<p>Hello everyone. With the Common App launching tomorrow, I'm starting to decide for sure where to apply. I was planning to apply to Stanford on restrictive EA, but my SAT II scores were less than stellar: 660 Literature, 700 U.S. History, 720 Biology E. My March SAT was 2050 so I need to retake that, and October is the last test date for EA.</p>
<p>Is it worth applying for regular decision so that I can take the subject tests again in November or December? I know it's a ways off, but I need to make the choice eventually. Thanks for any advice!</p>
<p>Pshh. My SAT scores have yet to reach a satisfactory number, and my II’s are 750, 710, and a shockingly disgusting number that begins with a 6, and I’m applying SCEA :D</p>
<p>And apply EA, you have a MUCH higher chance of getting in because you’re telling Stanford that their school is your number one choice. However, I’d advise you to retake the SAT reasoning test in October as I am. Good luck!</p>
<p>ExcitedG is misinforming you. If you are unhooked, you have almost no chance (probably ~1-2%) with those scores. Additionally, it is HARDER not easier to get accepted SCEA. It is a common misconception that SCEA applicants have an advantage.</p>
<p>Thanks for the various thoughts. Why is it harder to get in EA? And is there a difference between SCEA and EA? As far as I know, there are only two options for Stanford.</p>
<p>So 2 of 3 people think I should retake the SAT IIs in November or December and apply RD?</p>
<p>Stanford has only SCEA and RD options. SCEA is not harder, but also not easier then RD, especially since applying RD gives you more time to work on your application.</p>
<p>It is more difficult to get admitted during SCEA. A simple analysis of results (or a more complex one, which I have completed and can be found in the race thread) reveals this. Furthermore, a Yale admissions officer confirmed that only the slam-dunks are chosen SCEA. </p>
<p>In other words: the only real advantage of applying SCEA is to find out early.</p>
<p>^SCEA only SEEMS easier than RD b/c the SCEA applicant pool is generally stronger than the RD pool (stronger pool = more admits)</p>
<p>*SCEA isn’t really much of an advantage if your app isn’t at its strongest. Remember at SCEA, there are three possible outcomes:</p>
<p>1) Accepted (then yay! good for you)
2) Deferred (you’re good enough that they don’t want to reject you, but they want to see more updates and your 2nd semester grades; they move you to RD pool)
3) Rejected (which is bad b/c then you can’t apply RD the same year)</p>
<p>Perhaps I did misinform you to an extent. Let me rephrase. Since most of the better students apply during EA and ED (I’m still very confused as to the difference, although I know that one is binding while the other isn’t), the acceptance rate is much higher. However I still advise you to apply to Stanford EA. If you’re even worrying about applying, then I can tell you are a dedicated student. Just work as hard as possible to get better standardized test scores, however keep in mind that these tests are not all that matters. Stanford is incredibly weird because they relish themselves in rejecting valedictorians and 2400+ recipients. Hence, you will have no idea what your status is until you receive an envelope in the mail. </p>
<p>HOWEVER! Always be optimistic! And in my mind, after speaking to many adcoms, EA is the better choice of the two. Just separate yourself from the crowd and don’t rely too much on academics. (essays matter oh-so-much). And remember, you have two chances with EA, not only one! You can always get deferred! ;)</p>
<p>And I won’t stand back on what I said. You have to show Stanford that it’s your number one choice, and prove to them why you deserve to be at that school!</p>
<p>Stay optimistic! You never know what might happen
Sorry for the misconception earlier. Forgive me.</p>
<p>ExcitedG is misrepresenting the reality. His advice is ill-informed. </p>
<p>“2400+ recipients”</p>
<p>Yeah…</p>
<p>“Just separate yourself from the crowd and don’t rely too much on academics.”</p>
<p>That’s not really the correct way to stand out…</p>
<p>Even though Stanford does focus a lot on subjective elements (perhaps more so than the other highly selective schools), the academic portion of the application is BY FAR the most important aspect. This has been frequently conveyed by admissions officers at Stanford.</p>
<p>SCEA is only the correct option for those whose applications are in top form by November 1. If there is any chance (and in your case there is a lot, evidenced by the mere creation of this thread) that your scores could improve for the RD application period, the correct decision is always to wait unless you predict a sharp decline in your GPA first semester.</p>
<p>“You have to show Stanford that it’s your number one choice, and prove to them why you deserve to be at that school!”</p>
<p>First of all, applying SCEA does not indicate that Stanford is his number one choice; only ED does that. Second of all, the fact that someone applies SCEA does not prove that he or she deserves to attend nor does it prove why. I’m not sure why ExcitedG claimed that.</p>
<p>“Stay optimistic! You never know what might happen”</p>
<p>Being optimistic and realistic aren’t mutually exclusive. The ONLY benefit to applying early is to find out early. The applicants accepted early would get accepted RD and usually have some exceptional quality that makes them automatic admits. It is extremely rare for one to get accepted early with your stats (URM or otherwise). </p>
<p>It is by far the better option in your case to apply RD.</p>
<p>When I say 2400+…i refer to SAT subject tests.</p>
<p>Those who rely only on their academics tend to not get accepted. making yourself standard and away from the boring norm is the worst way to go. highlight an aspect of your life that relates not to someone else’s. You, obviously, have yet to speak to an adcom</p>
<p>Why should Stanford choose those who don’t to be their as their a top choice (and if you read carefully, oh-realistic-one, you’d see that I clarified my misunderstanding about EA and ED)</p>
<p>Always be optimistic, it’s the only way you’ll get through life without being bitter. </p>
<p>i still think you should apply early. there are much less applicants (refute that silverturtle, go look up some faulty statistics) or you can regret the double-chance you might have received. :)</p>
<p>“Those who rely only on their academics tend to not get accepted.”</p>
<p>Getting higher scores and making oneself a viable candidate from an academic perspective does not constitute an appropriate labeling of reliance.</p>
<p>“Why should Stanford choose those who don’t to be their as their a top choice (and if you read carefully, oh-realistic-one, you’d see that I clarified my misunderstanding about EA and ED)”</p>
<p>I’m not sure exactly what you are attempting to articulate here. English may not be your first language. </p>
<p>If you’re implying that Stanford doesn’t accept someone who doesn’t indicate Stanford to be his or her top choice, you are incorrect. If you’re implying that applying SCEA indicates this, you are incorrect. If you are implying that appying RD indicates that Stanford is not the top choice, you are incorrect.</p>
<p>I don’t want to sound hostile toward ExcitedG. I just want to convey that his conclusion is based off of a false understanding of the process.</p>
<p>If Stanford is the only school you want to apply early to, your application is completed by November 1, and your application will not improve in any way (GPA, scores, ECs, etc.) by January 1, apply early. </p>
<p>If you don’t fulfill all of those, it is not in your best interest to apply early.</p>
<p>I want to reiterate (and make a clear contradiction to the misinformation ExcitedG has provided): if you are accepted SCEA, Stanford is telling you that you would have been accepted RD, but were such a strong candidate that they felt comfortable accepting you even before seeing first semester grades.</p>
<p>^I don’t think you’re understanding this completely. It is correct that one must have other things besides academics to get him/herself into a school like Stanford. However, stating that one shouldn’t focus as much on academics is misleading. Everyone still has to have great stats, but if someone is an Intel Finalist and/or Presidential Scholar etc… in addition to having a 4.0 GPA and a 2400 on the SAT, then he/she will probably be accepted. But if one has a 3.5 GPA and a 1900 on the SAT yet this person’s written a couple of books or won some kind of (inter)national competition etc…, he/she still may not be accepted because of the not-so-stellar academic record. </p>
<p>So, in a sense, you are right in that a big part of getting in is to set yourself apart from the other applicants. However, academics are still a huge factor (so the key is to have great grades and test scores while still separating yourself from the crowd).</p>
