<p>whom?</p>
<p>I have always thought of Harvard as a sanctuary for the movers and shakers of the world--people who have done something.</p>
<p>World class musicians.
Math geniuses who have solved some 14th century mathematician's 700th unsolvable problem.
Virtuosos of literature and journalism.
Olympic athletes who also want a top-notch education.</p>
<p>In general, people who are extremely and unusually accomplished by the age of 18.</p>
<p>I am not knocking the achievements of you Harvard hopefuls, but am I wrong?</p>
<p>Are academics and a decent but not spectacular list of things you have done enough to get in?</p>
<p>Is the other path, the one taken by those who are merely above average, still accessible?</p>
<p>Or is it a "make it by 18 or bust" kind of thing?</p>
<p>Note: I am just asking in generic terms. I am not saying I am good at academics, or I have already compiled a list of decent but not spectacular things, or even that I am above average. I did not apply at all.</p>
<p>No way. Speaking as a Harvard student, there are some freakishly accomplished people here, but the vast majority got in through being smart, ambitious, and committed to something…or some combination thereof.</p>
<p>I’d imagine that most of us on here are rather unaccomplished (relative to some of your examples).</p>
<p>I find it hilarious that someone who isn’t at all associated with Harvard, with zero direct experience of the college, and with no contact with the body of ACTUAL Harvard students;</p>
<p>feels the need to impose some ludicrous and imaginary standard of what type of applicant Harvard is for?</p>
<p>The situation is too ironic.</p>
<p>Harvard is a place with dedicated and passionate people… it just happens that some of those people happen to have done those amazing things. But even regular, intelligent people can be dedicated and passionate.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Most of you are also all of those things. Am I wrong?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I fear that standard because I do not meet it.
I was asking if such a standard existed, or if
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It may have initially seemed so. I hope it is now clear.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The first reply to your OP is a Harvard student. He denied that such a standard exists. I would have thought that that was enough. Further, use your logic. There are not that many prodigies and olympic medal winners around. Even if all of them DID go to Harvard, they’d still make up a minority, not the majority as you suggest. This is basic common-sense.</p>
<p>I get you, OP, you’re feeling insecure about college admissions, and projecting into the future, about graduate admissions and even further, about general life success. </p>
<p>But I think you need to stop focusing on schools such as Harvard and come to realise (as many have told you over and over again, in various other threads), that success is not measured by which college you attend. The vast majority of the world did not attend Harvard. You can be a successful, brilliant, and fulfilled person regardless of where you go. What’s important is what YOU personally do, and who YOU are as a person. </p>
<p>We as individuals have agency over our own destiny. It is not the “system” or a nameless machine that will make us who we are. WE make of our lives what we want, through what we do with it.</p>
<p>^Yay for disproving the representativeness heuristic!</p>
<p>ETA: Actually, theskylitup, you have a very sophisticated common sense. Most people would argue the same as OP.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In one other thread. The very one that I am trying to forget. :(</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I neither suggested it nor argued for it.</p>
<p>It just occured to my curiosity because as motion said, most of us(including me) are not as accomplished as those who can snugly fit into one of the four examples I gave.</p>
<p>Because we are not, admissions is unpredictable–or at least more so that it is for them.</p>
<p>I use ‘we’ and ‘us’ not because I intend to insult you as I am a non-applicant but because they is less clumsy and less projecting. So if it bothers you that I am speaking as someone “who isn’t at all associated with Harvard, with zero direct experience of the college, and with no contact with the body of ACTUAL Harvard students,” then I apologize.</p>
<p>It is obvious that Harvard is not after mere academics–after all, valedictorians get rejected year after year.</p>
<p>There must be something, or otherwise a combination of smaller things that Harvard is after.</p>
<p>You may be thinking right now “how are we supposed to know? we don’t work for Harvard.”</p>
<p>Well, take a guess. Yours is almost certainly going to be better than mine.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You made your bed buddy…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think you’re over-thinking things. Harvard (and all the other top universities) are very clear in what they’re after.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Passion. students who are engaged with their world and have pursued what they love. In that sense, they’re looking for iconclasts, trailblazers. But also in a simpler sense, simply students who aren’t afraid to be themselves and have simply done what they enjoyed and had a passion for.</p></li>
<li><p>Drive, initiative. Students who have gone above and beyond what is normally offered. They’re actively doing something in their households/communities/the world even. They may also be overcoming difficult circumstances and succeeding IN SPITE of disadvantages. (Rather than sitting back and bemoaning it).</p></li>
<li><p>Hard workers. Students who demonstrate high success in various fields due to hard work and a pursuit of excellence. They don’t want apathetic, disengaged students who just want to coast. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>And I think they’re also looking for personal qualities, such as humility, maturity etc. (Among a whole host of other qualities, such as general academic success etc).</p>
<p>BUT these qualities are not at all exclusive to Harvard students (as you MUST surely realise?!). These qualities would be commendable in ANY applicant, regardless of what school they matriculate at, or apply to.</p>