I feel like some of you guys are being unnecessarily harsh. Let’s help him come up with some good ideas. @gallentjill had some helpful ideas. How about some more schools that won’t care as much about his light ECs because they want his 35 ACT. Wash U, Vanderbilt, Tulane used to be some of these schools. If he demonstrates interest, how about them? Or some others?
OP, you can’t “put together a compelling story” until you know what that is. For the top colleges you listed, it isn’t winning or placing in some contest. They want a broader picture. And tend not to want unilateral. You have to know if you match what THEY want, to even come up with a reasonable list.
And you note a C grade this year and those AP “4” scores in CS and physics 1.
“I feel like some of you guys are being unnecessarily harsh.”
Every year there are threads about students who didn’t get in anywhere. I think that it is better to be harsh now and strongly recommend that OP adds a couple of good safeties, rather than risk having another student run into the same problem.
At least in my opinion I feel that all of the UCs are very good universities, and a great many of them are very good for computer science. I think that OP has a good chance at many of them. However, IMHO every student needs to start with safeties, and then add the matches and reaches.
How about this?:
Safeties: UCSC, Cal Poly SLO
Matches: UCI, UCD, UCSB, UCSD, Umich, USC
Reaches: MIT, Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, Caltech, CMU, Cornell, Upenn, UCB, UCLA
Also, since when is a 4 on an AP exam bad??
And @lookingforward seems to be the only one here who brought up the C. I got a 79% in AP English after getting an F on the final paper. She refused to bump it up for me. This was kinda unexpected. Is this really a big deal?
Huang, you will benefit from accepting the fact these colleges I’m noting are fiercely competitive to get into. I’m not sure you realize yet how bad it is. Lots of kids focus on their dreams and wants. But adcoms don’t give extra points for those. They look for the reality of what one accomplished, how one stretched, the breadth of activities (meaning, not just STEM ECs.)
You should be looking into what these colleges say they want, what they look for. Not blogs, not anon forums, not teachers, but straight from the horse’s mouth- the colleges. You can show us- and yourself- that vigor. Or Not.
It doesn’t matter if I’m the only one, lol. I know how tippy top adcoms can react to a B, much less a C.
Go do the digging, show us your stuff. Then, when you have a realistic idea, we may help with interpreting some points.
Huangmaster, you have to be realistic in the college application process, or you will regret your decisions over the next year.
Besides your ACT, there is absolutely nothing compelling about your profile. Poor AP scores, terrible ECs (ofc in comparison to other applicants of top universities). Obviously, you can craft up a story in the next few months, but don’t you think everyone else is doing the same?
Think about it from an admission officer’s standpoint. Given that there are so many qualified candidates with 4.0, 35+, etc, what makes them want to select you over all others?
If you apply to the list of schools you just listed, you will end up disappointed.
Also, those awards that you mentioned are insanely competitive; but if you do end up with them, they will boost the application.
Let’s go back to the beginning
- you DO have ECs: robotics and its ups and downs Junior and senior year would make for a humorous essay; to qualify for AIME you train, so you must be art of a regional competitive math team (or did you do that on your own, train by yourself? Both are an EC); you do research; you are competing in science research competitions. All of that matters.
- for all the schools you listed, AP4 is bad
Everywhere else it’s good. - Cal poly SLO, UCSC are good safeties. Since you can be full pay, add Santa Clara. Start demonstrating interest (fill request info form, make an official visit if you can…)
- since you’re good at math and CS, include northwestern (CS+x, special math path mostly for AIME kids’). I’d suggest Harvey Mudd but it sounds like your profile fits caltech’s more.
- UBC, Waterloo, UToronto, McGill will love your act score and the ec’s you do have. They won’t care you don’t have other ec’s. Waterloo cs (co op) is one of the very best in the world. Those would be reached for most anyone else, they’re almost safetes for you. Use that to your advantage.
- UCs are very GPA focused. Not all colleges are. Wash U in St Louis but also Vanderbilt will like your profile because of the act 35.
- get the books mentioned upthread and start reading ; in the meantime, go to the results threads as start reading. Then go to the private universities’ websites and use your critical reading skills to figure out what they want.
You WILL get into a good college but you need to be strategic about it. Some things you can’t change. Focus on what you CAN do (continue robotics despite its ups and downs, do everything you can for Regeneron, etc.)
So:
UCSC, Cal poly SLO
SCU, Vanderbilt, WashU, Northwestern, USC => start demonstrating interest
UC’s
Canadian universities
Once you’re done with these applications, add your reaches.
Yes, it really is a big deal, especially at the name-brand places you say you want. They are not looking for students who completely blow major assignments, nor for students who are surprised that a teacher won’t do them favors afterwards.
As @lookingforward is pointing out, you have some homework to do. In particular, you need to reconsider whether the schools that you think you want are really the right place for you, and they for you.
As presented here, the big thing that you are missing for the lottery schools (Harvard, Stanford, MIT, CalTech) is evidence of real drive. The students I know at those schools tend to be people who push hard at whatever they are doing- is that you?
IF you want a highly focused CS program consider the UK, where ECs only matter if they relate to your subject area, & GPA barely matters.
If you get 5s on this years APs (esp BC & Physics), Oxford would be a reach but not impossible (without the 5s it will be impossible). Here is info on what they want: https://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/why_oxford/what_do_tutors_look_for.html. Be sure to check out the Math Aptitude Test (MAT), here: https://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/how_to_apply/MAT_test.html), because the score on that test is critical for getting an invitation to interview. Finally, here is the program outline (click through for details): https://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/courses/computer_science.html
You would have a stronger shot at the CS program at University College London (UCL). These are the courses that you would take: http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/prospective_students/bsc_computer_science/.
Note that CS in England is 3 years; if you stay a 4th year you can get a Masters. Scotland is 4 years, but the programs have a little more flexibility. The University of Edinburgh (Scotland) (which is actually higher ranked than UCL for CS) is even more likely for you, based on your scores so far. This is what you would study: http://www.drps.ed.ac.uk/18-19/dpt/utcmpsi.htm.
Be aware that all the UK schools will expect you to be responsible for the application process, figuring out the system, etc: in others words, stepping up & taking charge.
“6-8 months is a LONG time and I can accomplish a lot”. You miss the point.
The problem is that you have not shown a sustained commitment to a cause or purpose over time. Your last minute attempts to bolster your EC’s will not fool admissions directors. The admissions directors at several of the top colleges frequently address this question from parents and students. They even have a term for it “Drive-by philanthropy” or “Just in Time EC’s” which suggest that the student panicked during Junior year and desperately attempted to compensate for the dearth of ECs by doing something that might look good. Sustained ECs means multiple years of progressively greater contribution with multiple stakeholders able and willing to attest to such.
Focus on the second tier of UC’s as realistic targets. UCB and UCLA will be inundated with applicants with equal or superior credentials as yours. Sorry, but your lack of ECs is not something you can “fix” at this late stage.
“If you want an MIT, Cal-freaking-Tech, Stanford or an Ivy, UCB or UCLA, you have to be an energized type, think on a certain level. The kids with the best shot don’t turn to others to translate the basics for them.”
That’s pretty harsh and very judgemental. If you don’t want to help the OP, fine, but leave the snide remarks out of it. Kids that get into those schools are talented but they’re not George Boole or Alan Turing.
“Also, since when is a 4 on an AP exam bad??”
It’s not, and actually colleges do not look at AP scores for admission, the SAT 2s are more important in that regard, and your 800 in Math 2, 760 in Chem is totally fine.
“I got a 79% in AP English after getting an F on the final paper. She refused to bump it up for me. This was kinda unexpected. Is this really a big deal?”
You will have to explain that, without blaming the teacher, it’s ok to say you struggled as long as you can say you improved in the second semester. But you have to accept responsibility for the grade, and say what you learned from that experience.
If it makes you feel any better, there are people that got a C (only one) and got in to some of the schools you’re applying to, but it’s not common, it will stick out, so explain it.
^How would the College adcom know what grade he got on a paper?
I would forget Ivies and MIT/Caltech. I would not discuss the C in English on the application. I am not sure how you got an F on the paper, but I would not emphasize that issue.
It is a decent application with ACTs and SAT IIs, AP classes, almost all As and 4s on AP exams. I would apply to some top 50 schools as reaches, probably some top 100 OOS or private schools, and UCB, UCLA, and a range of UCs.
@suzyQ7 he was talking about the final grade of C.
OP, you do have great standardized scores. These are worth something. The push-back you are hearing is because the tippy top schools you keep talking about want significantly more than standardized test scores, so they aren’t a good match for you. Go for the schools that ARE good matches, and throw in a few safeties too. Writing applications takes a long time and a lot of thought, so concentrate on where you have a good shot of getting in. Come next April, you want to have a couple of different choices that you can both afford and will really like. Look at this year’s admissions results and you will see that it’s unlikely that anyone will get into all of their match schools just because of the sheer volume of qualified applicants and the available number of seats, so that’s why it’s important to have several of them.
I am disturbed that the OP said he got an F on his final , and his teacher refused to bump it up for him. OP, why should she have bumped up your grade? You get the grade you earn as well as you get into the college that shows your cumulative hard work over 4 years of HS. Not just a final 6 month effort.
Does sustained commitment in ec’s matter for schools like UCB and UCLA? Would I have a good chance at those if I get Siemens or Regeneron semifinalist. Shouldn’t AIME and USNCO also be extremely helpful for those?
And aren’t MIT and Caltech more stats-based too? Would I be able to get into those if I have very good awards and excellent LORs?
Guys, please don’t mention the situation in English. It’s my fault and I take full responsibility for this, but nothing like this has really happened to me before.
I understand that maybe Stanford and top Ivy’s are out of reach, but I want to do something to get into the more stats-based reaches.
Here’s some more info:
Essays should be amazing. I’m probably gonna hire an essay counselor to help me.
Teacher recs should also be absolutely stellar. I have excellent relationships with my teachers.
Here’s my more specific plan for the next 6-8 months:
- create a high quality maker portfolio of personal CS projects and attend many hackathons
- for leadership, start a CS club at my school, host a hackathon, and secure a leadership position in robotics
- research with USC professor which should result in a high quality publication, LOR, and maybe Siemens/Regeneron semifinalist
- 8 week internship at software development company
I feel if you remove the amount of years I’ve participated in my ec’s, I have an excellent profile (very solid accomplishments). Will the superficiality and appearing desperate really negate solid accomplishments? I don’t need to get into Stanford or a top Ivy, but I also don’t want to go to a bottom tier school. Aren’t MIT and Caltech also more stats-based, so shouldn’t tangible accomplishments help there. And what about UCB or UCLA EECS?
Go back and look at post #47. You DO have some ECs.
You really need to go onto the threads for UCLA, UCB, MIT and Caltech and look at who got admitted and why. MIT and Caltech are huge, huge stretches for ANYONE, and UCLA and UCB are stretch schools for anyone. Sure, being a finalist at one of these huge competitions will help you, but you won’t be a lock for admissions. When you are making up your list, you should be making it with an eye that you will NOT get accepted to these schools and that you have enough match schools that you can afford and be happy at.
I’m noticing that you keep on pushing these super reach schools and you winning one of these top competitions. Are you trying to figure out whether it’s worth it to you to do one of the competitions? And you are assuming that you’ll win. The competition is going to be fierce. If you’re doing the competition just to increase your chances at these tippy top schools, statistically you have an excellent chance of being really disappointed.