my parents don't want me to go to america. i want to. you think i can?

International Students
41

<p>WHOA-WEY! you’re definitely one solid applicant, avantika! do you qualify for any of the international olympiads? cuz that’d be a big plus… though you’re definitely a VERY strong applicant already (i’d say the strongest i’ve known/seen so far)!! oh… and here’s the regular chancing business… and my opinion’s based on my own application experience- so i take no responsibility if anyone disagrees with me and if you disagree… no, you’re not allowed to bring out your flamethrowers and online-forum-flame me! :D</p>

<p>stanford: low reach
harvard: reach
princeton: low reach
mit: reach
caltech: reach
michigan: safety (seriously). they have like a 40+ acceptance rate!
berkeley: low reach-high match
harvey mudd: low reach (they might take in few internationals, but you def. make the cut)
ucla: low reach-high match (depends though, they just won’t take you in for your achievements… so good stats+ ECs + a nice essay would do the trick)
duke: high match
uchicago: low reach- high match
columbia: low reach
cornell: high match
cmu: match
northwestern: high match
uiuc: safety!!
uva: easy match</p>

<p>and seriously, you’re one crazy-amazing applicant and will probably get into most places you apply to!! come to UCLA though… cuz we’re just better!! :wink: haha!</p>

42

<p>@ Alone: I understand what you are saying. MIT does take in based on life story etc, but i believe that is because they have admit many more internationals and students in general than caltech (also due to the applicant pool for caltech compared to MIT, its smaller). Since there are 3500+ intl applicants for MIT, you cannot only pick olympiad medallists, after all thats not what MIT is about.
i believe MIT has a quota of IMO/IPhO and IIO olympiad medalists it wants and it suffices this quota. But it also wants the kids who are equally intelligent but display it in other ways.
Both universities are excellent. I really respect Caltech, but ive heard far too many stories about intl olympiad medalists getting rejected from MIT to completely agree with you. I feel both universities are looking for somewhat slightly different students, and THAT makes it harder to get into both universities. If you’re all olympiad gold medalist, doesnt mean you will make MIT. Then again, if you have a great life story, doesnt mean you ll make Caltech.</p>

<p>However, OP has good chances. Show them that you are not all about academics etc. You need to first determine the type of applicant you want to project yourself as, compare it to their student type/s, and then build your application based on that. It will help churn the stuff that is unimportant from your application because some of it probably is. Otherwise you do have very good chances. I know a girl from DPS RK puram (i think) whos in my class and she wasnt the student who got the highest boards marks or topped her class each year. Instead she did things she had a passion for which led to some extraordinary activities and ECs which is why she got accepted. That is what you must realise. I am not trying to be rude or pessimistic, instead i am hoping you cover all boundaries and crosscheck all their requirements. Quite simply, just answer this question and it will do you the best help i can offer: So she has good academic scores, great SATs and a long list of ECs, but how does she fit within ____ university? ie what within that will make them want to take you?</p>

<p>That was the guideline i used…and it worked. Hope the best for you. I am sorry about this long post but i m slowly getting back to helping out at CC.</p>

<p>oh @100%tuna: ur very expressive. I love it. especially in some of the other threads. very entertaining in fact. :)</p>

43

<p>

</p>

<p>You put UCLA as a low reach and yet put Michigan as safety? Are you kidding me? You do realize that University of Michigan student body is stronger than UCLA in general?</p>

44

<p>Sidfromaus, thanks, I guess I needed to be specific and say ‘academic selectivity,’ because I was trying to make a point that while other-than-academical achievements can pave you a way to MIT, getting into CalTech will need nothing but an extremely strong academic resume (which the OP undoubtedly possesses!), and other awards etc. won’t matter (or so I have heard/read.) The ‘selectivity’ term I used is not specific enough and could be applied differently – MIT is still very very selective, it’s just that their selectivity is based on different factors with academic factor being one of them.</p>

45

<p>hey! thanks sid! lol! i shall take that as a compliment! your posts are pretty awesome too! they’re detailed and interesting and well, just different! so let’s both/all CC-whore on! haha! (and mods- whore is NOT a vulgar word… so don’t go on censor it!! they censored the four letter word for anal-expulsions in one thread! o.O lol!!</p>

<p>oh- and RetardedBear, apt username! haha! kidding!
as i said, don’t flame me. it’s from personal experience. UCLA’s strange when it comes to admissions. i have a friend who got into berkeley and stanford, but got straight out rejected at UCLA (he holds world records for being the youngest for 2-3 programming certifications). the valedictorian at my school got into caltech, chicago, columbia and got rejected at UCLA. as i said, they just won’t take you in for your SAT or GPA (especially as an international). they want a package (no pun intended), though avantika’s (oh- and i like your name) a WOW-inducing applicant, so it shouldn’t be a problem for her!</p>

<p>michigan, on the other hand… NO ONE i know (including me) has unsuccessfully applied to michigan- this year or last year. people who were 50th percentile in my school made it to michigan with average ECs, no leadership and <2000 SATs… (okay, that’s just one guy) but the fact is… michigan takes you in easy… whereas from among the people i knew before i got into UCLA, no one else got in. (the phasings a bit wonky, but i just woke up- so bleh!)</p>

<p>also, you might want to consider that UCLA has an acceptance rate of 21.7% while michigan’s in 50.3%. surprise surprise! it’s more than double!! so now you might bring out the figures to show that the student body is very similar… but here’s the fact. how good their SATs are doesn’t show how similar they are. as i said, UCLA looks for the whole package… or at least something special. so it might take this dude who’s worked his way through high school and plays awesome basketball even if he doesn’t have the best SAT score! michigan on the other hand relies heavily on scores (from my experience). also, UCLA takes in a lot of transfer students from californian community colleges, so though i actually support this (it’s like a second chance for them), it does bring our average SAT and everything down (cuz most of them were obviously not good enough when they applied for freshman admissions).</p>

<p>conclusion? if it wasn’t pretty obvious in this tirade against michigan… it’s that UCLA is def. more selective than michigan… oh- and just for the record, this year it was more selective than berkeley and it received the highest number of applications all over america! :slight_smile: though they don’t release stats for this, apparently more people chose UCLA this year (among those who got into both, UCLA and berkeley)- again… at least friends and friends of friends did! (and berkeley actually CALLED US UP to ask why we did that! hahah! so i had a nice, 20 minute chat with an admissions-woman from berkeley telling her how awesome UCLA is and how i’d rather go there than to her school!!) :slight_smile: go bruins! lol!</p>

<p>shamelessly promoting my school? hell yeah! haha!</p>

<p>edit #2:
oh- and in terms of numbers, UCLA’s student body is stronger than berkeley’s…</p>

<p>higher average GPA.
more people from the top decile in their class.
a mere 13 point average SAT difference.</p>

<p>yeah… umm… just putting that in.</p>

46

<p>

</p>

<p>First of all, Michigan has a 42% acceptance rate according to Collegeboard, not 50%. Also, UCLA’s acceptance rate is only low because of amount of applicants UCLA gets every year (60,000 compared to something like 25000 for Michigan). That does not equate to UCLA being a tougher school to get in. </p>

<p>If I remember correctly, couple of years ago, U Chicago had 40% acceptance rate. Does that equate to U Chicago being easier school to gain admission than UCLA? I doubt anyone will think so.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>lol, sure. UCLA will never trump Berkeley. Lets leave it at that, shall we? </p>

<p>According to collegeboard, U Michigan’s SAT average is 1970, compared to UCLA’s 1930.</p>

<p>Michigan
SAT Critical Reading: 580 - 690 42%
SAT Math: 640 - 740 42%
SAT Writing: 590 - 700 42%</p>

<p>UCLA
SAT Critical Reading: 570 - 680 99%
SAT Math: 600 - 730 99%
SAT Writing: 580 - 700 99%</p>

<p>UC Berkeley
SAT Critical Reading: 580 - 710 97%
SAT Math: 630 - 760 97%
SAT Writing: 600 - 720 97%</p>

<p>source: collegeboard</p>

47

<p>uhmm… and WHY are there more applicants at UCLA? oh… cuz we’re better and people want to come hither!! my mistake about the 50… that was back in 2006. anyways, 40 point something isn’t exactly very selective, either. oh- and second, most people who apply to UCLA also apply to berkeley- so now are you saying that berkeley (with a higher acceptance rate than UCLA) is less selective than michigan?? <em>insert-horrified-expression-here</em> UCLA will never trump berkeley eh? well, that’s not the point, is it? that was just to show you how useless numerical SAT-based stats are… and you proved it yourself, by ridiculing me for calling UCLA better than berkeley. thanks!! and oh- UCLA trumps michigan! without a doubt! :)</p>

<p>about UCLA versus berkeley- though berkeley definitely has an advantage in rankings (at least till now), UCLA has an advantage in terms of location, name-value (not that the berkeley brand’s not big) and general environment… people here have fun and still graduate with a degree that makes them look awesome to recruiting companies. it’s great academics, excellent location, a beautiful campus, fun people, super sports all clubbed in together.</p>

<p>oh… and i dunno what’s up with your collegeboard stats…</p>

<p>but</p>

<p>average SAT for berkeley (class of 2013): 2012
average SAT for UCLA (class of 2013): 1993</p>

<p>average GPA for berkeley (class of 2013): 4.16
average GPA for UCLA (class of 2013): 4.17</p>

<p>all berkeley, UCLA and michigan have a similar yield.</p>

<p>alright. right in the middle of finding stats, i forgot what i was trying to prove… (i think it was the obvious… that UCLA>michigan), anyways- peace out!! your school’s good too! i hate stats-finding! hmph!</p>

48

<p>She needs FA
So state unis are out</p>

49

<p>lol! true, actually! prateek, you getting any aid at NW?? mt. everest? lol! why? how?</p>