPS are closer to 3-4% -then divide THAT figure by 1/2 [ 50% male 50% female] and you get a real idea of the chances for an unhooked male or female applicant.</p>
<p>I think many, perhaps even a majority of applicants, think they are fully qualifed but are actually only marginally qualified, such as:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>those with good to great stats but unremarkable ECs,</p></li>
<li><p>those that think being within the mid 50% of scores and barely in the top 10% of their HS class is good enough,</p></li>
<li><p>those that think a URM or legacy boost will do more than it really will,</p></li>
<li><p>those who naively believe their “killer essay” will close the deal.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>While these are for the most part strong applicants, most will be disappointed, and I wouldn’t describe them as “extremely qualified” for HYPSM.</p>
<p>Just to clarify, by saying they’re not qualified, I don’t mean they aren’t intellectually qualified to handle the work at these colleges, just that they aren’t viable candidates for admission given the competitive pool of applicants.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, there were 26,247 applicants for Princeton’s class of 2014, and I believe Harvard had over 30,000. So in that sense the odds are even longer than you thought. . . </p>
<p>But Princeton provides a helpful breakdown on its admission rates by GPA range and by SAT range.</p>
<p>Unweighted GPA / % accepted
4.0 / 14.8%
3.9-3.99 / 9.5%
3.8-3.89 / 6.2%
3.7-3.79 / 5.4%
3.6-3.69 / 4.2%
3.5-3.59 / 4.2%
< 3.5 / 2.0%</p>
<p>SAT / % accepted
2300-2400 / 22.4%
2100-2290 / 9.4%
1900-2090 / 4.6%
1700-1890 / 1.9%
1500-1690 / 0.5%
below 1500 / 0%</p>
<p>Now they don’t tell us how many applicants they get at any of these levels, but the fact that they’re admitting any at the lower ends of the GPA and SAT scales—albeit in low percentages–suggests there are non-trivial numbers of applicants at those levels. And I would further surmise from the data that if your SATs are in the 2300-2400 range and your unweighted GPA is at 4.0, your chances are considerably better than Princeton’s overall 7 or 8% admit rate would suggest. (I assume a lot of the 4.0 GPAs who aren’t admitted have lower SAT scores, and vice versa). But the odds drop off pretty sharply from there. </p>
<p>Keep in mind, though, that “hooked” applicants—legacies, URMs, recruited athletes—are probably spread throughout these statistical categories at all levels, so that, for example, if you’re a hooked applicant with a 4.0 and 2300+ SATs, your chances of admission may be 40%, while if you’re unhooked and at the same GPA and SAT levels your chances may drop well below 20%. I would just assume the few who are admitted with very low (for Princeton) GPAs and/or SATs are hooked, but it’s likely many hooked applicants have much stronger stats, too.</p>
<p>The number I’ve seen is about 2/3 to 3/4 of applicants are qualified to be admitted, take advantage of the HYP resources, contribute to the community, and graduate.</p>
<p>that being said, the admissions offices then need to swim through this mass to craft the pool of admitted students. Just because one is qualified enough to complete four years of coursework doesn’t mean that he/she can be a useful component in the ideal entering class. Everyone will tell you that top college admissions is an art, not a science.</p>
<p>Let me clear this up – by mentioning qualified applicants, are you [guys] making reference only to academic aspects (SAT, GPA, etc.)?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This has been my experience too. The people I know who got rejected from Columbia ED this year had bad test scores and highly unrealistic expectations. They had good grades, but not the scores to match.</p>
<p>There are also definitely a lot of people who apply to HYP just for the sake of it. I knew a guy last year who applied to Harvard just because he’d get to brag about getting into Harvard if he got in. He had no real desire to go there. What a waste of money and time (for him and the admissions office). I wouldn’t say that he had no chance though, because he is attending a top 25 school right now.</p>
<p>
This, except that this probably understates the power of the hook. The 4.0, 2300+ recruited athlete’s chances are nearly 100%, because she has an influential advocate championing her cause.</p>
<p>^Agreed, sherpa. And the URM legacy recruited athlete who the football coach wants as his next QB has probably close to a 100% chance even if he’s just, say, 3.6 and 2100. I’m not sure legacy is as strong a hook as the others, though. URMs and recruited athletes with 4.0 and 2300+ are probably close to 100%; not so sure that’s true with legacies. There are a lot of legacies, and a lot who don’t get in.</p>
<p>From what I’ve seen on this website, it seems like most are academically qualified.</p>
<p>From what I’ve seen at my high school, it seems like most are not academically qualified (though one was sports-qualified).</p>
<p>The former is a self-selecting group, the latter is a group of students at a public school in Florida, which is sub-par in education. So I wouldn’t call either an accurate assessment.</p>
<p>Even the URMs and legacies don’t get in, though. Like someone said, hooks can only help you so much. As seen on here, even a 2400 won’t always get you in (see any of the Ivy 2014 results threads). Besides, even if there was something that did get you into HYPSM, it would have been on CC ages ago.</p>