<p>well i guess this is a thread about clarifying myths/rumors about harvard admissions. </p>
<p>i have a question: </p>
<p>what are the chances of getting in without a 4.0 unweighted gpa? if you're a middle class asian at a competitive school...will a b or 2 kill your chances? ya i know i sound pretty worked up about this, but from looking at the stats of people who got accepted and who are applying, im getting kinda freaked out.</p>
<p>i'm probably close in ethnicity and socio economic status to you, and i had 6 Bs freshman year, and 2 junior year... nothing really kills your chances, and 2 Bs definitely won't kill your candidacy. it is hard to get in in general, so you should also think about what you have other than grades to offer.</p>
<p>A couple of B's certainly won't matter. And if you got them Freshman year, you can disregard them completely.</p>
<p>As far as GPA goes, anything above a ~3.8 UW is fine.
3.7 is borderline, depending on your rank.</p>
<p>Wait. If you got it in your freshmen year, you can ignore it? Did I hear that right?</p>
<p>Please clarify! =)</p>
<p>You probably can't ignore it but they definitely won't consider it that much especially if you have an upward trend in your grades. I had a C in math my freshman year and I got in. I also had a couple B's in sophomore year. they definitely take into account how hard your school is, too, though, so that could change things.</p>
<p>Upward trends are definitely desirable--but so is a consistent, stellar trend. </p>
<p>Also, the idea that Freshman year grades matter less is ultimately a myth. I am giving info sessions from the admissions office this summer and was asked this question today. All four years matter.</p>
<p>saxfreq, could you say if a person got a 91% junior year in a class that they want to list as their major...well what do you think?</p>
<p>I was a homeschooler until Junior year...will they only count 1 year then?</p>
<p>A single B won't kill you. I've had two brothers with a B during application time, and one made HYPS (didn't apply to MIT) and the other HYPM (didn't apply to Stanford).</p>
<p>That makes me happy, since I've got a clean record so far :). Although, that really doesn't mean much at all.</p>
<p>Twochickens:</p>
<p>First off, a 91%, by Harvard's percentage breakdown, is an A-. Nothing to worry about -- fine grade. </p>
<p>Second, if by "list as your major," you mean checking those boxes on the application, first of all:</p>
<p>--Harvard doesn't hold you to what you checked on your application if you are accepted and matriculate. You're 17/18! You're bound to change your mind. Obviously, it gives them a sense of the interests of the people they're accepting. But it's not binding in any sense.</p>
<p>--An A- wouldn't make Harvard worry about your qualifications in that field, anyway. :-) </p>
<p>So don't worry.</p>
<p>speaking of majors. I don't know what I want to do, and I'm planning to check "Undecided" on my applications, sure they don't hold you to it, but will that be detrimental?</p>
<p>speaking of majors, I don't really know what I want to do, and was planning to check "undecided" on apps. Sure, they don't hold you up to what you check, but will my apparently indecisive choice be detrimental?</p>
<p>Nope. It's probably more honest.</p>
<p>No, of course not. Being undecided could be an implication of a student being well-rounded! </p>
<p>In most high schools, it's hard to go in-depth in most subjects, so many people have no clue what they want to concentrate in before college.</p>
<p>I would caution that, while the "antipated concentration" check-box section isn't extremely important, Harvard still uses it to make sure it's admitting a class that will take advantage of all of its resources.</p>
<p>Regarding the first question, I think it's really hard to say how big an impact it'd have. I've actually heard that with Harvard, if you're a white or asian kid from the suburbs of the Northeast or California, and you are neither a legacy nor a recruited athlete, then you essentially have to be perfect to get in- 2300+ SATs, great ECs, straight A's in all the hardest classes- just because so many of these kids have such great stats. I mean, when we're talking about a school with a 9% admit rate, and considering all the recruits, legacies and minorities who get spots... it's extremely tough for people without a "hook". It's not pretty, but the reality is that two B's could make a difference in admissions.</p>
<p>Not so fast. This is misleading in two ways:</p>
<ol>
<li> It's true that Harvard wants a diverse campus. But the fact of the matter is that the students within each of these so-called "hook" groups--legacies, athletes, minorities--are starting to become just as competitive, numbers-wise, as the students in the "non-hook" groups. Which means that 2300 Black Legacy Athletes are not shoe-ins. The applicant pool is strong enough that Harvard does not have to lower its standards for these groups and raise them for those poor, poor talented white/asian kids.<br></li>
</ol>
<p>In other words, a B on the transcript of a white or asian student is just as detrimental as a B on the transcript of a black student IF NO OTHER CONTEXT IS CONSIDERED. </p>
<p>But of course these assumptions about Harvard's standards conveniently leave out socioeconomic and other differences, where you can have a lower class white student from a rural area in, say, NJ (which I choose because it isn't underrrepresented) who goes to a high school with a graduating class of 20 and an avg. SAT score of 900 being compared to the rich black kid from Philips Andover. </p>
<p>These blanket statements about the B being more detrimental to certain target groups are becoming increasingly, resoundingly moot.</p>
<p>Because in the first place --</p>
<ol>
<li> What matters more is what classes you received B's in, and why. That has nothing to do with what sports you play, what race you are, or where your parents went to school.</li>
</ol>
<p>It just ain't that simple.</p>