<p>I have a 3.8 gpa
sat IIs: 760 US History, 710 AP Bio
SATs: 700 writing, 660 math, 720 CR
APs: Biology 5, US History 5, Euro 5, Psych 5, Comp 4
Currently taking AP Physics, AP Spanish, AP French, AP Latin, AP Economics, AP Literature, AP Government, and AP Calculus
I can speak/ I am studying 7 languages: Chinese, Spanish, French, Latin, English, Hebrew, Russian
ECs:
Chinese School, Hospital Volunteer , Hebrew Tutor, and I have tutored a Chinese immigrant
Co-founder of Jewish Youth group chapter, treasurer and president
Research: Honorable Mention 2 years in a row Toshiba Exploravision competition
Participated in Cardiac Tissue Engineering Research this summer, entered Siemens, planning to enter Intel
Clubs :
Co-president Latin Honor Society
President of Diversity Club (11th )
Co-Pres Amnesty International ( and co founder)
secretary of student council ( 12th)
vice president of the junior class
member of french, latin, and spanish honor societies</p>
<p>** PS : i WANT TO MAJOR IN CHINESE /EAST ASIAN STUDIES , DOES THAT HELP ?
AND I HAVE WON A MILLION AWARDS FOR VARIOUS THINGS TOO MANY TO LIST - SO WHAT ARE MY CHANCES , PLEASE TELL ME HONESTLY - THANX</p>
<p>I cant really offer any advice because im not one to offer advice about this. But, I am curious, are you Chinese or Jewish? or both? mixed heritage perhaps? You just have a plethora of languages under your belt and various cultural ec's. Im very intrigued. If you're a Chinese Jew, you're the first ive ever seen lol, unless you have mixed heritage.</p>
<p>Isn't the university of chicago very unique in how it looks at applicants? I noticed that it does not really list standardized tests as being a particularly important factor in admission. The thing they look at as being the most important is the rigor of the high school transcipt. It really looks like you have taken and are taking the hardest classes possible. It looks like you have an excellent chance of getting in. Also it is not really that competetive of a school. Like 46% or something of people get in as opposed to Rice's 20%.</p>
<p>pilebay, i think the image that chicago cares less about board scores is misleading because Chicago students have very high SAT scores - higher than students' at Rice.</p>
<p>The smaller pool of applicants is self-selecting making the range of scores less spread out. Also, those who can demonstrate a passion for learning and write outstanding essays probably will have very high test scores and GPA's as well (but not always).</p>
<p>kimfuge where are you getting your data? I am just curious because according to collegeboard the average ACT for University of Chicago is 28-33 and the average for Rice is 30-34. It is not that significant of a difference though. I can't find how many people apply to University of Chicago versus how many get in. Of course Rice is a much smaller school as well. Also it says in one of the Princeton Review books that standardized tests are only "considered" for university of chicago. For all the other school i have been looking at it standardized tests are listed under the "very important" for admissions factors. No doubt it is a very competetive school but as compared to other top colleges your chances of getting in are actually really good.</p>
<p>While it is true that Chicago has fewer applicants than its peer schools and thus a higher acceptance rate than some, its admissions is still "quirky" and hard to predict. My S had friends with similar "numbers" to his get either wait-listed or rejected at Chicago while being accepted at Princeton, Duke, Northwestern, etc. (the friend accepted to Duke was heartbroken, they had planned to attend Chicago together) How one presents oneself in one's essays and teacher recs are very important.</p>
<p>idad, did you son have very high stats? Mind of you share them? My gpa is relatively low (unweighted 3.3) because of my being as almost a full-time squash player, but I'm wondering if great essays and SAT's get offset this weakness.</p>
<p>Student profiles are hard to compare. My S did not have the highest GPA, 3.46 uw, but took a very demanding course load, finishing AP Calc BC as a sophomore, for example. His ACT test score was good, I believe between 1470 to 1500 converted SAT score. He took distance learning university courses from UC Berkeley and received very good grades (U of C, however, will not give transfer credit). His EC's were unique, he studied an Asian language and traveled in the far east training and competing in the martial arts, finishing 2nd in world competition, and won many tournament is the USA, he holds black belts in 3 arts, was part of a physics research group, was first chair in the school concert band, etc., etc. But what I think got him in, were his essays. He stunned me with his answers, which he initially outlined to me while drawing pictures on the back of a napkin. He was able to show he could communicate very complex ideas in a concise, well thought out, and entertaining way. </p>
<p>I'm not sure this helps you much, however, each student is different. If you believe the Newsweek article I posted above, then it looks as though U of C has a soft sport for athletes, perhaps that is what did it.</p>
<p>idad, thanks for posting that old Newsweek story. I had lost track of it. UofC used to have it somewhere on their system but I had searched in vain for it last year.</p>
<p>I agree with you that UofC may have a soft spot for athletes -- which is far from the stereotype of the place. They seem to like well-lopsided kids, too, not necessarily well-rounded, but there is always this background image of the ideal Rhodes Scholar sort of scholar-athlete lurking behind the decision process. When some kid is as outstanding in athletics as yours is, yet "still" wants to live the life of the mind at Chicago and has the talent to succeed there, the adcom is going to want to give him every chance to succeed. Not to mention, highly accomplished athletes usually have figured out how to manage their time well, and at an academically demanding institution like Chicago that really helps.</p>
<p>mackinaw: I agree about the well-lopsided student. I heard Ted O'Neil comment one time that Chicago admits a student not a class. I think he has written that they don't know what the class looks like until they are finished, there is no attempt to mold a "well rounded" or representative class.</p>
<p>Your scores are good. Your AP scores are great. You have a unique slant to your interests and ECs. I think that you are in. As long as your essays and interviews show that you have an inquisitive mind and are passionate about your intellectual interests, there should be no problem.</p>
<p>idad, is it possible that some of the rejected kids either showed little interest in the school or were somehow perceived to be using UC as a safety?</p>
<p>mommamia: No, one friend had his heart set on Chicago, he was crushed. My S read his essays, and said in his opinion his friend did not handle the essays well. Friend's numbers and EC's were excellent, but Chicago really looks at how one can handle ideas. The other applied RD to Princeton and EA to Chicago (his stated first choice), doesn't sound like a back-up to me. S's best friend did not apply to Chicago, said he didn't want to work that hard, he is at Stanford.</p>