I’m currently a freshman in high school and I’m on my high school’s speech and debate team (I’m a debater). This past year, I competed at local tournaments at the JV level, but sophomore and junior year, I’ll be competing at varsity level. In 10th and 11th, I’m hoping to got to the state/national tournaments. Junior year, I will be debate team captain and compete. For my senior year, I think I will just be team captain/coach because my schedule will be very rigorous that year.*
In 12th grade, I will be on my school’s We the People team. It will require a lot of time and dedication, but my school’s team is very successful and have consistently placed in the top ten in nationals.
Besides participating on the debate and We the People team, I don’t have many other ECs. Hopefully my transcript will show that I value quality over quantity??
Sports wise, I will be a four year varsity tennis player, and probably the team captain my junior or senior year.*
My involvement in music is pretty average I think. I’m not doing anything outside of school related activities:
-Concert band (9)
-Symphonic Winds-lower level band (10)
-Wind Ensemble-higher level band (11-12)
-Varsity Marching Band (10-12)
My academic record is good (3.9 UW GPA), and in all four years of high school, I will be taking the most competitive schedule available, except for math which I am one year behind in.
So my question is, is my participation in debate and my other ECs enough to make me a good applicant for colleges like Stanford, even though I’m fairly mediocre in all other aspects? And what I mean by mediocre is that there will be thousands of other applicants who are just as good, if not better.
*I’m not trying to sound arrogant by assuming that I’ll get leadership spots. In both debate and tennis teams, there are a few really good seniors, little to no sophomores, and I’m one of the best freshmen. So by the time its my senior year, I definitely think I have a good chance of being captain.
Think of all it entails. You’ve got to be smart, logical, quick on your feet. You need the ability to see both sides of an issue (I’m assuming you’re in LD, not team, debate?). You need to be able to flow an argument, and to find the flaws in an opponent’s reasoning. You’ve got to be able to convince a judge, or a panel of judges, that your arguments successfully refuted those of your opponents.
And you’ve got to do it all while facing the one thing that people tend to fear almost as much as death: public speaking. You’ve got to be fluent, and to make the most of the time you’re given.
I can’t think of a single career where those skills aren’t important. And any admissions counselor with any experience at all knows that, if you’re going to be a successful debater, you’re going to have to practice every day. So it limits the amount of time you have to devote to other activities.
You know the saying: “Jack of all trades, master of few.” To find success in debate, it’s got to be a pretty large part of your extra curricular focus.
yes, I’m in LD! Yeah I was worried that, because a lot of my time would be dedicated to debate, my application wouldn’t look as good because I wasn’t doing many other ECs. I guess I’ll try to emphasize in my app how much debate makes a difference and everything I’ve learned, etc. Thanks for your feedback! @bjkmom
Admissions counselors are familiar with LD. They know that you have less than 2 weeks to prepare your case, and that you’re preparing both sides of it. And that, once you get past your Constructive, it’s all on you-- the work you’ve done with your team disappears at that point. So a winning record means you really do have all those skills I mentioned.
Congrats on your success so far, and keep at it!!!
@aude182 I also did debate in high school, and I do it now in university as well. You probably already know about APDA, but you should definitely consider it.
I think it really depends on how you sell it. If you have a way with words and persuasion, which you presumably do, you can make every little achievement of yours seem like you were winning gold medals or something (without making it too transparent). And it’s hardly an exaggeration - many people don’t really understand how much intellectual prowess and effort debate requires.
There are a lot of applicants rejected from Stanford who were involved in debate; many of them at higher levels and with more success than you are planning for. Debate is a great activity, but simple participation doesn’t raise you above other candidates at the top schools. If that was the case, everyone would do it.
Work hard at it and maybe there will be a state or national award for you by that time.
