Stats:
average (36 ACT, but not in all subsections, 800 in only three subject tests, 4.5 W GPA)
Extracurriculars:
Founded an organization that has raised a few tens of thousand dollars for cancer research
Three patents (two for vaccines, one is a shoe that creates energy when you walk)
Been researching stem cells since I was 10 at Harvard
Published 4 papers (one in Cell, two in Nature, one in a lowly journal)
Won some national science competitions but I can’t say what cause that will identify me (e.g. second at Siemen’s, etc)
2 Scholastic Gold Medals in Poetry
Club volleyball and sailing for 9 years (placed in a few international competitions)
Soundcloud rapper
Captain of a bunch of school clubs
Auctioned off a few paintings for $10,000
FBLA state officer
Certified Nursing Assistant that created a program at a local place to streamline services
The post above is obviously fabricated and OTT. Is exaggerating about stats common on CC? I ask because it might have an impact on whether people apply to certain programs or schools (“he/she got incredible stats and didn’t get in so it’d be a waste of time for me to apply”).
I think 1/2 are honest. The number of unweighted 4.0’s does not seem possible to me. And then, once in a while, you get an obvious liar. It is too bad because it pollutes the environment for all involved.
About “placing” in international competitions, my daughter played club vball and at some national tournaments (where some teams are from other countries - so maybe could be described as international competitions) every team places - her team once was placed 45th out of 85.
I think there is often some exaggeration. For example, one student with an easy to identify EC said she won two scholastic national gold medals in poetry when in actual fact she won two regional gold keys (impressive, but very different).
We had two perfect stats kids at my D’s HS - 4.0UW/1600/36. S0, to me it does not seem so unusual to see so many high achieving kids posting here. Plus there is a lot of self selection as to who is using these boards.
That said, every year there is a 9th grader, posing as a senior, who posts stats for a “chance me” thread that haven’t happened. Not sure if that’s wishful thinking or just kids messing around.
Well, I recently read some absurd statistic that said 50% of students were A students. So maybe the GPA’s are correct.
I think a lot is highly exaggerated. Eg, the kid works for a non-profit and does a small project then claims the entire scope of the work.
Some of the listing are obviously done by parents. ( When my oldest was in 4th grade there was a science project done by a mom who was a cardiologist. The explanation alone was worthy of a post-doc.
This is especially true of internships at major companies and centers. Who is going to hire a 17 year old to do serious work.
At some point, one has to ask does this seem credible? Are there enough hours in the day?
I this particular poster was making an obvious joke . The other post he/she made in the thread is quote below:
Well, my sister was paid to attend Yale University and I am cousins with one of the people in the picture you see on the Simons webpage, so could that help? I have been practicing containing myself from moving couches out of random buildings and not crying when I get a strike so would that multiply my chances? My mother founded the Collegeboard, so unfortunately she didn’t take the SAT…Is that bad? I don’t go to school in Ohio, but I am from Michigan, which some people say is as equally irrelevant. I am friends with Al, so could that even things out?
Also, I was wondering, but does the Emporium have Kombucha or LifeWater I could take some artsy pics with on my bike? If not, I may consider not applying seeing that my chances are so bad…
If you look into Science Olympiad national high school winners, you will ask yourself if those projects/research shall be handled by post-doc, or college researchers. Many winners just simple got data from their parents, of parents’ friends. High school students can modify DNA/RNA? What a joke?
The person cited by the OP was very obviously posting in jest.
There are probably some posts which exaggerate stats/accomplishments. On the other hand, I do believe there are students who have significant advantages over others that tend to allow for significant ECs, for example.
I think most of the time, people on this site are fairly honest/straightforward. Honestly, to me, it’s not important enough to think about too much.
Yep. Some parent is convinced that X or Y will get their child into a competitive university so they set up a job, science fair or any number of other things. There are many discussions on CC about who has written essays for applications.
My kids have competed at high levels in a couple of STEM fields. Parents are not allowed in many areas. We have seen parents try to do numerous things to give their kids the “edge” I have seen this at many events across multiple kids.
Then parents are distraught when their child fails to launch. It’s truly amazing.
I believe “exaggerated” is too simple a word. To me, the bigger issue behind it is that kids over-estimate what’s going to be impressive (or even sufficient) and so often get it wrong. Too many go into this, at best, underinformed.
Imo, there’s no point in assigning some percent value or guesstimate. Where it exists, it exists. And it happens too often. Add this: these kids rave on and plenty of responders on CC are complicit in the hoohah by praising them. Duped or just wanting to encourage, I dunno. But it says something about those responders, too.
Yes, lots of kids have 4.0 averages. I don’t stop to question this. There’s a lot of speculaton as to why, but some scholar would need a deep examination to figure out more. Deeper than we usually deal with on CC. And when you’re reviewing holistically and there are so many potential points of failure, whether or not one 4.0 is the same as at another hs pales. (There are obvious differences at the extremes, sure.)
So imo, the question isn’t whether all this discourages other possble applicants. Rather, why they believe all this, in the first place. Why they can’t do a little of their own digging and self matching? What is it that they buy the snake oil.
I think you know, I respect your opinion, but respect and agree…
Have you ever done the math to see how many “non-A’s” out of 16 it takes to obtain an unweighted 4.0 average. The answer is 0. Not a single A-. We have trained ourselves to believe that CC is seeing some sort of elite applicant, but from my experience as an observer, that is not the case at all. We get regular kids here for a variety of reasons and the large majority, as you can tell by their writing (and thinking), are not going to top colleges.
Sometimes students post their target stats and the activities they’re planning to do without really specifying that’s what they’re doing. It only comes out later as the threads progress. I think they know the adults here aren’t going to give them a formula for getting into an elite school so they try to find out without asking directly.
I think others intentionally mislead. College admissions is competitive. In the years I’ve been here I’ve seen posts that negatively assessed a prospective applicant’s chances. Occasionally, I’ll recognize the poster from their own threads that mentioned applying to the same elite college(s). Just because some random person on the internet says you’re not qualified or they claim to have an amazing profile doesn’t make it true.
The place to gather hard data about any program is the official website. CC can be a good resource for broad strokes, but anonymous posters from a site wholly unrelated to the programs can’t be relied on as a valid source. People have been known to exaggerate and tell outright falsehoods on the internet. Students should thoroughly examine the official websites of the colleges and programs they’re interested in before deciding whether or not to apply.
“Some” of her points are excellent. The reality is some kids need honest feedback from a stranger. Some kids need just the encouragement. Some responders should maybe be more selective about what they answer, but their intensions, from where I sit are good (even to the exaggerators, but not the liars). So, you won’t hear me insulting someone for making an effort, when the effort is requested. And the best part of all is there are some excellent questions (not most) and excellent response (not most either), but the good ones make up for a lot. Of course the kids (and parents) should and will do more research, but people ask questions for so many reasons. I see absolutely no value in adding complexity to situations and ignoring people who need help.
