<p>I just don't get the admission process with these ivy leagues lately. I mean, I know spectacular students who I thought for sure could slide through admission into ivy leagues yet they have been turned down. But then, u hear these stories of kids who didnt have brilliant scores or anything but they had good ECs. So what does it really take to get into Ivy League schools? Are ECs really a huge deal in admissions?</p>
<p>Because they get tenfold times more applications than slots, there are no students who could for ‘sure could slide through admission’. They just can’t take everyone who is qualified. EC’s can be a major factor once you are in acceptable range and shown you can do the work. Many will have eye popping EC’s but not everyone.</p>
<p>I’ve always thought that unless you are absolutely SPECTACULAR at an EC (like, you can be ranked on the national level, that’s how good you are), you need good grades. But I don’t know how good “good” is. </p>
<p>However, I don’t think simply having good academics/scores is ENOUGH, necessarily, but it will make you worthy of consideration.</p>
<p>You need to have the test scores, the GPA, and very good ECs to get in as an unhooked applicant.</p>
<p>Ivy League admissions are basically a crapshoot for most applicants.</p>
<p>When you get 30,000 applicants for 2000 spots, most of which who are more than qualified, you can go for applicants that simply interest you. We also know some amazing kids who didn’t get into any Ivy’s. However, they tended to be amazing in the same ways many applicants were amazing… top scores, grades, sports, ASB. The kids we’ve personally known to get in are a little quirky. They aren’t all tops in school but tops in something a little different outside of school. They tend to have interesting stories.</p>
<p>Our daughter is only applying to Brown because that’s the one Ivy that excited her. We see it as a “throw away” application. Her stats are in the middle range for Ivy League but if she gets in, it’ll be because of her EC’s. We see it like buying a lottery ticket… a 75 dollar lottery ticket lol.</p>
<p>It’s one of those times where the best, most outstanding students have little control over the outcome. Type A personalities struggle with that aspect of the process. Some kids are a little cocky and approach the process as if they are guaranteed to get accepted. </p>
<p>You only go through the process once so you only know what you know. Some kids have paid consultants guiding them through the process and some approach the process the same as they would for community college so some great applicants go in with half the knowledge they need while others are coached by experts.</p>
<p>There are myriad other reasons why Ivy admissions seems so mysterious but no two people are the same.</p>
<p>Do Ivy leagues actually look at every application they get? Because I mean they get thousands so do they just kind of have a machine or person narrow it down then only look at the certain narrowed down ones? Or do they actually sit and go through all 30,000 applications?</p>
<p>Perhaps the question is… Why do YOU want to go to an Ivy League? Is it the prestige? The bright minds you will be surrounded by? The Intellectual challenge? If your motivation for going to an Ivy League is anything other than being at the front lines of what there is to know then perhaps you should consider other schools you can devote your skills too. No one will admit it on this specific website but Ivy Leagues are drastically over hyped. There are lists and lists of schools where the starting and mid-life salaries are much higher than those of the Ivy Leagues. Why not study abroad and learn a second language, maybe gain some life experience, before you spend 4 years of your face stuffed in a book to just spend another 4 years with your face stuffed in a book. Honestly, no one except your mother or wallstreet cares if you went to an Ivy League and your mother would love you regardless of what school you go to. </p>
<p>[12</a> Colleges Whose Job Payoff Is Better Than Harvard - ABC News](<a href=“12 Colleges Whose Payoff In Pay Beats Harvard's - ABC News”>12 Colleges Whose Payoff In Pay Beats Harvard's - ABC News)</p>
<p>During last years London Olympic Games, I came across the following:</p>
<p><a href=“Hsing Nearly Beats Li in Olympic Table Tennis - The New York Times”>Hsing Nearly Beats Li in Olympic Table Tennis - The New York Times;
<p>and thought it would be interesting to follow up on the story.</p>
<p>I learned the other day by accident that she was accepted at Yale and Princeton and will be attending Princeton. No mention of Stanford, her dream school.</p>
<p>If it takes personal relationships with Bill Gate and Warren Buffet, straight As in school, and two games off eventual Olympic and World Champion to get into an Ivy, the odds are not very good for the unhooked, is it?</p>
<p>I wonder what her SAT scores are </p>
<p>Why do colleges want athletes anyway? Those Ivys are giving out their money to athletes yet what do athletes provide for those colleges? What is it that colleges seek in athletes? We all know Ivys aren’t known for sports and anyone would rather watch a Duke game than Harvard vs Princeton, so it’s not like athletes are supplying something those colleges don’t already have. Are athletes able to keep up with the supposedly demanding academics at top universities?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Olympic medals, Ivy league titles, NCAA tournament appearances (Lin, Kameer), Pro league representation (Lin, Fiedler, Fitzpatrick, Lavarnway).</p>
<p>So they’re recruited for commercial purposes. Not that there’s anything surprising about that it’s just strange considering those colleges are beyond famous for sports recognitions?</p>
<p>Good SAT scores and a high GPA are a bare minimum requirement for admission into Ivy League/elite colleges. </p>
<p>You also have to offer a unique skill or talent - and the way the schools measure the strength of that talent/skill is by National Awards in ECs.</p>
<p>Ivy League schools are willing to sacrifice some academic merit in order to achieve these types of students, because the intensity and time required to become a nationally ranked individual in a specific area will take away time for school.</p>
<p>2400 SAT, 4.0 uGPA w. no ECs just tells schools all you do is study and you bring nothing unique to the table. Someone w. 2100+ SAT & 3.8GPA but is nationally ranked in something like Debate is preferable to Ivy League schools.</p>
<p>My .02</p>
<p>I would highly recommend you forget what sports league the School plays in and choose a School that you think you fit into academically, socially, culturally, politically … etc.</p>
<p>I got rejected from all but one of the 4 ivy leagues I applied to last year haha. Different schools are looking for different people I guess. </p>
<h1>ohwell Stanford Class of 2017 <3</h1>
<p>i feel like once you’ve proven that your scores are above the academic threshold necessary to continue to be considered for these top schools, it then becomes a matter of how you personify your accolades and experiences and demonstrate why you’re a good fit for the school, whether one is athletic, musical, artistic, etc.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>yep. this is why people shouldn’t apply to ivies if their sole reasoning is “OMG IVY”.</p>
<p>Well, it’s not just the appearances and commercial reasons, for sports. Student-athletes actually do very well in college, when they are true student athletes (not the pre-pro football players and such). I work at an Ivy and supervised resident assistants, many of whom played a variety of sports here. It’s precisely a school like these top places that put sports in their proper place - they get to play a sport that they love, but their coaches know that academics are #1 and they also have enough time to be an RA, do an internship and sometimes one or two other activities. Often times student-athletes do better than non-student-athletes, depending on the school. There’s some research out there on that.</p>
<p>I think Ivies look for athletes the same reason that they look for violinists, ballerinas, power volunteers or genius mathematicians. They add some roundedess and diversity to the student body and make for an enriching experience for the students who attend.</p>
<p>Thank u! The hyperlinks were very interesting to read!</p>
<p>Here’s my unofficial list of what Ivies want (Just my opinion-Not hard science)</p>
<p>1) Natural Ability & Consistency: A natural student will have great grades and board scores all through high school. (Don’t forget one technically starts taking Boards sophomore year with the NMSQT, then PSAT, the SAT. Personally I think a 145 PSAT & 2250 SAT (3 time) shows a lack of consistency and natural ability.</p>
<p>2)Solid EC’s & Rec’s that shows Adcom that one can function outside and inside the classroom. I tend to believe that it’s not so much about contributing to the campus but instead showing Adcom that one will not be disruptive on campus with weirdness or immaturity. A disruptive student is probably much more harmful than whatever help a good/supportive student can offer.</p>
<p>3)Not prepackaged: Reporting too many unverifiable EC’s, and unknown awards and claimed research papers, shows a slant toward salesmanship instead of real achievement. BTW if your research is that good, send it to the dept head of the university and he/she will likely get you in.</p>
<p>4)Diversity-It never hurts. The magic bullet for admittance might be as simple as being part of an usually small applicant pool from your state, city, school. </p>
<p>5)The ability to pay some tuition can’t hurt.</p>