<p>Hi, there, Im not on CC too often but for all the extremely nervous NORMAL people as in, no intel finalists, 2400 SAT scores, Perfect Sat II scores, and other attributes that constitute PERFECT or genius:</p>
<p>3.8 gpa - HIGH for a Canadian (3.7 is a 90ish+)
2190 SAT</p>
<p>Excellent Extra Curric revolving around: politics, sports, music
Didn't write a long resume or anything, but instead talked about what I was passionate about and that was those 3 things</p>
<p>Yup very true, loads of 'perfect candidates' get rejected every yr..
admissions committee truly mean it when they say they're looking at the bigger picture</p>
<p>I think the Ivy League is actually turning down SAT perfect scorers (and rich people) because they're trying to break away from their WASP/supergenius-only image. So when they get a 2400, they'd go like "Ugh. This guy thinks that s/he can get in just because he has a 2400? REJECTED!"... :(</p>
<p>signal, although i can understand the need to move away from the wasp-dominated image, i don't get your supergenius point. a 2400, backed up by the same characteristics of other high score apps (i.e. excellent ec's, recs, awards, essays, etc.) is the best thing you can have... i think colleges want supergeniuses, maybe not book nerds, but supergeniuses absolutely</p>
<p>Please help me understand this. The schools are looking for the best students and all around individuals who will contribute however its now a negative to work hard, get excellent grades in challenging subjects and also score perfectly top tier scores in standardized tests. This success is a turn off to admissions people?? Perhaps this is because those in the admissions offices represent the b- and c students who have chosen to become office administrators as opposed to doing high level research etc. Dont you think this is unfair to be judged by non peers? I think the mixed message here is rather upsetting.</p>
<p>I agree... and while getting good grades/high scores are important still, I do sometimes wonder if places like HYPS reject perfect scorers simply to be able to tell people that they reject perfect scorers.</p>
<p>While I don't know for sure that they turn away perfect scores for that reason, it's possible. However, if they did, it's most likely because they want well-rounded applicants. There are probably enough perfect or near-perfect scorers to fill all of the spots at HYP. If they then made it a requirement to have near-perfect scores, those with amazing ECs would stop applying. They would probably then get an influx of super-studiers who are not inclined to become involved with any ECs on campus. As a result, ECs and everything outside the classroom would deteriorate, and most HYP grads would be good researchers but poor leaders. In the end it could spell the end of HYP's reign of dominance.</p>
<p>Of course, I'm severely stereotyping those with perfect scores. Congrats to everyone that did get one, there are plenty of people with 2400s who have amazing ECs and are very interesting people. However, there are many people in the above situation, and so it is highly likely that the above scenario is how events would really play out.</p>