What kind of awards or extracurriculars are a big hook in elite college admissions such as Harvard and how prestigious do the awards/EC’s have to be in order to make up for bad grades (e.g. 3.5-3.6gpa).
(Besides recruited athletes)
If you look at Harvard’s Common Data Set, C11 Data Point, 87% of admits had a 3.75 unweighted GPA or higher in high school: http://oir.harvard.edu/files/huoir/files/harvard_cds_2014-15.pdf
There are only four “hooks” in the Admissions process: recruited athlete, legacy, URM, or Developmental Case (child of a $$$ donor) and those students sometimes have lower GPA’s and test scores. Although William Fitzsimmons, Harvard’s Dean of Admissions, has stated this about legacies: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2011/5/11/admissions-fitzsimmons-legacy-legacies/
A tipping point for awards would be an Intel, Google or Siemans semi-finalist or finalist, but those students generally have high GPA’s. A tipping point for EC’s might be a concert-quality musician (a student who has played at Carnegie Hall, San Francisco Philharmonic etc) or the equivalent in another field.
If you are not a “hooked” applicant, or an Intel, Google or Siemans semi-finalist, or concert-quality musician by all means apply to Harvard in the RD cycle, but you should be looking at more appropriate colleges for your GPA.
Have you tried the SuperMatch tool on the left edge? Transcript is the single biggest factor. Trying to see if something else “makes up” for it isn’t going to be worth your time. Good luck
@gibby What about being first generation? In that case, would it be appropriate to apply to Harvard in the EA cycle?
Being 1st Gen isn’t going to make up for a middling GPA. The only hooks that will make up for a middling GPA is recruited athlete, development case, or famous in your own right (e.g. if you were Malala Yousafzai), or your parent is POTUS.
^^ Correct. NOTHING is going to make up for a lackluster GPA. I think Yale says it best:
it is equally unlikely that wonderful EC’s or awards or being a 1st Gen will persuade an admissions committee to disregard an undistinguished secondary-school record!
Assuming you’re not a heavily recruited athlete or a member of the Kennedy family, the biggest “hook” you can have is simple: find something you’re really passionate about and pursue it voraciously. Then, write about it.
If getting into Harvard were a two-step process I genuinely think that’d be it. I’ve seen incredibly accomplished kids get turned down because they or their applications read as “boring,” laundry lists without passion or vibrance. On the flip side, I’ve seen kids with less-than-brimming resumés get in because they’re earnestly curious and excited, and reflect that spirit in every breath they take (I may or may not count myself in this category).
While grades and SATs matter, and should be above a certain threshold to get you in the door, I’d argue that passion is the single most decisive factor in Harvard (+ co.) admissions. Unsurprisingly, it’s also something you can’t artificially summon for the common app. It’s something that drives you and inspires you, continuously, far beyond the parameters of Ivy League pats-on-the-back.
So my recommendation is to do some soul-searching and just immerse yourself in the stuff you love to think about. Maybe for you its linguistics, or experimental theatre, or computational astrophysics. Or maybe it’s something less academic — like singing or doing the crossword every morning. Whatever it is, dive in. And the good news is that by the time you’re deep in it, you won’t actually give a d*mn about Harvard anyway.
Good post by astroknot. Since the post is about chances for admission, I will say that there are students who get into Harvard or other selective schools with less than stellar transcripts, if they do something wonderful outside of school in an area that, yes, they are “passionate” about- and work hard at.