<p>I got accepted, rejected, and waitlisted at all the colleges to which I applied based on my numbers. You know how you hear that "passion" and all that are more important to colleges than numbers? LIES. Unless you are a URM, recruited athlete, or have started your own company or have cured cancer, you will get into all schools based on your numbers.</p>
<p>I was ACCEPTED at: UC Santa Cruz, UC Santa Barbara, UC San Deigo, Santa Clara Univ., and NYU.
I was REJECTED at: Brown, Claremont McKenna, Columbia, Cornell, Georgetown, Harvard, Stanford (after deferral), UC Berkeley, UCLA, and Univ. of Chicago.
I was WAITLISTED at: Johns Hopkins and Boston College.</p>
<p>Everone in my school was basically accepted based on their numbers. I was, too. I know many schools did not accept me based on my math SAT score. I'm at peace with that... but I am sad that I even thought for a moment that I could get in based on my interest and passion.</p>
<p>I'M GOING TO NYU...! It rocks (especially in PHILOSOPHY). I will make a difference and it's not my loss. I also hate that senior year grades don't matter. I didn't really work until junior year, that's why my GPA is so low. It's almost as if we're being judged according to our pasts, not according to what we could or will accomplish.</p>
<p>I don't want people to think that they'll get in based on something other than numbers (unless they're exceptional, that is...).</p>
<p>Oh, stats --
My SAT scores were 670CR/560M/690WR.
My GPA was 3.7UW and 3.9W.
I have been class president for two years, have occupied several leadership positions etc.
I have A LOT of passion, potential, and ability which I demonstrated through my essays (I am a good writer... not so good at math). Passion for philosophy and law.
I am FLUENT in two languages (entirely bilingual) and decent in another two.</p>
<p>Agreed. Even with some of those things it still doesn't work. I had a great amount of EC's, I started my own company at 16, over 1000 hours of community service and still I was rejected by a few schools. It sucks that numbers matter so much but the reality is that they have to because there is no way to meet 20,000 plus potential applicants. Oh well. NYU is nothing to be ashamed of and i'm sure you'll do just fine</p>
<p>I was able to get into Penn RD without insane numbers. Now, my numbers were pretty damned good (2230 SAT, 750 MATH II, 760 CHEM, 2/589, hardest classes, all A's), but I think what got me in was my focus and passion for going into medicine. My essays were, in a roundabout way, based on being a doctor. I work at a hospital. I talked about it for a while in my interview. It's kind of a part of me, and I made that evident. </p>
<p>I was also able to visit the campus a few times, and I met a professor there. I mentioned that I met him when asked who I would like to do research with (which Penn professor), but he didn't write me a letter of recommendation or anything. </p>
<p>I just wanted to let you know that I don't believe it's all about numbers. My numbers were good, but they are average, at least I think, for Penn. I feel like what actually pushed me in was my extracirricular stuff, my interview, and my displayed interest in the school. </p>
<p>Number matter up to a certain level. When youre applying to all ivies and you have the basic stats (2200+, 3.9uw, etc)...from then on its whether the adcoms like your essay</p>
<p>^^what did you do at the hospital? And how did you get your job there? Did you know someone that works there that helped you get your foot in the door?</p>
<p>I started just delivering food to patients, but I have since moved into some more skill-oriented work in the nutrition office working with patient diets, etc. I still go up on the floors and work with patients though, which is what I truly enjoy. The only way that people are able to get jobs in our department in our specific hospital is through networking. It's pretty hard to get in, but a friend of mine whose mother is the head nurse for the med-surg floors was able to give me a recommendation of sorts. </p>
<p>JackBauerPowerHour -- THANK YOU for making this post. It's so true. I hate how everyone says extracurriculars/good essays/fantastic recs/an interest in the school can override numbers. For some people, yes, SOME people can get away with that. But it just does not apply to the vast majority of people. I also had a poor underclassman experience -- I wasn't challenged and I was downright bored in my classes and didn't care about school. That changed my junior year but it was not enough to be admitted to schools that wanted someone with higher GPA/class rank. It's just really weird to me that someone who is taking easier classes AND doing bad in them as a senior will be admitted over a straight A senior with the hardest course load possible. Colleges care about skeletons in the academic closet.... and in my opinion entirely too much. </p>
<p>JackBauerPowerHour, i might be going to nyu too!!!!!!! and i was waitlisted at boston college, as well. we're really alike... i got rejected from brown, cornell, georgetown, and UCLA.</p>
<p>now it's a matter of nyu or berkeley... unless i get into stanford from the waiting list. i definitely agree that most of the schools just looked at numbers, except for stanford... my numbers aren't spectacular but my stanford essays were very good and personal, and i'm glad they took that into consideration.</p>
<p>Yeah, Stanford I think is exceptional... They actually deferred me SCEA. NYU rocks! Hope to see you there #1 in philosophy, baby! Oh, btw, is your screen name based on the Elton John song? I like his music Oh, and UCB didn't take me, and this girl in my class got in instead. Every year, Berkeley takes 2-3 (never more) students from our grade. This year was particularly competitive, and because this girl had a better GPA (not even by much) and better SATs (in math -- I had better in both english sections), she got in. She has no ECs and is generally dispassionate. She's also a bad student this year. She was good in 9th-11th, I've been good 11th-12th and somehow I'm worse...?!</p>
<p>In response to mf06d: you need a minimum, then passion/ECs and all that matter. As long as youre like me, and you have a 560 in Math, you know you wont be taken. "2230 SAT, 750 MATH II, 760 CHEM, 2/589, hardest classes, all A's" is really Ivy material. I'm not surprised you got in... Congrats!</p>
<p>You know, I'm bitter too. But I'll end up somewhere great. I'll do something great and I don't need an Ivy for that. I'm just sad that they couldn't look past my numbers. SATs don't measure anything. Don't they know that yet? I could have studied hours on end for them and gotten 800 on all of them, but what does that mean? I wouldn't feel intelligent or good about myself, I would have felt like I sold out. (I know it's ridiculous, but I find the SATs borderline unethical.)</p>
<p>mtrizzle06: what was your GPA. It matters more at NYU.</p>
<p>Touche.
I hate that people always say "well you don't have to be a valedictorian to get into harvard/yale/princeton"</p>
<p>This is going to be my ONE bitter outburst. In this one post, I am eschewing logic and reason and saying what my gut and heart are saying:
Shut the **** up!</p>
<p>Check out the accepted threads. See how low the rank gets.</p>
<p>My mom read an article in the paper about how essays are the last thing a college looks at in an application. I had pretty much no ECs, but a good GPA and ACT, and that's what got me into college. Sure, it's different at many of the top schools, but for most people it's just based on numbers.</p>
<p>The thing is that this board isn't composed of "most people."</p>
<p>I had an "F" in online PE (which DEFINITELY calculated into my GPA) in addition to three B's for final grades (2 of which from junior year).</p>
<p>My SATs were 2170 (or 2160, depending on how you combine them)--a tad below all the other schools. Subject scores were "okay" by top tier-standards.</p>
<p>I'm not a URM and I'm the antithesis of an athlete.</p>
<p>I still got into all the top LACs I applied to, plus Brown. Rejection at Yale and Columbia; the first was expected, the second didn't faze me as I applied because of peer pressure anyway.</p>
<p>I can say definitely that my scores weren't responsible for getting me in.</p>
<p>The holistic approach is a joke. Once you have stats that lower USWNS rankings, sure, they look at who you are. But they won;t for a second look at anyone who might drop their rankings.</p>
<p>I agree with this thread. It's the only way to explain my 5 rejections, despite my single weakness being rank (due to bad freshman/3rd semester grades). Strong upward trends are overrated. At least at the top schools. They really don't help unless you're URM/hooked.</p>
<p>Somebody heard way back sometime that they don't split hairs between SAT's of 1550 and 1600. Gradually this turned into a myth that they don't split hairs between 1400 and 1600. Part of the confusion is that people get onto CC and say that they got into Harvard with a 1320 without thinking to mention that they are a URM. Adding to the confusion even more are the posters who give advice to people not to give up on their dream and that you can't be admitted if you don't apply. Over top of the whole process is the fact that people like to believe whatever they want to believe and are very willing to ignore bad news.</p>
<p>The EC's are used to differentiate between applicants who have the right numbers, but you have to have the right numbers first. The EC's are the icing on the cake, but you have to have the cake first.</p>