<p>When you apply to a school, it is agreed upon that you pay the necessary fee in exchange for a fair review and consideration of your application. </p>
<p>Is it common for admissions officers to stop reading or skip-altogether one or more of your essays before making a decision? An application reader from NYU undergrad admitted to it in a little Q&A session I went to. If the numbers aren't high enough and nothing stands out, they may just deny and pass to the next reader...</p>
<p>So it does happen, but how often? Has anyone heard of this?</p>
<p>Think of it from the admission committee’s point of view – if an applicant has academic credentials below what even the most extenuating circumstances applicant may be admitted with, why should they bother looking at the rest of the application?</p>
<p>Obviously, applicants should evaluate their application choices and not apply to out of reach schools (e.g. 2.0 GPA with D grades in math applying to MIT).</p>
<p>You pay the necessary fee as the price to get considered. The level of consideration – whether the committee argues about you for an hour or whether the first reader spills coffee all over your application and just moves on-- does not have price.</p>
<p>"it is agreed upon that you pay the necessary fee in exchange for a fair review and consideration of your application. "</p>
<p>Another point of view is that for my application to be fairly read, I don’t want the reader to waste time reading every jot and tittle of another person’s no-chance application. Isn’t that “fair” as well?</p>
<p>I don’t remember reading or signing any such agreement. </p>
<p>Each college can set it’s own rules about how much scrutiny to give any given application. And if the grades or test scores are so low that the student will get rejected no matter how good the essay is, then what is the point of wasting time on hte essay?</p>
<p>Is it common for admissions officers to stop reading or skip-altogether one or more of your essays before making a decision</p>
<p>Not really. You can get dropped initially if you are obviously a serious underperformer and nothing about the app even hints you’re a compelling candidate for that school. But, IME, they at least skim the full package. After passing that first hurdle, multiple reads take place. </p>
<p>What can happen though is that the app pkg is so lackluster that the reader has very low expectations for the essays. If the short answer is plain old dumb, the supp shorts are ineffective, the reviewer has low expectations for the personal statement. Then, if it doesn’t start well, it may just get the fastest glance.</p>
<p>You know, a really great essay can capture some interest for an underperformer- but it raises some serious questions re: how the essay was so good, if there’s nothing else in the app that supports that quality. Likewise, a top performer with a lousy essay can lose points- it just communicates the wrong things.</p>
<p>Common for some schools to have a “stat filter” on their applicants. If they don’t meet the minimum GPA & test score threshold, they don’t go any further. Colleges are very reluctant to say this because then they would have to explain “hooK” exceptions. High school students can be very unrealistic about admissions. Heck Cornell has 1,000 applicants a year who are rejected because they fail to follow directions on the application. I know what you’re saying, you pay the application fee, they don’t absolutely tell you they have a “cut score”, so they should read your essay. However when they receive a number of applicants who are obviously not at the academic level needed, can you really blame them for not taking the attitude of “why go any further when it would be an injustice to this student to put them in an academic setting in which they can’t succeed”?</p>
<p>Would a 3.6 GPA be one of those automatic cut-offs for an Ivy League? Even with a 2250+ SAT? I put a lot of time into my essays, and I’ve gotten a 4.0 since the beginning of junior year. Doesn’t seem fair…</p>
<p>…no I’m talking about the students with the 1000 SAT score. We had a student from our school who wasn’t in the top 25% in class rank, had an 1100 on the SAT, no outstanding EC’s & cried for 2 days when not admitted to an Ivy…you would be surprised at how many unrealistic applicants there are out there.</p>
<p>"Doesn’t seem fair… " How are you to judge? Let’s say Ivy X has 2500 spots. And they’ve already read and processed 15,000 students who have 3.8 and above. Why would it not be fair to just set aside with just a cursory look at a 3.6GPA applicant w/o anything else outstanding in the file? </p>
<p>Harvard and Yale are expecting near 30,000 applicants. You tell me an orderly manner to sort them through, samonuh. I’m not trying to be unduly harsh but long gone are the days when there was 12000 applications for 3000 openings. Just not going to happen.</p>
<p>I think a 3.6 would be very difficult to get into an Ivy unless there were some extraordinary hook. It is competing against thousands of much stronger applications. I don’t quite understand what is “not fair” about that.</p>
<p>IME, a 3.6/2250 won’t get summarily tossed aside. You know the saying about not every top school wanting to fill its ranks with valedictorians? And the oft repeated bit: it’s not all stats. And, that your gpa is evaluated in the context of your school and the rigor of your course selection? And, that your other experiences matter?</p>
<p>Since the remaining apps are split among a few dozen readers, it’s hard to imagine any sense of first-come, first-served or top-down only. But, there are no guarantees. Not even for a 4.0/2400.</p>
<p>If the numbers are so low as to show that the applicant cannot handle the school, then the essay - which is there to show how the applicant thinks and who the applicant is - probably isn’t relevant, because selective schools have enough academically qualified applicants that they don’t need to accept academically unqualified applicants just to get interesting people. Colleges won’t admit it (and maybe they don’t have to worry about it anyway), but there probably is some threshold of stats where there is no point to accept somewhere under. But it’s probably pretty low, and it probably applies to people who are applying to schools with no perspective of what their selectivity means.</p>
<p>I think it would be unethical to throw away an app on the basis of something subjective (like extracurriculars, or maybe even a teacher rec) before reading the essay, though.</p>
<p>My 3.6 was caused from my depression/suicidal attitude my freshman and sophomore year you *******s. Let me stress again that I’ve gotten a 4.0 junior year and I will have one senior year. Will I still be tossed aside due to the enormous amount of 3.8+ GPAs the Ivy League receives?</p>
<p>I’ll overlook the immature name calling. Your question was clear the first time. Is a 3.8GPA competitive for Ivy leagues. By an large, NO. As I said before, the competition for limited seats is enormous – more than doubling over the last 12 years. Most of the Ivies have under ten percent admit rate. They turn down thousands of students who have more than a 3.8GPA. </p>
<p>Look, I’m happy you’ve overcome your earlier issues and are on the right track now – but 1) your attitude is uncalled for and 2) these are the facts. No one with a 4.0 has a good chance. A person with a 3.8 is even a few steps behind the 4.0 student. Make sense?</p>