<p>Hmmm. Just wondering. I'm a junior gearing up for my second go at the ACT next month. I am on the Academic Decathlon team, and last year, a fellow teammate, with a 2.7GPA (oout of 4.0) pulled off a 31 on his ACT. He also wrote a fantastic essay in which - wait for it: said that starburst candies were essential to life and learning lol!!!! But he did not want to apply to any ivies because of his grades (which really transitioned to all As and Bs by his junior/senior years). So how many smart slackers get in - I hear this all the time... a C student getting 30+ on the ACT or 2000+ on the SAT.</p>
<p>I don’t think a 31 ACT coupled with a 2.75 GPA cuts it for anyone who’s not hooked.</p>
<p>If I’m not mistaken, collegiate academic promise indicated by your high school academic performance is given significant weighting by the adcom. If you give them the impression you’re going to cruise through your Harvard experience, they might be motivated to admit someone else.</p>
<p>31 ACT is really barely good enough for Harvard, combined with a low GPA would make a Harvard acceptance really unlikely. Sounds like your friend was smart not to waste his money.</p>
<p>Unless he’s hooked in a big big way he’s not getting into an Ivy League college.</p>
<p>haha I’m a smart slacker.
except I got a 2360 and a 4.0 :p</p>
<p>^ haha, d0uche move</p>
<p>^ Haha, l337toast FTW.</p>
<p>Smart slackers do not get into Ivies. If they did then the Ivies might as well start using IQ tests as part of admission.</p>
<p>Smart slackers =/ low grades, bad SAT. I know of many slackers who do not study for any tests but miraculously get A+s on everything. So yes many do get into ivies. If you are talking about a slacker with bad grades, then that’s a dumb slacker who doesn’t know how to suck up to a teacher or spend 5 minutes looking at notes to get an A. I hate those people who think they’re smarter than the SAT or school and end up with bad grades.</p>
<p>Well, if you’re a “smart slacker” who gets good grades and whose transcript is exactly like someone who is a hard worker, you still might get tripped up since many of those colleges have so many applicants with 4.0s and 2400s that they look at other things like recomendation letters, extracurricular activities, and essays to base their decisions. Those might be a hurdle since it’s hard to really “BS” your way through Varsity lacrosse or solicit good rec letters from teachers who you were rude to during class everyday.</p>
<p>Frankly a 31 ACT really isn’t impressive at all. It certainly won’t be enough of a reason to overlook a 2.7 gpa</p>
<p>^^^^
Haha. Why do you think smart slackers are rude to their teachers?</p>
<p>Ok let me put this to rest…</p>
<p>There is no such smart slacker who can never crack open a book or listen in class and make A+'s. He/She is either pretending or feigning their “Super” intelligence and secretly studying his/her ass of at home.</p>
<p>That or he/she is smart enough to study themselves. Still requires some time.</p>
<p>No such thing as a complete slacker who makes excellent grades. I’m sorry. I have dashed everyone’s romantic views about that super-slacker who sleeps casually in class and somehow churns out A+'s : /</p>
<p>But of course, there may be some people who have excellent memories and just scan the lessons over before a test. </p>
<p>But you have to ask: Did they really learn anything or just memorize and regurgitate more efficiently?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Your basic point is certainly correct, but even among the submissions to top five institutions, 2400/4.0 qualifications still constitute less than one percent of the applicant pool. Perusing CC tends to create a highly idealized conception of the prevalency of extremely high qualifications.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They’re not all rude, but there’s often a correlation between someone who thinks that they’re super-smart and don’t have to work and someone who thinks that they don’t have to even pretend to pay attention in class.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s a good point. Still, most applicants to those top five colleges are extremely competitive. They don’t have to settle for laziness. I’m not saying lazy people don’t get in, but it’s definitely harder for them.</p>
<p>haha sorry for being a giant arsehole!</p>
<p>but there are people who don’t study and get all A’s, it’s just that we’re different learners. I can’t read a textbook for more than 1 hour, I just can’t do it. But I can half-listen in class and remember everything that the teacher said, nuances and all included. And tests are another thing: some people are just good at taking tests. If you have a very analytical mind and pay some attention in class, you can generally score very high on any exam. If you have a high capacity mind, you can cut out most of the processing time and be very efficient with your time. </p>
<p>I’m rambling, but tldr; some people can pull off straight A’s and not work hard at all</p>
<p>har har I have taken quite a liking to Esplin’s post in #14. My sentiments almost exactly. :)</p>
<p><<i’m rambling,=“” but=“” tldr;=“” some=“” people=“” can=“” pull=“” off=“” straight=“” a’s=“” and=“” not=“” work=“” hard=“” at=“” all=“”>> I know, right? All you have to do is take 5 AP classes a year and not do work at all and get straight As. Easy. AP classes don’t give homework. Their tests cover like 1/20 of a chapter so it’s even easier.</i’m></p>
<p>Cough cough…</p>