<p>I think Harvard and other prestigious universities break down their admissions decisions like this:</p>
<p>Transcript/class rank/GPA-30%
Test Scores-25%
Essays-20%
ECs-15%
Recommendations/Interviews-10%</p>
<p>Anyone agree/disagree?</p>
<p>I think test scores would be worth more than GPA/class rank because the former puts the applicants on a more even playing field.</p>
<p>I think ECs are more than Essays</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>I think test scores would be worth more than GPA/class rank because the former puts the applicants on a more even playing field.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Test are nice but Harvard clearly states in its admissions literature that the single most important stat you have is your grades. That is true of pretty much all colleges - except in special cases such as recruited athletes at big jock schools, the grades are the single most important stat when considering a candidate for admission.</p>
<p>I would think that SAT/ACT, SAT IIs, APs, IB's all combined would have equal value with GPA/rank.</p>
<p>The whole method of giving the qualities percentages reflects a misunderstanding of the admissions process at Harvard. Stats--GPA and SAT--will allow your application to be considered. If you have stats that are not up to Harvard's exacting standards, then the adcom will probably reject you (unless there are extreme extenuating circumstances--, URM status, outstanding accomplishments, rich parents).</p>
<p>After this, the charecter assessment begins. To ascertain whether or not you stand out from the horde of excellent test-takers and students applying to Harvard each year, the adcom will use your essays, EC's, and recommendations.</p>
<p>Each step is important.</p>
<p>On the flipside, if the adcom believe that their personal assessment of your character (not necessarily something tangible like awards, etc.) overcomes lackluster test scores or GPA, you can be a very strong candidate.</p>
<p>exactly correct, xjayz</p>
<p>Like market state said, quantifying Harvard admissions is misunderstanding its inherent subjectivity.</p>
<p>Do not underestimate the importance of alumni interviews, as other factors - GPAs, SATs, essays, letters of recommendation etc. become more problematic..</p>
<p>What about on-campus interviews? How do they add into the admissions process?</p>
<p>They ordinarily don't factor in at all, if you mean "courtesy" interviews granted on request by applicants or potential applicants visiting Cambridge,.</p>
<p>The only exception would be interviews undertaken directly by the admissions office to resolve certain questions raised earlier - ie, a conflict between the strength of the paper record and the alumni interview report, etc.</p>
<p>Byerly, if an admission commitee really likes an applicant, but the applicant's GPA seems to be unforgivingly low, would admission officers set up an interview with the applicant to get to know the applicant better and find out why his GPA is low?</p>
<p>On occasion the Admissions Office will seek a second interview, or ask the region to conduct a second interview, if there is, as I say, a "disconnect" between the qualifications apparent in the application and the original report of the alumni interviewer. It is rare, however, for a good interview to overcome an academic record that is - as you put it - "unforgivably low."</p>
<p>Aren't recommendations also often overrushed and overlooked by applicants? I can't see why an essay - in an age where just about everyone gets advice from somewhere or someone - would hold much higher weightage than commentary from an educator who spent 120 hours with the student.</p>
<p>Edit: According to a NYT chart and TPR (Admissions Factors), Harvard says that transcripts, recs, character, talent, and activities are the most important factors, while scores, essays, and the interview are ranked a notch lower. Byerly, does this have any validity to it?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Edit: According to a NYT chart and TPR (Admissions Factors), Harvard says that transcripts, recs, character, talent, and activities are the most important factors, while scores, essays, and the interview are ranked a notch lower.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>How exactly does Harvard get to know someone's character?</p>
<p>Sure it does, but you can't figure these things with mathematical precision, nor know, with absolute certainty, what makes the difference between acceptance and rejection. Particularly when you talk about a concept as ellusive as "character" you are talking about personal qualities that can shine through during interviews; and it can manifest itself in many different ways. Based on experience, all other things being equal, the school is attracted to people who display a certain electric quality (sometimes called "passion") which does not always manifest itself in the paper file.</p>
<p>FreshElephant - ask the admissions office. If they give you an answer, write a book about it and you'll make millions overnight.</p>
<p>
[quote]
FreshElephant - ask the admissions office. If they give you an answer, write a book about it and you'll make millions overnight.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Nice. : )</p>
<p>Thanks Byerly.</p>