<p>for example, can this help the applicant more than academics do? i know that academics are the top priority, but how much do admission counselors consider the extra curriculars / leadership?</p>
<p>
Colleges, when you come down to it, are in the education business. At the top schools they use ECs to help them select between strong candidates since they get more apps from kids in this category than they can admit, having already weeded out those who are significantly weaker academically.</p>
<p>No, it will not take precedence over academics, though a kid with strong but slightly weaker academics may be admitted for reasons like racial/geographic diversity, meeting institutional needs (ie, brass for the band), or because they happen to want more debaters that year.</p>
<p>Your ECs can say a lot about you – what you’re passionate about, how you spend your time, and so forth. It can definitely help schools look at you as a person. That being said, you’re not going to get in a top school if you don’t have the grades as well, unless you’re an extremely rare case with special circumstances. Stellar ECs may allow for some wiggle room in the academic department, but not much. It really comes down to where you’re applying.</p>
<p>Well, it depends on the school and on the ECs. If you’re a potentially an NFL-caliber quarterback and you’ve led your HS football team to one or more state championships, then I think your ECs and “leadership” could potentially compensate for some weaker academics at a lot of schools, even some elite ones. But apart from athletics in sports that really matter to the school and where the particular athlete in question is being recruited by the coach, ECs and leadership are for the most part going to be no more than a tie-breaker between two otherwise equally or similarly credentialed candidates. And at the most selective schools there will be lots of candidates with both strong academics and impressive ECs, probably more than the school can admit, so having strong academics and strong ECs just puts you in the pool of those who will be seriously considered. From there, the adcom’s job is to put together an “interesting” class reflecting a range of interests, accomplishments, and life experiences. At that point it’s no longer even a question of choosing the “best qualified” candidates; out of the larger applicant pool, there’s a subgroup that’s deemed more-or-less equally qualified, and selection from within that subgroup is not based exclusively or even primarily on comparative merit.</p>
<p>Honestly, at privates, especially Top 20, they mean A LOT. Of course they won’t compensate for “poor” grades, but they use ECs to discern between equally strong candidates. Here’s an example (assume equal recs/essays):</p>
<p>Student A: 4.0 UW GPA, 2400 SAT, but is only a member of 2 clubs and is treasurer in 1 of them. Has never competed in any tournaments (Debate, HOSA, DECA, etc) nor has ever played a sport. Has done roughly 100 hours of community service.</p>
<p>Student B: 3.85 UW GPA, 2200 SAT, but is president of 3 SIGNIFICANT clubs (HOSA, DECA, Debate), has placed in many tournaments in the respective clubs, has done 200+ hours of community service, and has a medical internship under his/her belt. </p>
<p>Which student will Harvard, for example, accept?
Student B. Overall, colleges want the best and brightest kids they can find; HOWEVER, they also want students who will contribute/be successful in the real world. They don’t want a class full of molecule-counting bookworms; they want students who are brilliant yet exemplify leadership and involvement outside of the classroom.</p>
<p>The reason Student B “won” is because he/she showed that he/she is capable in the classroom (assuming same class rigor as Student A, a 3.85 is solid), he/she can take a national test and do very well (a 2200 is 99th percentile), and he/she is a leader outside of the classroom. Student A is exceptional in the classroom and on a national test, but won’t succeed (based off his/her resume, on paper) in the real world, unless working in a lab or in front of a computer. Of course there are some students like Student A who DO get accepted, but it’s definitely not a shoe-in if your numbers are perfect.</p>
<p>Just my 2 cents…of course people may disagree, but this is my take on the issue :)</p>
<p>yes, i get your point golfer but you make the mistake of thinking that EC’s and grades are all there are. Of course not. There are essays and recommendations among other things. you also assume leadership positions are everything. i don’t believe so. passion and dedication is where it’s at!</p>
<p>ultimately i don’t think it’s the EC’s that get people in. if for some reason, you can make yourself stand out FOR WHATEVER REASON, if you make that positive imprint into that admit officer’s mind, you’re a leg up above the rest. try to make your personality shine through in your application.</p>
<p>but to answer OP’s question, no EC’s will not make up for poor grades.</p>
<p>Haven’t applied and accepted, but not only do my EC’s make me stand out, some are on the verge of a hook because they are so unique in how I used them.</p>
<p>Just made the edit. I meant to say to assume equal recs/essays (I know this is impossible, but it’s just for explanation’s sake). I by no means ever said that ECs could make up for POOR grades, but a 3.85 is by no means poor. Now if you’re rollin in with a 3.5 then that’s a different story. And leadership usually shows passion/dedication…so that can be assumed.</p>
<p>ECs are very important in top schools</p>
<p>You can’t just assume passion/dedication golfer111…surely we can all agree we know people that have attained leadership positions that are neither passionate nor dedicated.</p>
<p>Some of the indirect generalizations you’ve made are ridiculous.
Why are we weighting HOSA, DECA and debate as significant clubs when they might pale in comparison to other clubs…such as SO?</p>
<p>I understand the need for colleges to accept students that are not simply talented in academia yet…at the end of the day. person A got a perfect SAT score. had a perfect GPA. and did a healthy amount of community service on an objective basis.</p>
<p>Curious question…(I am a creeper) I went through your old posts (because i felt the examples you gave of the students were so specific…debate hosa and deca are just an odd combination) and I noticed that your own self reported stats are an almost identical match to student B.
No one likes grandstanding…especially when its done in such a way that you pit yourself against an imaginary student and make yourself “beat” him…</p>
<p>On the other hand.
ECs are crucial brah</p>
<p>don’t worry, OP, many people, including me, are f**ked in the EC’s arena.</p>
<p>i don’t worry about not having a job for admissions but i just never really do leadership positions. why? never interested in being prez of NHS or something or the other. <shrug></shrug></p>