<p>Thank you for this post. It made me feel much better about myself. :)</p>
<p>Doing some massive forum-lurking, and I wanted to bump this since it was kind of uplifting to read, even though it’s so late in the game!</p>
<p>This is the best post I’ve ever read on CC :)</p>
<p>avdaxes ~ very, very well said. thank you.</p>
<p>you have to be very good. stats & numbers would show that. very well-rounded, passionate, committed & involved. ecs would present that. finally, you have to make the admission really, really want you to be in Stanford campus. that so-called “NICE” factor that Stanford is looking for!</p>
<p>Should you not say things like “I have a passion” in your essays but rather let this fact show itself?</p>
<p>Good advice!</p>
<p>GlobalDolphin,</p>
<p>I doubt you need to specifically specify what your passion is – I wrote purely existentialist essays.</p>
<p>I wholeheartedly agree with the original poster. Just have fun, and be yourself. Even if you don’t get into THAT school, you’ll get into another school that might be even better for you. Things will work out in the end.</p>
<p>Exactly. Show your intellect with grades and test scores, then show how crazy awesome you are with your essays. it’s good to break down the application and see what sections accomplish what and then tailor it to be that way. I’ve got a year until I apply, but i’m going to bookmark this for future reference</p>
<p>Is is good advice - the problem is, in my opinion, that colleges only seem to be looking for students who have insane, driving passions, and I think this expectation of a high schoolers is ridiculous. Personally, I feel like college, and especially ivy league admission, is making teenagers who don’t have these intense passions feel worthless. It’s unrealistic that everyone should have this by 17… but I guess that’s why so few people get into Ivy Leagues… and to think it used to be about intelligence…</p>
<p>Here’s another thing you forgot: You should not (preferably) be Asian. They want diversity (even though it’s illegal to base your decision off that), but they really stereotype on this. An Asian with much better grades than, let’s say, an African American applicant and more passion (given both have a lot of passion to begin with to be competitive for Stanford) will have an equal, probably LESS chance than the African American.</p>
<p>The world we live in…</p>
<p>EllaVirginia: </p>
<p>That’s sort of how I felt when I began the whole college application process-- I’ve always gotten involved in whatever interests me but have not yet discovered a single, driving “passion.” However, in my essays I talked about things that I care about (languages, theater, travel) and I was admitted to Stanford. So, it seems like admissions officers appreciate well-rounded, articulate kids as well as the superstars with the singular interests.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wait! The Stanford facebook group includes those that got in to Stanford that the used CC (because, otherwise, how could they “regret” using it?). If they used it and got in – wait, wait!! – what’s to regret!!! Your statement is illogical on its face. We need to have the facebook group for Stanford rejects who used CC in order to make your implication valid.</p>
<p>I’ve got to say that I loved the essay question on the Staford supplement concerning tell us about your intellectual passion or something like that – in our school, a lacrosse player got in who has all the intellectual firepower of a doorstop. This is why Stanford makes it clear on its application (in case any lawyers are listening) that it can abandon any part of the application and just do what it pleases. This explains why we see all those lacrosse players exhibiting their “intellectual passion” – or not.</p>
<p>Amazing post. Thanks for your time</p>
<p>^^ Glad I could be helpful to you.</p>
<p>Placido</p>
<p>My daughter’s college counselor once told her that “These institutions make decisions based on what is in the best interests of the institution, not what is necessarily in your best interest.” </p>
<p>If a school is going to field a lacrosse team (although I think Stanford’s men’s LAX is a club sport) they had better recruit someone who knows how to play lacrosse - and probably plays it well enough to well represent the university. </p>
<p>That will be a decision decidedly not in the best interests of applicants who either do not play lacrosse or do not play it well. </p>
<p>Another very old saying is appropriate here. Comparisons are odious.</p>
<p>You could do all of those things as the OP said, but I still think 85% of the criteria still is your GPA, SAT scores, rigor of your course etc (which puts in the door). Since there just are so many applicants. Also if you are in a competitive school, what I have seen is, typically only the top 1-2 get in (they obviously have the gpa and the stats) and then add on, some other excellence (sports, music etc). Not to put a damper, but in some ways, you are also competing against other kids in your school/local area. I haven’t seen as much of lower ranked kids get in unless they are an athlete or urm.</p>
<p>I love you. You are a wonderful, amazing person. Congrats on Stanford.</p>
<p>I’ve made these exact points to students and parents. And they don’t listen!!! Congrats!</p>