<p>I was talking to my counselor, freaking out about the 7% admit rate, but my counselor says a lot of unqualified people apply due to a misguided sense of notion that Stanford is as simple to get into as a community college (due to the social influence Stanford has).</p>
<p>He estimates around half of the 30,000 applicants are underqualified, so the admit rate is just a fancy number....unlike MIT and Caltech's applicant pool (where specialized and competitive people apply), Stanford's pool is so much broader...</p>
<p>I wouldn’t say a lot of “stupid” people apply, but rather that a lot of people apply who have a very long shot at getting in. At my school, there’s probably about 10-15 people applying to Stanford, but I’d say only 2-3 have a reasonable chance at getting accepted.</p>
<p>With the Common App, applicants today are applying to many more schools than applicants in the past. It’s as easy as filling out a supplement and putting in a credit card number, so students are a lot more likely to put extreme “reach” schools like Stanford on their list. They have a “Why not?” sort of attitude. </p>
<p>I notice this particularly with Stanford, probably because Stanford seems most accessible to the everyman, whereas HYP still hold the faint connotation to elitism and old wealth, and schools like MIT and Caltech are renowned as the “braniac” schools. I’m not saying that any of these presumptions are right or wrong, or that Stanford is any less prestigious than any of the schools I mentioned; I’m just saying it’s the general public perception.</p>
<p>Do I think college admissions have become more competitive over time? Yep, it’s pretty clear that they have. I talked to my dad about it (an MIT alum), and he told me that his SAT scores were between 600 and 700 in each section, he spent minimal time on his essays, and his extracurriculars were nothing special, yet he still got in. I’ve talked to Stanford alums who told me the same thing. Obviously, things have changed. But I think that’s only part of it.</p>
<p>People can’t honestly say that every year, six percent (the percent increase in applicants to Stanford this year) more talented people apply to college than the year before. That kind of increase doesn’t make sense. We’re not becoming more and more exceptional as a society at such an incredible rate. Yes, competition is EXTREMELY tough for these schools, and they often have to turn away thousands of very talented and qualified applicants. But with the revamping of financial aid, coupled with the simplification of the application process, many more people who might not be so well qualified have the “Why not?” mindset and put schools like Stanford on their list. And that’s why the acceptance rates keep on shrinking.</p>
<p>Keep in mind that the admission statistics for Stanford become more promising if your GPA or test scores are higher… there is a breakdown somewhere on the admissions website, but I’m too lazy to find it now. For example, I think the acceptance rate is somewhere around 20% for applicants who score 800 on the CR portion of the SAT… so that kind of proves the point that not every applicant to Stanford is super smart, and if you are indeed super smart, you will have a slightly better chance.</p>
<p>soadquake981, I entirely agree with your analysis. I think being “super smart” is important, or better yet, knowing your strengths and making the most of them (super smartness can be overrated). I think it’s not the great GPA or scores themselves, but the qualities that come with them. For example, an 800 CR or W score may correlate with really fantastic essays. The better you score the better, of course, but I think it’s a matter of correlation and not causation.</p>
<p>Haha, uh oh. I got an 800 on CR, but I can’t do creative writing / college essays at all. I’m more of a formal essay writer. My Stanford essays were definitely more on the concrete side of the continuum, rather than abstract and creative. Oh well, we’ll see what happens.</p>
<p>@Applicannot, does that mean if I have a lowish SAT score (2000-2100) but a high GPA and good ECs and a good essay, my chances are almost that of someone who scored 22+? That’s assuming everything else on my app is EXACTLY the same and I’m just not a good test taker.
That situation is purely hypothetical by the way. I can’t get above an 8 on an SAT essay so I doubt I can write a great college essay.</p>
<p>No. If the rest of your application is exactly the same, they’re going to choose the student who has “something” that is better. That is, the other person’s test scores are better, illustrating something. However, if the rest of your application was measurably better in other qualities, then sure, I imagine you’d have a chance. Being a good test taker is - in my opinion - a requirement for life. That’s one of the reasons I support the SAT despite its numerous flaws.</p>
<p>Yeah my impression has been similar to post #4 as well.</p>
<p>Stanford seems to give off the vibe of the eiite school for everybody. At my HS in IL a handful of top students applied to Stanford every year, usually none of them getting in, while nobody applied to HYP because they didn’t feel that people like them went to those schools. At admit weekend I heard people talk about a much more eclectic group of schools they also applied to than when I visited Y. </p>
<p>However, I think Stanford likes to take a different kind of student than HYP anyway so to Stanford it probably has an equally difficult time discriminating between applicants.</p>
<p>I am a part of that “stupid” statistic. I applied just because I would always be curious whether or not I would have made it to Stanford by luck or not. It’s a dream school and I just wanted to give it a shot. I’m a below average applicant (4.18 high school gpa, 7 college classes, 1940), but I did spend weeks on my essays. So yes there is a 1% chance of me getting in and I think that is a reason why the Stanford acceptance rate is low… many people like me apply who do not have a unique story but have always wanted to go to Stanford with our mediocre statistics.</p>