I understand that Harvard likes applicants who have a great interest/passion in a specific area and demonstrates such. But I was wondering if it is more advantageous for an applicant to just qualify for USAMO (demonstrating passion for math) or qualify for semifinals in biology, chemistry, physics, and qualify for AIME. I believe the first option would give the student a rating of ‘9’ in admission decisions. But would the second option also give a rating of ‘9’? I would think not since the student only qualified for the semifinals so there’s no “spike”. I guess I’m trying to ask: Does Harvard classify qualifying for the semifinals in physics, chemistry, and biology a deep interest in “science” or do Harvard admissions officers count each one as separate subjects and would like to see a deeper interest in one like qualifying for USAMO or getting to the finals of physics olympiad?
You’re trying to boil this down to some sort of formula but it really doesn’t work that way. That being said, the deeper you go in one specific area the better, generally speaking. But again, there really is a “score” for each activity. Just do whatever you enjoy doing and try to do it better than everyone else. Good luck.
@Falcon1 Thanks man! I just recently went to one of those college seminars and they said that Harvard rates each applicant from 1 to 9 based on Academics and “Personal Achievements” or something of the sort. They gave an example of a 9 which was to qualify for USAMO so I was wondering if I should pursue that (I qualified for AIME last year and did pretty well) or just qualify for AIME again this year and instead try qualifying for the semifinals of the science olympiads to demonstrate my interest in science.
Bump…USAMO vs semifinals of science olympiads+AIME???
The college seminar you attended gave you wrong or misleading information. First off, Harvard rates each applicant from 1 to 6, in four categories, with 1’s being the top score. And I would imagine that EVERY admitted student had 1’s in each category, but only a very few of them were USAMO, Intel, Google, Siemens, Science Olympiad +AIMEE qualifiers. Most student’s distinguish themselves in other ways – and as @falcoln1 said, there isn’t a formula – and you keep looking for one.
Why don’t you start by reading this article:
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/2006/05/keys-to-the-kingdom
And this thread:
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/harvard-university/1420290-chance-threads-please-read-before-posting-one-p1.html
In terms of what you should pursue: Do what you love. Here’s another article to read: http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/applying_sideways.
And in terms of which high performing student with all 1’s are accepted, please watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UYhTylqC9o
@gibby Hmm I see, thank you for the info! Could you possibly explain to me what would constitute 1’s in each category? And what are these categories?
@gibby The video you referenced is advice from the Stanford Director of Admission. Would it still apply to Harvard admissions?
^^ Part of applying to college is doing the research for yourself. Read the first link and it will list each category. Read the second link and you’ll find an article about William Fitzsimmons and what he looks for in the ideal Harvard applicant. Everything he talks about constitutes 1’s in each category. Did you read everything from each link in post #4?
@gibby Sorry I was so caught up in the fact that some applicants bribe admissions officers with pastries :P. I found it: (academics, extracurriculars, personal qualities, and athletics)
But now I have a few questions…don’t many students fail to participate in athletics? But they still judge on that, and you say that admitted applicants have a 1 in it? What would constitute a 1 in athletics?
I read the links but there was no mention of exact test scores that would fit the bill of a 1. Can I assume that generally top 5% class rank , 99% standardized test scores, substantial research, and an overall love of learning would constitute a 1? At least this was the case with Stanford admissions based on my research.
Class rank is not considered for Harvard. And Admissions doesn’t admit by test scores. If you look through the decision threads, you’ll see there is a wide range of admitted test scores, from about 2100 to 2400. GPA’s tend to be 3.8 to 4.0 on an unweighted scale.
The athletic category is only used for recruited athletes.
The seminar you attended seems to have given you the impression that Harvard admissions operates under some sort of algorithm and you’re trying to find the key. Admissions is made of people reading essays and letters of rec while trying to piece together who you are. I’d say it’s more art than science.
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
As one version of the OP admitted in another post to be a cousin using the account, I cannot tell if @JuicyMango is asking the question. That is one of the reasons why sharing accounts is not allowed. For that reason, I am closing this thread.