<p>It was not my intention to stir things up. Everybody is free to believe things they see or hear. I do not advocate things I make up, I simply argue things for which I have found evidence. I don't know if athletics is still a fourth category or not. All I know is that I always imagined harvard students to be able to manage to do sports and research and win a few Math competitions at the same time.<br>
I believe that columbia has four dimensions too, cofirmed in an actual telephone conversation. I will find them and post them for comparison.
Applying common sense like - "it doesn't make sense for sports to be separate from ecs is not a valid argument, as common sense has been proven fallacious in the case of college admissions. Apart from this, I cannot believe that in 4 years and 3 summers there could be people that cannot sample one physical activity.
I know that 4.5 hours a week for martial arts or tennis or swimming is not a big deal. especially if you do 1.5 hours on friday. Do it then go home light a few candles and take a bath. It is amazing. My dad is a very smart man and he always claimed that alternating physical and brain activities allevieated brain tension. He'd always read for awhile then do something around the house or go on a bike ride with me then read some more... Maybe that's why I see things this way. That said, I am no star. My game is probably subpar and I cannot go beyond intramural... The experience from it, however, i consider invaluable.</p>
<p>meh. id rather do something that i felt proud of doing than doing something just for the sake of doing it.</p>
<p>I am not saying that you won't get in or that it would hurt you. Research in HS is an amazing thing to do.</p>
<p>well by nature the fact that im not doing sports anymore is going to hurt me if athletics is its own category. it just does not make sense as to why athletics is apparetly glorified instead of it being a component within extracurriculars.</p>
<p>It could be that admissins didn't want to initiate separate admissions practices for athletes and they instituted this so they could integrate the whole admissions process. In this case probably just practicing sport sports would get probably a 3 or a 4 while being a varsity prospect would be a 1. This way a person with an academics 1 and sports 3 would be comparable to a person with an academics 3 and sports 1. However, the majority of people would probably get a 4 or a 5 in sports which I don't think would be hard for you to make up for.
Disclaimer: The above is entirely a speculation of mine.</p>
<p>It's still disturbing though to think that athletics would weigh anywhere near as much as academics in a top tier university (a SCHOOL last time I checked) such as Harvard.</p>
<p>Harvard is a diverse community so this is somewhat necessary.
3 academics at harvard is probably a 1 in Duke or Darthmouth. research has shown that athletes with lower academic credentials have an even higher success rate in life... It is their prioritizing that causes them to get a .1 off their gpa for example.</p>
<p>it would make more sense if they had just a miscellaneous category for things such as research, athletics, special talents, ext instead of lumping most other talents into ecs or whatnot while keeping athletics separate.</p>
<p>Again, to prevent your inner turmoil, the athletics cathegory might have been removed. The OP didn't mention it after her conversations with the notorious ex-adcom. I am sorry if I caused you any distress.</p>
<p>Please allow me to clarify. I was informed directly from a Harvard representative, and there are only four categories, as follows: </p>
<p>1) Academics
2) Extracurriculars
3) Personal Characteristics
4) Overall</p>
<p>There is no separate category for athletics, as they should be included in the EC's.</p>
<p>Alrighty then.
To the plausibility question - it was published by an ex-edcom, and it is old inforation. Still indicative of how scales could tip though.</p>
<p>P.S. Just to be funny not to contest information - just as 'athletics' is included in the ECs, aren't 1, 2, and 3 included in 4?
:)</p>
<p>well thank you for the clarification laxman.</p>
<p>haha martinibluex, i thought the same way.</p>
<p>And here comes another confirmation
<a href="http://www.bostonmagazine.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/article.view/articleID/e1a0ed2f-c761-427d-85a4-3a6812bcff59%5B/url%5D">http://www.bostonmagazine.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/article.view/articleID/e1a0ed2f-c761-427d-85a4-3a6812bcff59</a></p>
<p>In both the early and regular action rounds, Byerly Hall evaluates applications with the same exacting system. Under the leadership of dean of admissions Bill Fitzsimmons and his deputy, Marlyn McGrath Lewisor Fitz and Marlyn, as the famously down-to-earth pair are often calledadmissions officers start by assessing each applicant in four areas (academics, extracurriculars, personal qualities, and athletics) on a scale of one (best) to **six<a href="worst">/b</a>. Those who pass this initial threshold move forward to a second and sometimes third reader for further appraisal; the rest form the first batch of rejects, their folders marked with dismissive notes such as below the edge or case falls flat. Small teams of admissions officers, each responsible for one of the 25 or so geographic regions into which Harvard divides its applicants, then scrutinize the survivors for as long as five days. Between 5,000 and 7,000 applicants proceed to the last and most contentious stage, the full committee meeting, in which all 35 admissions officers debate and vote on who will make the final cut.</p>
<p>Basically if you don't play sports, you're not getting into Harvard, regardless of whether you're an international mathlete or not.</p>
<p>screw athletics as a separate category.</p>
<p>thats all.</p>
<p>Athletics is an important category only for recruits and possible walk-ons. It is not a category that is equal to academics, ECs, and personal qualities, which every admit must show strength in. You do NOT have to be athletic whatsoever in order to get in. Do you think that Harvard alumni like Yo-Yo Ma and Natalie Portman were on the soccer team?</p>
<p>yea but Natalie Portman is Natalie Portman.</p>
<p>I just followed the evidence. The article has great references, so I trusted it. Moreover, it is the second one I found that claims so. However, all my information is second hand and I simply do quote+no contest.</p>
<p>Porman was already famous in HS. Her resume went like this: HS - graduated with honors, Star Wars: Episode I,...
How wouldn't Harvard accept the girl that turned down the role of Lolita for moral reasons?</p>
<p>Hanna, how do you know everything you know aboud admissions at Harvard? Did you work in the office? Simply being a transfer student does not enrich one's knowledge with the admissions process so elaborately. You have been giving definitive answers and your posts exhude autority.</p>
<p>Lots of non-movie-star people here didn't play any sports in high school. Heck, I was one of something like 5% of the kids at my HS who didn't do a sport.</p>