<p>Funny I thought CCer would be able to understand the concept of hypothesis…</p>
<p>
Yes. Why is this so surprising to you?</p>
<p>I had also thought of the Ivies as an opportunity for many… I was wrong. It’s only for the elitist snobs that think they are above everyone else in intelligence, who understood that they had to make perfect A from day one into high school, join many EC and take many AP/IB to make themselves look good, and take a outdated exam that is nearly based on how well you can study…</p>
<p>^^^ I don’t know what you want me to tell you.</p>
<p>“Oh yeah, a 2.0 GPA is fine, if the person also gets a full SAT score, and literally does everything else perfectly.”</p>
<p>As far as I know, that might happen, that might not happen. </p>
<p>Like I said, “speculation about such a scenario is pointless”. The process is, as others have said, holistic. Harvard regularly rejects people with great GPAs and full scores, and regularly admits people with lower GPAs. We don’t know what they want for certain, but a high GPA can’t hurt. People get into great colleges despite bad GPAs, never because of bad GPAs. </p>
<p>No one on this board can tell you for certain what a low GPA means for certain.</p>
<p>But surely you’re aware of acceptance rates to the Ivy League and their general reputation of being difficult schools to get in?</p>
<p>… You’re assuming. Do any of you truly actually know that my hypothesis is true or false? I doubt it. @renoverchat:“speculation about such a scenario is pointless” …your statement also applied to those that think they can get in with a 3.8, 2350, and great essay…</p>
<p>^Descuff, I’ve been trying to tell you this whole time that literally no one can know if it’s true or false. That’s why it’s pointless to speculate. Only the admissions officers can tell you if you’ll get it.</p>
<p>"…your statement also applied to those that think they can get in with a 3.8, 2350, and great essay…"</p>
<p>Yes, it does. That’s why I wrote on the last page: “Harvard regularly rejects people with great GPAs and full scores, and regularly admits people with lower GPAs.”</p>
<p>Ik, I talking to the other people…</p>
<p>I don’t know of any URMs who can just waltz in with a 3.5 uw. O___o My 3.9 uw keeps me awake at night. So…</p>
<p>^ Which is why I think it’s absurd that people assume a URM got in with a low GPA/SAT/ACT.</p>
<p>Yeah.</p>
<p>I mean, perhaps someone with a low GPA can get in with a combination of things, but URM alone? Nah, son.</p>
<p>Ivy league, an opportunity for many? Lmaoooo </p>
<p>It’s called ivy league for a reason.</p>
<p>What he said,</p>
<p>Selective isnt 75%</p>
<p>Can you safely lie about your race on commonapp ?</p>
<p>^^ lol no (10char)</p>
<p>I didn’t mean many as in everyone. I meant many as in people who goes there. If someone with a low GPA and high everything else can’t get in than that grand opportunity is useless.</p>
<p>Sent from my LG-VM696 using CC</p>
<p>Why useless? How many people do you think there are out there with nearly perfect college application attributes with the exception of a 2.0 GPA? And for the very few people in such a situation, why do you think they deserve a spot in the Ivy League when they could have tried harder in high school classes instead of slacking off and getting a 2.0?</p>
<p>There are many circumstances for why people would get lower grade. Poor income family with child working two jobs so they can pay off water bills and gas bill. Student could have some sort of disability that prevent them from making good grade with u so strongly support. They probably ****ed off a bunch of teachers and they all change his grade. There are many reasons. Also you’re saying that no one with a 4.0 slacking off shouldn’t deserve to get into an ivies league.
And even if they slack off how can we be so sure they will do so in college? I mean I do slack off a little but I don’t intend to do so in college because I’ll have pretty much no chores, no car, and no family distraction.</p>
<p>Sent from my LG-VM696 using CC</p>
<p>Your first 2 hypothetical situations would make it difficult for a student to achieve success in all of the other necessary aspects of the college application - it doesn’t explain why a student would have solely a low GPA but high scores in everything else. I don’t see a problem with the last situation. Why would an admissions officer want to accept a student who has a history of angering his/her teachers, and thus consequently has a higher chance of angering his/her professors over a student with no such history?</p>
<p>There are a few problems with your 4.0 slacker idea. First of all, it is somewhat of a contradiction to have a 4.0 GPA and be a slacker. Such a person must do the things that gain points in a class (such as homework, participation, tests, etc), which doesn’t really fit in with any reasonable definition of a slacker. Secondly, there’s also letters of recommendation from teachers, which aren’t going to be that good unless a student does what the teacher expects a good student to do (again, in contradiction with the definition of a slacker). Also, if there is a hypothetical high school where grades are solely determined by tests (no homework, participation, anything else besides tests), then this student would be doing all of the required work anyway (just tests), and thus cannot be a slacker.</p>
<p>Your last point: Of course no one can really know (if it was possible, I would like to get some lottery numbers from this person because this would entail being able to predict the future). However, you can infer that a particular student has a higher chance of not slacking by his/her history over another (which is basically what the entire admissions process is about).</p>
<p>guys if you really want to get into an IVY</p>
<p>and I mean if you REALLY WANT TO, here’s what you do</p>
<p>do your homework, do good in school, have fun with your outside activities, study for tests, and then apply</p>
<p>that’s what you do.</p>