<p>I'm not giving all my stats, but just how hard is it for this school? I see 10% rate, seems almost as hard as Harvard. First thing they ask for on common app is your money (before you submit the application). Is it worth it? I live on East Coast, I'm just wondering if I should take this off my common app list.</p>
<p>Have you looked at the Naviance for your school?
That data will give you a much better sense of the historic pattern of application outcomes from your high school than the general 10% acceptance rate number, which is not very useful.</p>
<p>Are you nuts man?</p>
<p>Just how hard is it to get in to Stanford? Seriously? Do you live under a rock?</p>
<p>The reason all you see is a 10% rate is because that's the only statistic worth trusting. Anything anyone else gives you doesn't mean jack because there's a million different factors that go into each individual kids offer of admission (or not). As cliche as it sounds, no two applicants are alike, no two applicant pools are alike, and no two years are alike. Even data about your particular high school can be misleading.</p>
<p>I'm going to have to agree with docket on this one. Too the poster referring to Naviance: I don't even trust that. The reason why stats on naviance are very high are because, for the most part, only people with tremendously high GPAs and SAT scores apply to Stanford. At my school, I know people with higher grades than I have that aren't applying because "they have no chance of getting in." Though I don't complain about this, I think they're just too lazy to put the time and effort into a tough application like Stanford's. </p>
<p>To the OP: Stanford is tremendously difficult to get into. Every year, Stanford rejects some of the best applicants in the entire world, and some "sub-par" (academic wise) applicants are admitted. You can never tell in the college admissions process, especially with Stanford, which is why it is such a great university. In my opinion, Stanford truly follows the idea of "everyone has a chance." Like docket said, there are multiple factors that go into the admissions decision. The essay is the part of the application that can have the most impact, in my opinion. If one's essay is amazing and the admissions officer buys what you're trying to say, you're probably heading for that school. </p>
<p>Don't apply to Stanford just because. A) Its a tough application that's very time consuming. B) You'll just be giving the admissions officers extra work. If you think you would enjoy being at Stanford, apply. If not, don't.</p>
<p>I'm not sure why you would claim that some "sub-par" applicants are admitted every year. This is not a lottery, where everybody has an equal chance. A very dedicated team reads the applications and makes choices based on rational factors.
The reason that Naviance is a useful tool is that there are high schools that send no students to Stanford in a given year, and others that send several every year. By placing your data in the context of the field you play in, you can get a sense of your real odds.
It beats a "chances" thread any day.</p>
<p>The reason i put "sub-par" in quotes was because I believe those applicants aren't actually sub-par. I've seen people with lower stats and everyone gets ****ed because those people may have gotten in over a 2400/4.0, thus they call them "sub-par".</p>
<p>
<p>Sure, but this might as well be a chance thread anyway. The OP is asking for basically the same thing as one.</p>
<p> [quote=siliconvalleymom] The reason that Naviance is a useful tool is that there are high schools that send no students to Stanford in a given year, and others that send several every year. By placing your data in the context of the field you play in, you can get a sense of your real odds.
</p>
<p>The thing is, you're not placing your individual data in the proper context, so the odds you're seeing aren't your real odds.</p>
<p>Sure, I'd bet there are some macro level factors that would correlate well with admission, but you don't need a website to tell you those. The stuff people DO use a website for, what % of people with my SAT/GPA score or below got in, etc., has so many hidden factors within it that the number by itself is useless. </p>
<p>The same thing could be said about high school. Say that over the past 10 years the valedictorian from your school has gotten in to Stanford every single year. If you're the valedictorian this year, does that give you more confidence? Probably. Should it? [Answer: If you toss a fair coin 100 times and get heads 100 times in a row, does that make it any more likely you'll get heads on the 101st toss?]</p>
<p>Now obviously the real world doesn't work like a coin toss, but I think the general principle holds that each pool of candidates--and each candidate within that pool--is their own individual case independent of prior trends, etc. I know the college admissions process is stressful, and a lot of people come to CC just to have their fears of rejection be allayed. To a certain extent that is all good and well, a sort of way to relieve some of the stress of the whole process.</p>
<p>But when people come here looking for good, honest feedback on their applications, misleading statistics do everybody, but most of all the potential applicants, a disservice.</p>