<p>This is a statement I've heard from a few people and a statement that I disagree with. I don't think that anybody can make a fair assumption (even adcoms) about who belongs/doesn't belong at a university based on a 20-minute rundown of some stats and a few essays. </p>
<p>Thoughts?</p>
<p>Well for more selective universities they only have so many spots they can fill, not only do you have to belong there but also be able to distance yourself from everyone else.</p>
<p>Sometimes it’s just that there aren’t enough spots for all of the qualified kids. If you get rejected from a school, and someone with very similar stats gets accepted, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they belong there and you don’t; it might as well mean that their application was read on a good day, and yours was one of the last ones read, late in the day, when the adcoms are tired.</p>
<p>I think that statement is more steered towards “If you didn’t get accepted, it wasn’t meant to be”</p>
<p>Not “you’re not good enough”</p>
<p>I happen to believe in the statement. There is a reason that schools have minimum standards based on grades, scores, etc. How can one be successful at a particular college, maintain a GPA and eventually graduate if they cannot demonstrate to admissions some type of minimums? It is one thing to be admitted, yet far another to remain at that college and be successful. Admissions (hopefully!) look at all parts of that app which can account for score(s) (if poor on a student’s bad day), grades (overall GPA) and not just one class or semester, commitment to ECs, a well-written essay, teacher recs, etc. So, yes, in effect, if you were rejected from a particular school, you may not have survived more than a semester or two. You may have “belonged” there, but you may not have been successful, much less been able to graduate in four years. I suppose you could say that the tests are skewed in one way or another, but most schools accept both ACT and/or SAT scores. Not to mention that you can take these tests on more than one occasion at varying locations. Grades–span a period of at least four years. Teacher recs-the student has the option of asking teachers they want to write those recs. ECs–you, again, as a student choose to participate. Therefore, the student presents a whole package; if that package does not somehow represent what that particular college is looking for in a particular year, then NO, you probably don’t need to be there. Don’t most students want to be successful and graduate in four years?</p>
<p>^^IMO this couldn’t be farther from the truth…often students are rejected because even if they have the stats to get in, their demographics are not what the school is “targeting”…female/male, diversity needs, geographic goals…etc…</p>
<p>by you didn’t belong there, most people probably mean that you wouldn’t fit the student body, and you’d probably feel different. Adcoms admit people they believe are the best fit for the school (whether it be academically or character-wise). If someone gets rejected from a top school, it means the adcom didn’t think he/she “belonged” there.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is just silly. You mean to tell me the people who get rejected from Yale but goes to Harvard and do well would have failed out of Yale? Or what about my friend who was rejected from Brown but graduated with with a 4.0 and high honors from Wesleyan while also being super involved in the community (tutoring, holding huge offices in a Greek, working in the admissions office, etc)? Sure, Wes might be easier to get into, but I don’t think the acedmics are so much easier (or any easier) that someone who can graduate from here with a 4.0 would fail out of Brown. In fact, I bet they would have done quite well there too.</p>
<p>I mean, sure, if your uber-reach was Harvard but the only place you get in is a second-teir state school where you struggle, probably you were not going to survive at Harvard. But most people are more realistic about where they apply, so that if they did get into their reaches they’d probably do fine (in fact, I know someone else who got rejected or waitlisted at every school around Wes’s range, but managed to get into Wes, and is now on track to maybe get Phi Beta Kappa).</p>
<p>rodney-if you will look at my post, I said you may not belong because you have not presented what a particular school is looking for in a particular year. Maybe the demographics did not match what that school was looking for in that particular year.</p>
<p>And, weskid–admissions look at the total package, or so I would like to believe. Perhaps that engineering degree at Harvard varies just a bit than it does at Yale. My point being that it isn’t all about the academics necessarily. Yes the minimum standards are a part of it, but it is all about what a particular school may be looking for in that particular admissions year.</p>
<p>And, as far as academics and being successful, I have seen a lot of posts with kids posting stats for admissions to very high calibur schools that sometimes border on what admissions advertises as minimums. Have to wonder if those kids do indeed maintain a GPA and graduate in four years.</p>
<p>Yeah, I don’t exactly agree with the whole “If you didn’t get in, it’s because the adcoms don’t feel like you’d be successfull here.” My friend was valedictorian last year, was waistlisted at Harvard and rejected from Cornell, but admitted to Brown, Vanderbuilt, and she’s now at U Penn (and isn’t dying there either). These schools are at about the same level of intensity, and chances are she would have done fine at Harvard or Cornell too. I really think it’s just a matter of if your in the demographic their looking to fill, or if your app just gets read by the right person and you have that “something special.” If it’s meant to be, it’s meant to be.
(But yes, if your reach school is wayy out of your test score/grade range, then your rejection may be because the school can see you won’t work hard enough or whatnot to be successfull there)</p>
<p>‘your kind dont belong here!’</p>
<p>well to me its not that adcoms don’t think you’d be successful, its that you don’t fit what THEY want in a student body. Every top college wants people who are passionate and kind, but they need to see it. They want to see the things you have overcome and see if you can make a positive contribution to their student body, not just take things that they offer. I’ve also heard of people being accepted to ivies such as Upenn and only getting C’s and some B’s.</p>
<p>Ooo i just had another thought - a pretty good analogy if I do say so myself=)
I think it’s sort of two different actors auditioning for a movie. Look at say, Whoopi Goldberg and Meryl Streep. Both extremelyyy talented but could you ever picture BOTH of them being exactly perfect for the SAME role? Love Whoopi, but pretty sure she wouldn’t have worked in Sophies Choice ;)</p>
<p>I totally disagree with that statement. It honestly is foolish to say…especially in highly competitive areas of NY and NJ, many candidates are rejected because they are in the wrong area and don’t have anything the college wants. Are you telling me a kid from Stuy who gets rejected from Harvard would fail out? That’s incredibly narrow-minded. At the same time, does being accepted mean you belong there? Obviously not if colleges have high transfer rates.</p>
<p>OTOH, I do agree with the “If you got rejected, it wasn’t meant to be/your path”</p>
<p>Noob has two statements:</p>
<p>“If someone gets rejected from a top school, it means the adcom didn’t think he/she “belonged” there.”</p>
<p>and “its that you don’t fit what THEY want in a student body”</p>
<p>From my experience, I completely disagree with these points. What I’ve seen through about 20 yrs of interviewing is that the vast majority of applicants are qualified and as far as i could tell, done fine socially and academically at my HYP alma mater. They would have “belonged” and “fit” just as much as I did. however, it’s a numbers game and there is only a finite number of spaces. It becomes an art and not a science. Not a value judgment – just a feel of what’s needed for the aggregate pool.</p>
<p>And toomuchpressure: is a 20 minute read of one’s file “fair”? Fair as compared to what else? What would be a reasonable alternative? I’d like to know how you can make it MORE fair… It’s not about who “belongs” but a choosing from among those who eminently qualify and COULD belong – how many can I squeeze into my limited incoming class.</p>
<p>One day you may be in a position to look over a stack of resumes. What “fair” system will you employ?</p>