<p>According to the Stanford undergraduate admission web site ..."Among the many measures of diversity, more than half of our undergraduates are students of color ".</p>
<p>If over half are students of color then my guess would be that approximately 800 freshman matriculants will be for students not of color. So the odds of getting admitted are probably even lower than the 9% that is often posted for the overall chance of admissions. </p>
<p>Figure 50 to 100 recruited non-color athletes, add another 100 for national academic competition winners and you can see that even for a 4.0 with a top 1% ACT or SAT scores and president and founder of school clubs is still going to come up well short. With about 25,000 high schools in America all with one valedictorian and many with a handful of otherwise "perfect" students the odds are getting close to the chances of winning the powerball.</p>
<p>I think taking your $75 application fee and going to the race track and betting on the horse out of gate #3 has a much better chance of pay back than applying to Stanford.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Some of those “students of color” are from over-represented minorities, who are presumably not given a boost in admissions based on their racial status.</p></li>
<li><p>The number of students admitted to each class is actually more like 2400. 1600 is the number that enroll.</p></li>
<li><p>Spots are not “reserved” for minorities, nor are they reserved for academic competition winners (the number of which you probably overestimate, by the way). Even recruited athletes have to go through the same admissions process as everyone else–and if they don’t get in, I assume it’s just too bad for the coach. Reggie Bush is the best-known example; Stanford recruited him, but the admissions department nixed him.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Also, please stop perpetuating the myth that one has to be “perfect” (valedictorian, top test scores–whatever that means, president/founder of a club or three, etc.) to get into Stanford or similar schools. I’ve met lots of perfectly ordinary people who just happen to be smart and enthusiastic about their academic pursuits. I don’t know how the admissions office manages to find so many such people year after year given the information available to them, but they sure do a good job of it.</p>
<p>Cressida is making a good point that when all factors are taken into consideration, non URM are a very small percentage of accepted applicants. I think Stanford is looking for truly special people who have done something extraordinary. Also, I don’t know if last year’s policy of selecting URM will continue this year.</p>
<p>I should start by apologizing for being blunt, and pointing out that I am white, to add perspective and context.</p>
<p>If your determinant of what is a waste of time is based solely on the “numbers”, and you honestly believe that only “perfect” applicants get in anyway, then it would also have been a waste of time to apply five years ago.</p>
<p>Sure, it’s a tough admission. Sure, the numbers are ostensibly ugly. Stanford, more than any other school I’ve encountered, ever, puts significant emphasis on the value of keeping its institution an “educational” institution, rather than the “business” that I tend to see most colleges as. I find Stanford to be the most… morally… well-aligned of all the top-tier-schools for this reason exactly.</p>
<p>And that’s why they have my EASC application in their inbox.</p>
<p>The numbers may be ugly, but they are no more ugly than they used to be. If the school is right for you, the application has nothing to do with your skin color or background. These are considerations, but they are not deal-breakers. If you want to matriculate (what a great word) at Stanford, apply. If you don’t, consider the reason why you don’t, and remember that it is you who is applying. Stanford cannot, I repeat, cannot be blamed at all, and instead should be praised, for placing value on diversity in a country that has forgotten the diversity-based principles on which it has grown. </p>
<p>If your feelings are of unhappiness at the numbers, that’s more than justified, but please do not discourage prospective applicants.</p>
<p>Cressida has a valid point. I can sense the frustration. Take a look at the main marketing brochure that Stanford sends out to prospective students. You won’t find a picture of white male in the brochure. That’s not their target group.</p>