<p>I sometimes hear about people who apply to schools of varying difficulty, yet sometimes the harder school accepts the student and the weaker school rejects him or her. Like a person getting into Harvard but getting rejected by Cornell. </p>
<p>I think at some point there has been be some randomness.</p>
<p>Yes, at some point. But that’s assuming you’re well above their acceptance numbers in grades, tests, etc.</p>
<p>Does anyone think boys have an advantage in acceptances - or put another way, there are more girls with high grades/scores/ECs?</p>
<p>I have boy/girl twins, and on paper my D would appear the better candidate - higher GPA, more balanced SATs (excellent writing) very good ECs - artsy, theater, volunteer, music etc. Yet D is wait-listed at American U while S was admitted with modest financial aid; S has been admitted everywhere he applied, so far, including three quality B-schools; D is in at one SUNY but no fin aid, and has yet to hear from first choices. We’re stunned at S getting into American and D waitlisted.
My theory is the competition isn’t as strong among male applicants, so it’s easier to stand out. But maybe that’s not true. Thoughts?</p>
<p>You’d have a point if girls scored higher than guys on tests. The other info can’t be compared (ECs and Grades), but if you look at the SAT breakdown by gender, males score a decent amount higher than females in all three sections. Those results quite surprise me because I always assumed women would perform better on CR and Writing, but that’s not the case.</p>
<p>We have heard from D’s guidance counselor and read in several articles and books that colleges find it hard to get maintain as girls are more academically qualified than the boys, so it IS easier for boys to get in to college.</p>
<p>[SAT</a> Percentile Ranks for Males, Females, and Total Group](<a href=“http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:0b2cmUDxYhIJ:professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/sat_percentile_ranks_2008_composite_cr_m_w.pdf+2008+sat+percentile&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a]SAT”>http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:0b2cmUDxYhIJ:professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/sat_percentile_ranks_2008_composite_cr_m_w.pdf+2008+sat+percentile&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a)</p>
<p>Numbers don’t lie.</p>
<p>Many schools - like American - also have classes with girls to boys on a ratio of 2 to 1 (66% female). So, those schools might be trying to even out their classes.</p>
<p>Boys actually have the advantage at the current time in admission. There are more girls in college, and many institutions are trying to balance that out. </p>
<p>There is an article in the U.S. News College Ranking edition magazine.</p>
<p><a href=“字神帝國英語學院 :: WordGod English Institute”>http://www.wordgod.com/download/SAT/05.pdf</a></p>
<p>the above link is broken, but basically boys are scoring higher than girls</p>
<p>this random [Dirty</a> Secrets of College Admissions - The Daily Beast](<a href=“http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-01-09/dirty-secrets-of-college-admissions/full/]Dirty”>http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-01-09/dirty-secrets-of-college-admissions/full/)</p>
<p>andreeab: now that’s some messed up shi*t right there</p>
<p>I don’t think college admissions are all that random. Colleges look at other things besides GPA and other “numbers.”</p>
<p>Lets take this example for early decision Stanford at my school</p>
<p>Everyone said “oh that was so random, Student 1 is so amazing and got rejected, but student 2 got in!”</p>
<p>Student 1: GPA: 3.98, SAT:2190, SAT 2: 780/800, Extracurriculars: study and please over-involved parents. Basically has no personality and would not contribute to the college social scene.</p>
<p>Student 2: GPA: 3.49, SAT:1990, SAT 2: 680/620, Extracurriculars: talented writer, varsity Soccer, volunteers time at hospital where his brother “lives”…would be a tremendous asset to colleges.</p>
<p>Now, all the chatty people who can only talk about grades and “impressing colleges” and have no balance (you all know the type I am talking about) were downright outraged that Student 1 was rejected over Student 2 (I know some of them refused to apply regular decision after hearing about how outrageous these decisions by Stanford were).</p>
<p>Colleges dont just throw app’s on the floor and pick a few up to make their choices. Look really hard at the people who get in. If they aren’t just study worms and DON’T get straight A’s…then there is likely something else they have that is attractive to colleges.</p>
<p>Just some of my thoughts after observing our entire NHS club up in arms over these seemingly “unjustified and totally RANDOM” decisions that weren’t that random at all.</p>
<p>^^^^Not random within a specific college.</p>
<p>i won’t call it randomness but LUCK
and that does make a big difference!</p>
<p>To some degree, luck really does come a big way.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Your logical fallacy is assuming that that is random, when in actuality, it was probably very carefully thought-out. Ever heard of WashU or Tufts syndrome? The weaker school is pretty sure that the applicant will get accepted by a more selective school and that the applicant will probably not attend the weaker school since he/she was just using it as a safety, so why bother wasting a seat in the admitted class on someone who will most likely not attend?</p>
<p>As for whether college admissions in general are random: I’d compare it to one of those card-shuffling machines at casinos. The machines themselves actually use very complex algorithms to sort the cards and admissions is very careful at both considering the individual applicant and how they could fit in with certain other applicants to produce a diverse class. However, to outsiders both systems appear very random since they do not know the algorithms used. The shuffled deck appears to be shuffled perfectly randomly, until some wise guy decides to do in-depth analysis of it.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE=Dare7to7Dream]
i won’t call it randomness but LUCK
[/QUOTE]
Luck IS random.</p>
<p>If you look at it closely, it’s not that random. Too-qualified students do get rejected from safety schools (like, super safety) because nobody wants someone who is 99.9% going to some place else and lower your yield. Similar colleges give different decisions because maybe they think you aren’t that great a fit (Columbia and, say, Dartmouth are very different places that want different types of students), or maybe your answer to the “Why X” question isn’t that great. At the end of the day, everybody is concerned about yield, so people who sound like you’re just “trying your luck” at a place and not really interested in it at all probably won’t get the nod.</p>
<p>The random cases do exist, though, i suppose. Because admission officers are people who “feel”, and our feelings are sometimes random. Sometimes we like certain people and believe in their abilities to succeed without having any tangible proof.</p>