<p>
[quote]
I, on the other hand, got rejected SCEA. And I just got accepted to Caltech RD
[/quote]
Seriously, never in all my life will i understand how stanford makes their decisions. it seems like they just choose a decision at random out of a hat or something...i can't even begin to tell you how many people i know with a similar situation. boggles my mind</p>
<p>SCEA is single choice early action. There seems to be a concensus that applying RD actually gives you a better shot than SCEA at Stanford because they will only take the top top top kids early. Usually the acceptance rates are higher for SCEA than RD (and for Stanford it is; MIT is an example of where it's where EA and RD rates are the same), but the applicant pool is much more competitive. Anyway, you should apply SCEA if it is truly your first choice school, not because the odds are better.</p>
<p>The only consensus is that Stanford has even more weirdo selections than its east coast ivy brethren.</p>
<p>^true dat. based on their selections they might as well choose names out of a hat; it will save them some time.</p>
<p>I got deferred from SCEA. I guess that gives me the best of both EA and RD, with a lot more nail-biting involved? ::nervous chuckle::</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>exactllllllllllllllly~</p>
<p>^ They needn't have hooks to get in, and I also don't think they simply took some people with very high stats. I got a 2320, 35 ACT, two 800 SAT IIs, 4.0 uw gpa, valedictorian of my class. CLEARLY stats were not a significant basis for acceptance.</p>
<p>^ i hope that was sarcasm..if not...then that was disgustingly boa****l</p>
<p>i have no idea why they blocked b.o.a.s.t.f.ul....until i spelled out s.t.f.u...lol XD</p>
<p>I'm actually saying that Stanford (obviously) looks at so much more that stats and REFUTING the statement made earlier that "they took those with the most amazing stats as well." It's not as though admits were either "super amazing unique applicants" or "academically perfect applicants." I suppose I should have mentioned that I was rejected, thus my claim that stats aren't a category that they singularly based early acceptances on.</p>
<p>my bad...i seriously have problems reading..hence the 690....i guess we know who's definitely NOT getting in..X_X</p>
<p>"In the Bay Area, the only people who got in early to Stanford were legacies who donate gobs of money and children of people who work at Stanford because Stanford pays for college education...." </p>
<p>Not true that only legacy Bay Area kids get in SECA! I'm a first-generation (my parents don't work at Stanford either) and I got in SECA... is that unusual though?</p>
<p>this is making me anxious lol. consider this:</p>
<p>say that i am an above-average applicant.. fairly unique, but not CRAZYYYY. if stanford is and has always clearly been my first choice school and i DO finish my apps early and work my butt off on them, would it be better to apply SCEA and possibly get rejected (and therefore not be allowed to appeal) or RD?</p>
<p>fdhsgfhsdgah</p>
<p>basically, the people who got in early either had legacy, URM, or were nationally ranked in something. for those applying next year, don't do SCEA unless you have one of these things, despit the so-called "better acceptance rate". However, if stanford keeps accepting people based on things they can't control (legacy, URM), then i don't know how they'll fare in future years.</p>
<p>^...not true...</p>
<p>what constitutes "unique"?</p>
<p>also, is it just <em>any</em> national award, or must it be something academic, like math? i know that scholastic arts and writing and NCTE awards, for example, are less competitive/ easier to get than certain science awards are, though they are both national.</p>
<p>forizzlejdl, do not do SCEA casually. Stanford is unlikely to reward someone
because it is their first choice. </p>
<p>Just having awards will not help. Essays that are superb may help in RD but
is not going to make up for lack of awards during SCEA.</p>
<p>I applied RD with the Arts supplement (11/15 deadline). It was quite
a surprise to receive an early approval! You can look up my profile
but basically I believe it is the essays that matter more than any awards
after you have a few of them at the national/international levels.</p>
<p>Do you think the arts supplement helps a lot?</p>
<p>Oh and in Math USAMO could help but in a given year there are so many
of them that other achievements like USNCO or USABO might be required
to bolster the academic achievement profile.</p>
<p>Research achievements like Siemens , Intel STS or Intel ISEF (more common)
maybe helpful alongside some Science Fair placements.</p>
<p>Additionally, Gold Key awards are sure tot be looked at favorably (especially
if you make it at the National level).</p>
<p>thepapercrane:), If you have unique achievements that can be highlighted by submitting an Arts
Supplement, yes it will surely help. Keep in mind though this will get evaluated
by the actual departments (Drama/Dance, Art, etc.) and remember this is Stanford.
So the quality level sought by these departments will be commensurate with
their preeminent status in Art.</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>I don't know. I think i am pretty unique, but then again, this is my easily misled opinion...
i'm pretty sure my portfolio will be high quality.</p>
<p>baah. but essays are so subjective!</p>