<p>I read a bunch of threads on here by people whining about their life. they complain how they have stellar SAT scores but they're not going to get into the top colleges because they don't do a bunch of the "stupid" extracurriculars that some kids do. i even read one kid write them as "inane bs extracurriculars"</p>
<p>why are so many of the kids on here lazy smart kids? </p>
<p>do any of you realize that there are kids out there who devote incredible amounts of time to extracurriculars because they really do care about other causes in the world or locally, or artistically, or even athletically?</p>
<p>maybe because high school is so much more than your SAT score. </p>
<p>why do you want so much weight on your SAT score?</p>
<p>i pulled off an SAT score in the 2200s, and I'm very happy with it. but personally, I want to get into a college not based on my SAT scores, but on my transcripts and my extracurricular work. </p>
<p>sorry for ranting a bit, but it just ticked me off when i read someone put "bs extracurriculars"</p>
<p>"do any of you realize that there are kids out there who devote incredible amounts of time to extracurriculars because they really do care about other causes in the world or locally, or artistically, or even athletically?"</p>
<p>Not to sound arrogant, but do you realize there are also a lot of kids who'll half-ass a bunch of ECs for the sake of looking more impressive to colleges, or worse, outright LIE about ECs? We can't generalize this.</p>
<p>well that's another whole issue. that's integrity. and the kids who are involved in the worthwhile extracurriculars have something to prove it. many times counselors or teachers will mention it in their letters.</p>
<p>I wish college admissions was based most off the SAT, that would be easy. Work really hard studying for a week, a few weeks, a month, or a few months instead of the four years I have to suffer through compulsory education.</p>
<p>^yeah exactly. or i wish they really super cared about AP's or really super cared about GPA or class rank....basically anything far easier to do well in if you try hard enough than something ambiguous and subjective like essays or EC's.</p>
<p>grades/test scores clearly measure how well you can do in an academic setting and how much you are able to achieve.</p>
<p>i feel like often EC's measure how resourceful or maniupaltive you can be, or about who has better connections or resources already available to them....well at least in my school where ppl will stab each other in the back for "leadership" positions and pursue stuff they don't give a crap about that will make them "look good" for college. </p>
<p>while writing essays that reveal yourself is all well and good, if you really think about it, when colleges condemn certain topics as "cliche" or overdone (like a trip to a third-world country, your greatest achievement, stuff in your room, your parents serving as your role model), you have to start finding frivolous topics and literally crowbar meaning into them in order to "stand-out" and really show your personality, even though you're really writing about something stupid and inconsequential. the reason some topics are cliche is because they really are what affects us the most...i think it's far better writing about something like that if it really did change your life/world/vision/etc. rather than writing about say the time you snorted sprite out of your nose, or were really constipated, or ate a banana, or something else inane and ridiculous and then pretending like it had a profound impact on your life just for the sake of having something to write about that qualifies as "personality-revealing".</p>
<p>well i think you limit yourself so much when you think of the admissions process like that.</p>
<p>the point is, colleges are not just looking for people they want to purely educate, they want people who are interesting, willing to do things, and will hopefully stand out in someway after college.</p>
<p>the students who are committed to a cause, or the arts, or whatever it is they might have in ADDITION to good grades and SATs are far more compelling. </p>
<p>because grades, numbers, statistics will only get you so far. tons of kids get 4.0 gpas and 2200-2400 SATs. they can't take all those kids. so they have to find whose really worth taking. </p>
<p>and don't generalize with the extra curricular thing. there are definitely ways into seeing who you are and what you do, that give legitimacy.</p>
<p>what about a kid who founds an Anti-Genocide in the School, works his but off for four years in that club, raises thousands of dollars, and ultimately changes the attitudes of many kids in his school? </p>
<p>think about it....should that go unnoticed?</p>
<p>That's like ... totally the wrong idea ... </p>
<p>I think that you should learn for the sake of learning, not to perform well on a test. Someone might do well on the SAT but hate learning, whereas another person could be a bad test taker but is genuinely interested in learning. I'd rather have the second person at my school.</p>
<p>doing bad in the SAT though you love learning is a paradox and an excuse used by the ppl who are really too lazy or just haven't figured out how to utilize their intellectual potential to truly succeed at it.</p>
<p>seriously, i really get tired of all the ppl who say "oh i didn't do so well on the SAT even though I'm smart because I'm not a good test-taker". if you're not a good test taker, you really aren't such a great learner.</p>
<p>true to a certain extent, you need to know the test itself and study it, just knowing the material might not always be good enough. but studying the test only and memorizing skills and "tricks" will only get you so far.</p>
<p>most ppl i know who do well on the SAT math is really great at math and they love it. i personally think solving math problems is usually fun (to a certain extent).</p>
<p>many ppl who do well on CR love to read, they've absolutely been devouring books at like 10 a month minimum since elementary/middle school.</p>
<p>and ppl who do well on writing love to read and write. they might be newspaper editors, really shine in their english classes, or be on the school debate team.</p>
<p>tests/grades are supposed to measure your not only your intellect, but also how willing you are to learn, how driven you are to excel. </p>
<p>about the anti-genocide example....what if another person started such a club in a different school and also worked really hard on it for four years, but failed to accomplish much because local businesses/organizations were stingy and wouldn't donate money, the other students weren't very motivated, and his club advisors kept leaving the school at the end of each of the four years? or maybe he held elections at the end of his first year, and was ousted by a group of ppl who were incredibly jealous of him and thus banded together to bring him down? sure, you can argue if he really "deserves" to get into a good school" he should find a way around all that, but honestly, is it completely his fault?</p>
<p>well i could not disagree with your example of tests being a way to determine who likes to learn. that is completely false in every sort of way. </p>
<p>what type of a high school have you gone to? obviously one where only tests have been emphasized.</p>
<p>i guarantee you if you write about that for any top college, you will get rejected.</p>
<p>not to sound harsh, but seriously while there might be slight truth to what you're saying, not nearly as much as you're trying to suggest. </p>
<p>as if learning was limited to the three branches of the SAT math, critical reading, and writing...please. </p>
<p>like i said, i have a score in the 2200s, and trust me, i don't think that says anything more than my ability to take a test well. </p>
<p>you obviously have a very good SAT score and are trying to defend yourself.</p>
<p>i mean this is totally not worth my time.
but who's taught you to think like this? there are so many more facets to what entails a person and their ability to learn than a test. seriously...</p>
<p>^i'll admit, my grades/test scores far outshine my EC's, but that IS because I love learning. honestly, i would rather stay inside on a Saturday morning and pour over my Bio textbook pondering a way to prevent prions from bonding to alpha proteins and turning your brain to sponge.</p>
<p>or if i do go outside, i'd rather take a walk on a trail and study the native plants and animals than go out into the community and like go door to door or hold a bake sale for a cause i'm only pretending to care about for colleges.</p>
<p>thus i pour more effort into academics because i enjoy it more and have more to show for my passion for learning. i don't learn for the sake of doing well on tests, but i end up doing well on tests BECAUSE i am so motivated to learn. if that makes any sense??</p>
<p>unfortunately, what i'd RATHER do in my pursuit of learning gives me little credit in terms of gaining acceptance to a highly selective college. </p>
<p>and really, i did not mean to limit learning to the three brances of the SAT. there is a multitude of other subjects obviously and many other ways to learn. but i'm just saying, rarely do ppl who really do love to learn and shine academically do poorly on the SATs unless they really aren't as academically driven as they'd like to believe.</p>
<p>haha i totally know what i'm saying is controversial. i know ppl don't like it, and i'll admit, i could be totally wrong.</p>
<p>but i just don't like how those super-selective colleges kind of expect a 2300+ and 4.0 as almost a prerequisite and then want you to have been involved in 20+ other extracurricular activities as a way of demonstrating your "passion" and how you'll benefit their community if you're accepted as a student. because that just promotes the faking of a passion; the conniving and deception that is involved in pretending to really care for something even if you don't just so you'll get into one of those colleges.</p>
<p>i think it's even sadder when you see students who truly are passionate about learning get rejected from their dream schools while ppl who slacked off in high school; with SAT scores of 2000 and below and mediocre GPAs get accepted because of superficial reasons. haha this mindset probably just comes from the school i go to, where ppl really are superficial in their attempt to gain entry to the nation's top colleges. i guess ppl in other schools actually care about the EC's they pursue.</p>
<p>"That's like ... totally the wrong idea ... </p>
<p>I think that you should learn for the sake of learning, not to perform well on a test. Someone might do well on the SAT but hate learning, whereas another person could be a bad test taker but is genuinely interested in learning. I'd rather have the second person at my school."</p>
<p>This is supposed to emphasize a point. How easy would it be if college admissions would be based off one stupid test. People make such a big deal about it, but it is only one small portion of the application.
I really want to learn for the sake of learning, that's why the American education system is horrible. I can't take philosophy, ethics, comparitive religions, international relations, creative nonfiction, or many of the other classes I would love to take. It would be really convenient if I could study for the SAT for a month or so and then move straight to college.</p>
<p>well you've already displayed you're more than your SAT scores. </p>
<p>your love for biology is what makes you unique. and that's why a school wants you not because what an SAT score says.</p>
<p>an extracurricular is not defined in terms of a club. i know a kid who loves nature and trails and the environment, and he plants trees everyweekend and that's what his essay is about. </p>
<p>to me that is extracurricular. it's about being a person more than what your scores say.</p>
<p>not every club sits around and sells stuff. many of them work within their school to inspire and work with kids on a variety of issues. </p>
<p>and learning goes beyond the core academics. i think thats my point. there are kids who purely enjoy learning. like for me, i'm extremeley passionate about calculus. i love learning calculus, but i also love painting, and i also love learning about global issues in the world, etc.</p>
<p>"well you've already displayed you're more than your SAT scores."</p>
<p>thanks=) but sadly to colleges, i'm just another asian girl who stays at home and studies and gets A's and 5's in biology...nothing special, nothing extraordinary enough to merit an acceptance because i haven't shown how i'm involved in the world. i haven't placed in USABO nationals, i haven't published a research paper, i haven't raised $5000 for Mad Cow Disease research.</p>
<p>all i've done is just stay at home, apply myself to a subject i love, and get good test scores and grades.</p>
<p>which theoretically should show i can apply myself and work hard for anything i might undertake in college...but honestly when you can have a student who got everyone in our high school senior class to wear our school colors one day and got an SAT score of 2000, or a student who got 70% of the school body to just "pledge support" for ending genocide in darfur and got a 1900 SAT, why would you ever pick the student who just reads about stuff all the time and got an SAT score of 2300, which clearly shows she doesn't learn for the sake of learning but simply for the purpose of doing well on tests?</p>
<p>i think a good SAT score in combo with excellent grades in tough classes proves a lot..
just a really high SAT score proves that you're intelligent, but without good grades it shows you're lazy, which looks really awful. Because if you have potential, colleges want to see that you can make the most of it. I think that they appreciate a hard working person with a good SAT much more than a lazy person with an excellent SAT</p>
<p>as for EC's, well a lot of people half-ass those and lie about them, i mean people just say "i was in this club.." "did this charity..." while they actually didnt do anything, and some people are really devoted. </p>
<p>To show that, i think you should list not all, but you're really important EC's on you're application and discuss them in depth</p>