<p>Okay, to the OP. Like it or not, you'll have to suck it up and do some ECs. If you dont feel like volunteering and its ilk (which is perfectly OK-colleges dont really love that type of applicant) you should try tutoring. You could tutor for money or for free- either way you'll be introducing others to learning and that's a valuable EC. Also, pick one subject you're truly passionate about- considering you are smart and motivated individual, engage in some competitions and other stuff. You could even start a business (your coldness+cynism really helps in the business department) However, there is virtually no way you'd get in to these colleges without doing some truly engaging ECs. Good luck!!</p>
<p>Actually - you know what, I have a friend who just had really good grades and test scores, and had virtually NO ECs (he played sports, but never achieved anything). He has little trouble getting into places that accepted ~30 percent and ~20 percent with legacy action.</p>
<p>^^
It doesnt matter if you "achieve anything" as long as you're not being recruited. If you play the sport long enough and have gotten to varsity level, that shows that you don't spend all your time studying. Also, I doubt your "friend" had "virtually no ECs". Which college is this anyway that he breezed through with legacy action?</p>
<p>
[quote]
nonethnic,
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What is nonethnic?</p>
<p>Lol, Stanford? There is no way you'd get into Stanford with no EC's. Aim lower.</p>
<p>haha ZERO chance at stanford with no Ecs, no leadership, no life. Stanford rejects 2400s and people who get accepted to Harvard.</p>
<p>iin77, I am the father of a boy who felt like you. So, I told him in freshman year of HS, be authentic, true to yourself and to hell with the world of college admissions. If you change yourself to get into a brand name college, change in abhorrent untrue ways, then you would have lost yourself and negated the reason for college which is exploration. Stop pleasing others.</p>
<p>My son eventually played varsity tennis but got into Columbia, Brown, etc on sheer strength of curriculum and SAT (2350, 5s on 5 APs taken by jr year, 6 APs to go senior year, expecting 5s) took toughest curriculum taken by any student in the history of his school. Unfortunately, he was a bit of a grade grubber, less learning for learning's sake than I would like. But all kids at this age are just like that, grade grubbing, etc. Grade grubbing is not bad, it sets up a reinforcement schedule that becomes autonomous of reward eventually and is then called intrinsic motivation. All intrinsic motivation begins with extrinsic motivation. </p>
<p>So, with no Ecs other than tennis, no community service, no clubs, no ECS period , he made it. So will you. If not, go somewhere that values you, try U of Chicago, St. John's, Reed, you will get a better education than at all the pretentious Ivy League places.</p>
<p>^^^Eh...maybe. I also had relatively few extras, and very strong (although not <em>quite</em> as strong as your son) academic credentials, and I did get waitlisted at Brown and Columbia. So...are there places that will take someone with few ecs and lots of other stuff going for them? Sure, absolutely, even very very selective schools (I would imagine that had I applied to some schools between Brown's and Carleton/Wellesley's selectivity I could have been accepted, but I didn't, so I don't know that), but can you walk on in? No, and you still have to show some signs of extracurricular life.</p>
<p>Also, no offense ramaswami, but not all kids are grade grubbers, nor do they need to do that to have motivation.</p>
<p>Advantageous, of course, not all kids are, just wanted to say that it is a common phenomenon at that age and of course it is not the necessary condition for motivation. You are also right in that for getting into a selective college ECs are necessary, that someone getting in without is rare and I wouldn't advise someone to take that risk if he/she wants an Ivy. Perhaps the Ivies' reasoning is that even if kids are faking it, in some the very doing of these activities will encourage them to continue doing. Also they may be a surrogate for energy and drive and initiative and perhaps a way to show that one is not a depressed scholar!</p>
<p>I agree that you shouldn't be involved in ec's just to get into college. However, the OP seems to be the kind of person nobody wants to be around. He seems to have few friends, no life, and isn't interested in anything. He shows no compassion, and he claims to love learning for learning's sake, yet later states that he hates several subjects. Sure, you can probably get into several good colleges with your attitude, but I feel that you will get almost nothing out of the college experiance. College is as much about interacting with new people and trying new things as it is going to class. Also, once you graduate college then what will you do? You have no interests, a terrible attitude, and I'm guessing few social skills. When applying for jobs these negative qualities will shine through. Furthermore, how can you claim that all poor people deserve to be poor? Many of them don't ahve the advantages you have had. Overall, frankly, you seem like a total dick.</p>
<p>Patsandheels, why are you calling me a total dick? Or do you mean the OP? I agree with your comments re OP but I think that gentleman is exaggerating his misanthropic tendencies for effect. I am not sure he is all that extreme as a person.</p>
<p>i've a friend who got into stanford with little to no ECs. he wrote a stellar, stellar essay that was personally commented on by the admissions head person (i don't know if that's the exception or the norm), who specifically creditted my friend for a stellar essay. </p>
<p>on top of that.. great grades and great recs. but very little ECs.</p>
<p>I was referring to the OP</p>
<p>The OP is also took pride in that fact he never reads books...</p>
<p>Hate to open Pandora's Box by bumping up this thread, but I couldn't resist. :)</p>
<p>iin...although I agree with you in that I'd rather allocate most of my time to study than EC's (and I do), I do see the benefits of having a job, playing a sport, having a hobby, joining a club, and maybe wheeling old folks around. So, I play golf, volunteer a little, have a job, etc.</p>
<p>If you are going to be so extreme in your opinion, you might as well go all-out on your end...you have nothing to lose. </p>
<p>MY ADVICE:</p>
<p>TOTALLY ignore ALL EC's, get a 4.0/2400 by studying your brains out, and while you're at it, write your essay on how you think altruism is overrated. Then, apply to all the ivies, Stanford, Chicago, Duke, etc. and SEE WHAT HAPPENS. Maybe you'll stand out and they'll take you in for being a "visionary" or something like that.</p>
<p>FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HEART, YOU HAVE A BETTER CHANCE AT MAKING THESE SCHOOLS BY DOING THE ABOVE THAN BY HALFHEARTEDLY DABBLING IN EC's AND GOING THRU THE MOTIONS.</p>
<p>When Princeton rejects *four out of five * valedictorians every year, working to only be on top of one's class is hardly the best game plan.</p>
<p>OP: </p>
<p>I want you to notice that everything I am posting on this site is done under my real name. Now...what if all of your post were written under your real name? Do you think that the competetive colleges that you aspire to attend would want to admit you as you've presented yourself on this site? You are a self admitted cynic and misanthrope, two qualities which will be much more detrimental to your college admissions experience than your lack of extra-curricular activities. </p>
<p>When I was a junior, I attended a conference in which a Harvard Admissions Officer talked about what it would take to gain admission to his institution. In my mind were a list of things I thought that he would be looking for:</p>
<p>4.0
34+ ACT
Mountain of EC's
ect
ect ect</p>
<p>What he said, however, is that all competetive colleges (though they of course look at the above mentioned aspects of an application) are "looking for someone you would want to have dinner with, have a conversation with." So I ask you this: would you want to have dinner with yourself? </p>
<p>Your critics are correct in telling you that the college experience is about much more than academics. I am excited to attend Duke University next year not just because of its illustrious academic rapport, but because of the fun such an experience will bring me.</p>
<p>Although your more vocal critics, like citygirlsmom, are just as unfriendly as you have portrayed yourself (and yes citygirlsmom, you are a MOST unfriendly person--I have seen your posts on multiple forums), I would hope that you would be able to rise above it. Sinking down to their level by responding vitriolically does nothing to help your case. </p>
<p>Here is my advice to you:</p>
<p>Apply to a small liberal arts college with a strong focus on academics. You will get in, and you will love it. The big name colleges will not offer you what you want out of a college experience (and I feel that you only want to attend because of the "academic pedigree" that they can offer you.) Your posts consistenly complain about teachers who dont care (beleive me, I feel you on this one): professors at small liberal arts colleges can offer you an intimate and caring environment. Additionally, I think that a small community of scholars like yourself would offer you an oppurtunity to come out of your shell a little bit, once surrounded by persons you consider to be more "on your level." </p>
<p>If however, you think I'm just another crack-pot, and you still insist on applying to the top echelon...then I suggest you get cracking with extracurriculars. I would like to reinforce this with some information about myself (though I will not post a complete resume for the purpose of flaunting ego, like many on this site are prone to do):</p>
<p>ACT: 35
GPA: 3.9
4 APs so far, 3 5s, 1 4
HEAVILY HEAVILY involved in extra-curriculars (that I enjoy, btw)
(i.e.--State Champ debater, Founder of a Humanitarian Releif Society, multiple varsity sports, multiple volunteer activities)</p>
<p>Now...considering the typical formula, I should not have had much trouble getting into my choice of schools, however, I was wait-listed at the University of Chicago. This tells me that even with all I have to offer, colleges can still find fault. My advice to you would be to not let them find any fault that you can prevent, because the problems you cannot prevent will be adeptly discovered. If you know up front that colleges want extracurriculars, then get involved if you want to be admitted. </p>
<p>I know that you are diametrically opposed to conformity...but guess what--read some Michel Foucault, we live in a completely normalized society anyways and there is really no escape...so your boycott of ECs wont really do anything for you or society in this regard. Make no mistake, you are not making a statement, you are just making an ass of yourself. If you really want something, then go through the motions and get it...otherwise, stop lamenting.</p>
<p>so which college did OP get into?</p>
<p>I gotta say, I’m pretty much in the position the OP was in almost 4 years ago. I have like 3 EC’s, and they aren’t very solid either. But I do have decent grades, a 3.88 UW GPA, honors and AP classes, though I’m taking the SAT in June.</p>
<p>I’m not applying to any Ivys, just state schools, but even then, I’m worried I won’t get in, because I’m not a well rounded kid. I do care about things, I just never took initiative to do something.</p>
<p>Try UK colleges. If you’re as smart as you say, you should have no problems in top UK schools, even Oxbridge, which are just as well regarded internationally as HYP. And from what I’ve heard, they actually care more about your standardized test scores (AP, SAT, IB etc.) than grades and I’m not sure extra curriculars matter at all. Just ace their entrance exams for the course of study you want. Their interviews should appeal to you too. Say, you’re a law applicant. They’ll ask you about hypothetical law cases (you don’t need background knowledge) and they just want to know that you can think. Interviews are actually the scariest part of admissions because they only want the cream of the crop (of critical thinkers), especially true at Oxford or Cambridge. Their UCAS application is straight forward and hassle free, and tuition is low compared to the US. The caveat? If you don’t like your chosen concentration you’d have to reapply. You’re not in the “college”. You’re in the “finance course” and if you decide to do philosophy you’d have to drop out and start the application process again. And there is no “undecided”.</p>