<p>A- rejected
B- waitlisted
C-accepted</p>
<p>srk_fx is off by one. Remember that one was accepted, one was rejected, and one was waitlisted.</p>
<p>a - accepted
b - rejected
c - waitlisted</p>
<p>Correct.
phroz3n is right.
Student A was admitted to Yale, Harvard, Princeton, and numerous other prestigious colleges.
Student B was rejected by Harvard, Georgetown, and Yale but was accepted to Columbia and UChicago. She was also accepted to liberal arts colleges of the same caliber, some with substantial scholarships.
Student C was waitlisted at Harvard but received a full scholarship at the state university and chose it.</p>
<p>lol, that was fun.</p>
<p>Mallomar: can u explain why, please???</p>
<p>also, Mallomar: i am wondering, B is a female and has much better SAT scores, is president, and w/ excellent essays. why didn't she get accepted? or at least waitlisted? and i was surprised at C, being and ORM and waitlisted, at that low sat score. also, A is probably the average applicant to Harvard, and he is also an ORM, plus he had not "excellent," but decent essays. explain please?</p>
<p>wow...i guessed wrong</p>
<p>Cooldude, you have to remember that these are only three, isolated situations. If you had 1,000 students who applied to Harvard with Student B's stats and 1,000 students who applied with Student A's stats (or Student C's stats for that matter), more Student B's would be accepted. What happened to the students that Mallomar described is just an anomaly. </p>
<p>You also have to remember that applying to the Ivy Leagues with sky-high SAT scores does not guarantee admission. They can only take a small number of students, so some extremely qualified students still get the shaft. In addition to EC's and other stuff that makes an applicant more appealing, there is also definitely a luck factor to the admissions process. It's unpredictable, especially at the Ivy Leagues.</p>
<p>thanks jlauer95, and i also realized that student b's gpa is 3.6, which is pretty low. according to "A is for Admission," ppl who get waitlisted are normally ppl w/ high gpas and low test scores, or ppl with low everything and good ecs/sports. so i can see where you're coming from. just took me a while to realize it. thanks.</p>
<p>Cooldude wrote:
"also, Mallomar: i am wondering, B is a female and has much better SAT scores, is president, and w/ excellent essays. why didn't she get accepted? or at least waitlisted? and i was surprised at C, being and ORM and waitlisted, at that low sat score. also, A is probably the average applicant to Harvard, and he is also an ORM, plus he had not "excellent," but decent essays. explain please?"</p>
<p>Are you asking me to explain? I'm not the one who made the decisions :D
Student A was a perfectionist machine. Harvard loves those.
Student B was the smartest of the group with the best essays and test scores. Grades sucked--in fact student B's GPA was closer to 3.5 than it was to 3.6. To many, it was surprising that this student got such good results--scholarships, etc.
Student C was hardworking and charismatic. Not a genius but certainly well-loved and accomplished extracurriculars-wise. Decent grades and good extracurriculars made up for low test scores.</p>
<p>I'd hesitate to call this an anomaly. Harvard is full of students like Student A. I actually think Student A had very good extracurriculars--the "worst" parts of his app were test scores and essays--I put that in quotation marks because a 31 ACT is not really that bad. It is extremely difficult for people like Student B to get into Ivy League Schools--colleges value GPA very highly. I think that if Student B had had at least a 3.7, she would have gotten in everywhere.
I think that if Student C had applied early to Harvard, he would have gotten in. Excellent extracurriculars and decent grades would have overshadowed test scores. But the RD pool is just too competitive.</p>
<p>and in the end, where did each student choose to go?</p>