It's not about the stats...

<p>Guys, I think we need to realize that Harvard's admissions process is going towards the way it should be. Someone posted two days ago that an admittee she had talked to had never been on one of these forums and obsessed over the college admissions process; she was basically mortified by what she saw here. I have to admit (no pun lol), that I felt the same way. You all seem to be amazingly well-qualifed students but that is almost a given for 85% of Harvard's applicants. For better or for worse, it is a subjective process.
I liken this to my basketball philosophy (and a very common one). Have you ever heard references to players who had a major impact on a game but didn't necessarily fill up the box score? It's about being a team player and not merely caring about how many points you get. Granted, it is mostly due to the competitiveness fueled by our society, but it's unhealthy for so many students to try to "fill the stat sheet". You may look good on paper, but it's more than that, as it should be. It's the intangibles that make the difference- on the court and to the adcoms
My alumni interviewer said "You know, Harvard could fill it's class with valedictorians and still turn away 2 out of three"
My reply "I wouldn't want to go here if my class rank were the only consideration" That's the attitude one should have. Don't go around saying "Oh, I won this award and that award and I did this and that. Come on. Would you honestly want to have a person like that as your roommate? I know I wouldn't.</p>

<p>Precisely. Stats have lost their power due to grade inflation, unlevel ground for SAT due to prep, etc. So, people need to focus on THEM and not stats on paper.</p>

<p>OK, there may be some personal bias in this, but sometimes a passion does translate into awards. Certain awards just aren't equatable to grades. The best example of this is in math/science. You can have a tremendous passion for science and research and discovery, and one of the best ways for that to come across is via science research awards, to demonstrate that you have taken that passion and put it to truly productive use. That's a lot different than studying for a bunch of tests and scoring high and becoming valedictorian. Ranking high or getting amazing, 2300+ SATs aren't indicative of passion. Many awards are. So please, again, don't confuse the two...</p>

<p>and many people who have high stats and awards also are amazing people with passions that probably would have gotten them into harvard without those awards. Don't just assume someone with high stats and national awards are just that...they got those awards for a reason.</p>

<p>I think that ranking high and scoring on tests can easily translate to passion - learning is fun and we can learn in so many ways not necessarily restricted to scientific research or even academia but also through our bodies (sports), the arts (e.g. music), and service to others. Life is rich with passion and meaning in all respects - if we can "perceive" it.</p>

<p>Stats are important but an unbridled enthusiasm for the endeavors supporting the stats is also highly significant. The question isn't black or white... but begs the answer of moderation.</p>

<p>With that said, I believe many Harvard applicants love what they do and do what the love with an amazing degree of success.</p>

<p>don't get me wrong, I agree with you completely and don't mean to devalue academic awards. I'm just saying that this is where society's injustices begin. We feel that in order to get into our dream schools, we have to promote ourselves as award winning such and suches. I had a post earlier to the effect of stating "what if things I do out of passion come across as being strategically planned?" I think we just have to trust the adcoms to get it right. (well that's a bit disjointed but I hope the point is buried there somewhere)</p>

<p>I totally agree. And one of the hardest things is, if you have a true passion, really getting it across in the application, and doing it right. Without sounding packaged...</p>

<p>Its all about the pathos. I think its easy to convey my passion for science since anytime I start writing about it, the sentences seem to write themselves and flow. That, and during my interview, I spent a long time talking about science and my physics teacher says that I have that "twinkle in my eye" when I do problems. I think I'm weird.</p>

<p>It's too bad I was deferred, I was looking forward to taking classes at possibly the best math department in the nation. That, and I hear Harvard students are the most attractive out of all of the Ivies.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think I'm weird.

[/quote]
Most of us are a little weird. :)</p>

<p>I prefer the term quirky. ;)</p>

<p>GTMan, RSI and Siemens represent only a small fraction of the brightest kids in the country. I can assure you that the majority of the high schools in the country have never heard of either. That doesn't mean they can't turn out highly qualified and passionate students that are just as capable of succeeding in Harvard. Harvard could fill a class with science award winners, just as they could fill a class with vals or top SATs or any other criteria you can come up with. They choose not to. You chose to compete in the science/math pool of applicants. Unfortunately, this is a highly competitive pool with many similar applicants. Some of those applicants have similar awards to yours. Others have distinguished themselves by working in a hospital, or raising money for charity, or being a leader in the community. That doesn't make them inferior to you and it doesn't mean they stole your spot.</p>

<p>So true...</p>

<p>I have to admit I hadn't heard of any of those competitions until I visited this forum but I'm in Maine so news gets up here slowly....</p>

<p>i still have no idea what they are ;)</p>

<p>bandit--I don't recall saying anyone stole my spot or is inferior to me. And I certainly don't think that, either. But I wonder, though, why math/sci people (forgetting me, for a second) seem to get placed in a group with people who are valedictorian or get high SATs, etc. To get a 2400 or be valedictorian, you have to study hard and be naturally smart and do well on tests. To win some of these awards for math and science, especially research awards, you need to be really passionate about what you do. You need to have just as much passion and love for what you do as someone who works in a hospital or raises charity. To conduct the kind of research I saw at Siemens, regardless of whether the people doing them were accepted or not, you need to have a natural passion for conducting research and discovering new things about the universe around us. Who's passionate about studying for the SATs?</p>

<p>These math and science awards are indicators of passion and as such are MUCH better placed with things like working in a hospital and doing community service than they are with being valedictorian and getting perfect SATs.</p>

<p>It's not about being compared to SATs or vals, it's about being compared to peers. Only a subset of any peer group is going to be admitted, no matter how brilliant they are. I was a little shocked at some of the deferrals until I looked at the aggregate and realized that there are a large number of similarly placed students. </p>

<p>But I also think you have missed another point. Even though your awards are excellent, there are other students just as qualified that would never have the opportunity to compete if that were the overriding criteria. Few students nationwide are positioned near major universities and corporate labs. Does that mean they aren't deserving? No. It means they need an opportunity. If Harvard only took science award winners, they might miss the next Einstein in Pecos, Tx. Your awards are excellent in your environment. His awards are excellent in his environment. A 2300 SAT from a high school of 125 students 300 miles from the nearest town with a population greater than 25,000 is a huge accomplishment, and quite possibly more difficult than anything you accomplished. Because of your background, you really have no idea how difficult it can be to accomplish anything in that environment. Things that are common in your setting, like a 2200+ SAT have probably never been done in his environment. And yes, some people do have a passion for getting a high SAT score, because that's something they can somewhat control. </p>

<p>And finally, in voicing your indignation over being deferred, you have come across as thinking of yourself as superior to some of those that were admitted.</p>

<p>GuitarManARS, I can understand your frustration. It's true that many bright math/science kids are grouped with the "geniuses" who get 2400s and have 4.0s, maybe even because there seems to be an overlap. </p>

<p>But I think Harvard and other great schools know that it is also legitimate to be a prize-winning poet and still be considered a genius.</p>

<p>I think we need to understand the difference between the connotations of intellect and brilliance. If you consider brilliance a superior knowledge or skill that can translate into action, you can include the the poets, the dancers, the football players, AND the students of "superior intellect," ie the stem cell researchers and young anthropologists. Brilliance shouldn't be limited to "book smarts," as it often is in society at large. Admissions committees know the difference.</p>

<p>bandit--Once again, I really don't mean to come off that way. I can think of several reasons why I was deferred; my indignation is honestly at some of the other people with similar math/sci passion who didn't get in either. People with better stats than me. So, sorry for coming off the wrong way...</p>

<p>That being said, you are completely right. Many great researchers didn't do any in high school because they never got the opportunity, they never even knew it existed, and such people are still common today (and then there are the high school researchers who go on to great heights, such as Frank Wilczek who was an STS finalist in 1967 and won the Nobel Prize for Physics last year). Which makes it hard to tell. My only point is that these major research awards are often overlooked by people unfamiliar with them and cast aside as being an academic achievement that comes easy to brainiacs, or is achievable by studying for five hours every night. What Harvard is looking for is students passionate for what they're doing, and these kinds of things are clear indicators of a passion for science and math. And despite my overwhelming passion and love for astronomy, I mean none of this to apply to myself, so please don't take it that way.</p>

<p>Saxfreq--I agree with your post 100%. And isn't that what Harvard really is? A collection of the very best scientists, poets, musicians, athletes, dancers, etc. out there? It takes those who have a passion for and excel in whatever it is they do. And that's a great thing :)</p>

<p>Peace -- I think we understand each other now.</p>