HI!
I am a sophomore set on going to Vanderbilt! Looking for extracurriculars, ACT score needed, and gpa needed in order to secure a spot!
As of now i have about a 3.65 (out of 4) unweighted GPA and just starting ACT tutoring.
It may seem early but this is really important to me!
Thanks 
Vanderbilt looks for students who stand out. This can be done via extracurriculars. What do you enjoy doing outside of school?
Thanks for the reply! Sounds tacky but outside of school I enjoy helping others. I have an active role in the tutoring club where i tutor kids every week for two hours, a volunteer job at the local family center, and hope to start at a retirement home soon. I also do tennis and do statistics for the swim team.
get a 34+ act
When it comes time to apply, consider applying ED. I took the campus tour and admissions information session a couple years ago. I learned that roughly half the class comes from early decision but only 15% of all applications are ED. So it appears that applying early will really boost your chances. If you apply early, you will also be organized enough to apply for the merit scholarships, which require some additional work but can be well worth the time invested. Good luck!
And more importantly, keep up the great work and helping others. No matter what you will live a happy life if you continue your path
Vandy is very scores oriented. Study for your standardized testing!
^ Very very true - try to get a 34+ or you can probably forget about Vandy.
^ all this, and also, do you have any academic/athletic/musical ECs? Your current volunteer work looks a little haphazard (I’m sure you enjoy it all, but a little here and a little there says less than if you were to spend more time in one place). If you’re going to be passionate about service, go all in. Also, I’d try to get a higher GPA, mine was 3.7ish unweighted and was on the low end.
IMHO VU is no more test score or GPA oriented than any other top 30 university. VU is no less holistic than any other top U. They are just doing a better job of enrolling more of these students.
Check out their CDS for the numbers needed. They also report 100% of accepted students have received major awards or held significant leadership positions. 100%, not 99%.
^ It just seems that compared to a number of factors that their average SAT scores just seem higher than peer schools so I bet that their holistic admissions process is more weighted to SAT scores than similar schools. I was surprised to see that their EBRW 75% level is “only” 770. I’m sure that they will try and get that number up if they use their waitlist.
Early Decision, especially ED1. It is 23% vs 8.6% regulation decision.
“IMHO VU is no more test score or GPA oriented than any other top 30 university.”
While Vandy is of course holistic like all top 25 schools are, the numbers don’t lie.
The 25-75 ACT range for Vandy’s 2020 enrolled class was 32-35. That’s the same as Princeton. Stanford’s was 31-35.
School’s like Vandy in the 11-25 band obviously weight test scores more heavily than the 1-10 schools do.
There’s no single magic bullet. But if you really want to get into Vandy, applying ED with a 35 ACT is a great start.
@northwesty : And then there was Cornell, Emory, Georgetown, Berkeley, Dartmouth, and Brown. Interesting catch for the top 10 though. Even those with really high scores have been in the same score range for years or a decade. They have maybe been slightly fluctuating up and down but haven’t been trying desperately to add 10-20 points each year. And the schools I refer to are HYPMCoCh(Ch is new to the score emphasis. It changed to the same admissions scheme as VU, WUSTL) and of course Caltech (this is just natural at STEM schools). Then there is another cohort that are basically identical score wise that, for SAT, have taken a while to or refuse to hit 1400 for the bottom 25%. These are Duke, Penn, Stanford, and JHU (though JHU has shot up and appears to be using the scheme that increases the scores quickly) as as far as I know. But even among those in the high score brackets. The score in that range will do little to predict an admit or wait-list because many applying in their score range are applying as a top choice for sure meaning more folks in those ranges will be denied than at other schools where the yield is solid but still much lower. They pretty much just focus on other things when even around the score range.
In addition, Vanderbilt is one of the places that used to give a speech on the admissions website about how SAT levels the playing field. I have also read language in strategic planning documents suggesting that their admissions is now a “meritocracy” which suggests intentionality(made up word) and a potential agenda. So they could have begun placing that much emphasis on the scores due to a mixture of wanting to drive up the rank and also because of these ideals.
There is also this which I find strange: https://admissions.vanderbilt.edu/vandybloggers/2017/02/class-of-2021-early-decision-summary-statistics/
Why list a percent of students that has a “major” leadership position? It almost seems as if the admissions office has caught on to students perception the stats emphasis so they write in distractors like that to suggest that they care just as much, which they may, but that is a very strong claim and one may want to know how that is defined. It just reads a bit fake, like when a certain president’s press person comes out and says “biggest inauguration ever!”. I mean, why say anything about it?
Either way, Vanderbilt is not the only non-STEM Ivy using this admissions scheme. I just do not understand why use it. Increasing the scores will do very little for performance beyond a certain threshold. Perhaps schools like Chicago can almost justify it because they still known for a much more stressful academic environment than peer schools and were known for it before they chose to pump of SATs. But for schools generally not known for super stressful academics (and this is giving them benefit of the doubt, I think other metrics can be used to measure students ability to handle this because these schools are not usually stressful because the courses give multiple choice tests that are quite coachable. They are known for heavier workloads and maybe exams that are intentionally unpredictable or unusually challenging), I do not really see the point. I guess you’ll start seeing higher grades in disciplines that are considered easier? Or ones where multiple teachers still do have multiple choice (easy MC at that) as the major form of assessment? Which, I think should not be the case at any elite school. I just think the emphasis should be tailored to predict success in much more challenging situations (but we all know it has nothing to do with maintaining or enhancing academic standards. It has nothing to do with undergraduates themselves at all. Who wants to bet that each cohort that has 50SAT points or .5ACT points higher than the last has almost exactly the same EC profile at these schools?). Apparently, while GPAs and class rank are inflated, they have been shown to have more predictive capabilities by many studies. These elite highered maneuvers in admissions just get old to me. They already have high achieving student bodies. Instead of trying to make the SAT average a 1550/1600 instead of a 1540, get back to ensuring that these folks get a challenging, modern education that the schools are supposed to deliver on. Using the admissions office to represent the prestige and quality of the school is just getting old and nearly all are guilty.
rant over: Until they stop focusing on this, if you applying to one of those schools, aim for a 35-36 if you desperately want to get in. It will not remotely guarantee you but chances will be more correlated than at other schools.
BTW, the first list are basically schools that have yet to have an incoming class with a 1400 25% on the old SAT as far as I know. Really, there are maybe only 2-3 in the 15-25 bracket that have met and surpass that bar. And the thing is you can’t just claim all the others are failing. Dartmouth, Brown, and Cornell definitely have a choice, and it appears they are choosing not to. Even many of the elite LACs choose not to and they very well could I bet. So among places with the super high application volume (and even those who don’t like Rice which is getting close), it appears to be a choice. Most schools remain normal and saw periods of normal growth in admissions and some chose schemes that got much quicker change to the score brackets as soon as the application volume increased.
Just some evidence that there is a particular strategy that can be employed (and has been) if you want a quicker rise in stats and national standing (basically these patterns of sudden popularity and high app. volume for certain schools is not magical or prospective students “waking up” all of the sudden). Chicago’s changes were highlighted here. Seems the schools outside of the top 10 with unusual high score brackets employed similar strategies for different reasons and sadly, I think in terms of the rank, USNews has caught on. There seems to be a ceiling for schools without the academic reputation of some of those top 10 schools. Hence, why WUSTL can fluctuate despite it also having HYPM like score range. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/education/edlife/07HOOVER-t.html . Again, schools employing this strategy should now refocus efforts on offering differing academics than competitor schools because this method has its limits in terms of attracting certain types of students and has marginal effects on the rankings for some places.
I think some posts are off topic here. The person was only asking help to get better chance in getting to Vandy, not an analytical reasons why top schools are gaming rank by only taking high scorers. I have seen some school had white paper for that topic. I only know from my child that with an ACT 33 and no major leadership (unless you would consider church worship and small group leader) was able to get admitted this year by applying ED.
@amNotarobot : That is considered major leadership. They said “100 %” of the ED and RD applicants had that so it counts lol. So, basically, for ED, get high stats (let us say 33 and higher, but the closer to 36 the better) have solid ECs and then cross your fingers as everyone has to do. For RD, I am willing to imagine, you probably need a stronger EC profile as the volume is so much larger, but when, on a new SAT scale, the lower quartile of the SAT is like 1510: https://admissions.vanderbilt.edu/vandybloggers/2017/03/class-of-2021-regular-decision-summary-statistics/ maybe a 34+ and/or like a 1550 is more helpful.
You need a very high score plus better ECs than most candidates in ED I would guess, but I wonder if Vanderbilt, outside of the super duper candidates that will get into every elite school they apply to, perhaps prefers certain types of EC profiles. Maybe more well-rounded and less pointed or academic. I feel only current students can tell the OP what may be preferred beyond insane stats. Also, it is very possible that, because of the application volume, it is like everywhere else. Once you meet the high statistical threshold, there just may be very little rhyme or reason. I feel applicants to these places need to learn to accept this despite how tough it is. They also need to know that they are usually not less qualified than admits. They just were not chosen because there were way too many darned apps.
They definitely have some formula or data for those who have high stats and are likely to yield (40-50% yield takes some strategy). It has to come from what they usually see in resumes, academic interests, and general EC profiles. It seems also, that they have a really good handle on which schools in their tier that they tend to compete with most for these very same applicants and know which ones are winnable without scholarship money (maybe some financial aid). Perhaps they use the waitlist to avoid too much overlap with certain schools that they do not deem too similar that students yield to over Vanderbilt in higher numbers. Basically they have figured something out, but to us it would appear there is no rhyme or reason because if you look at profiles on CC, they are biased towards the stronger end (assuming students posting are truthful). If you look at the whole pool, you will see high achievement in terms of stats, but I wonder how diverse the EC profiles (or whether they fit profiles at similar ranked schools that Vanderbilt has a yield advantage over) are for admits and waitlisted folks vs. the many qualified denied applicants.
Regardless, we cannot pretend to know beyond: “Definitely do super well statistically”
Until someone comes up with a better objective way to evaluate students from different high schools the ACT and SAT scores are here to stay. I still think VU high stats are due to more high stat kids wanting to attend. There are many reasons for this: happy students, school spirit, academic community, marketing, academics, research, financial aid, Nashville, merit aid, etc…
Don’t fool yourself and think other top U’s aren’t attempting to do the same thing. Top U’s with low test scores are having difficulty attracting today’s students to their campus. Some top U’s are so concerned with test scores they report false numbers, turn to international students to boost their scores, or limit the number of incoming freshman then fill their classes with transfer students. These are the U’s overly concerned with test scores.
Today top students want more than a great education. They are attracted to schools that offer the best education plus a great quality of life while in college. High test scores are one way to determine desirability of a university. Yes, there are many other ways to do so. The most desired U’s tend to have higher scores.
"Until someone comes up with a better objective way to evaluate students from different high schools the ACT and SAT scores are here to stay. I still think VU high stats are due to more high stat kids wanting to attend. "
I really don’t think that SATs are the best “objective” way to evaluate kids from different schools. There are tons of empirical research that shows that high school grades are better indicators of university performance than SATs. Actually, with just about all kids applying to top schools taking AP or IB courses, (not to mention international kids taking National Exams) the universities could easily change their focus from SATs to GPAs plus AP/IB scores and downplay SATs and still end up with strong classes…
Also, I think it is more a case of VU wanting high stat kids rather than high stat kids wanting VU as most high stat kids would rather stay on the Coasts where the job prospects are better and the political climate is more liberal.