<p>How can one ask that? Off with his head! LOL...</p>
<p>Sadly by the time we attend Rivers would've finished his last two semesters and left....</p>
<p>haha sadly, I know. So technically Rivers isn't taking up my spot, but I'd rather we each had one. I mean, come on, going to school with Rivers Cuomo? It sounds absolutely amazing :D:D hehe</p>
<p>BTW, zogoto: Rivers may or may not be the frontman of Weezer.</p>
<p>Decision: Deferred</p>
<p>Stats:[ul]
[<em>]SAT I: 2170 (740R 740W 690M)
[</em>]SAT IIs: 800 Writing 720 Lit 700 Spanish 690 French
[<em>]ACT: 31
[</em>]GPA: 4.675...?w 4.0 uw
[<em>]Rank: 1/165
[</em>]Other stats: All-Eastern Choir, 2 years PMEA All-State Chorus (2nd and 1st chair respectively), PA Governor's School for International Studies, typical school clubs, community service (BBBS), etc.
[/ul]Subjective:[ul]
[<em>]Essays: ehh...very reflective....
[</em>]Teacher Recs: decent
[<em>]Counselor Rec: no idea...he's not the brightest
[</em>]Hook (if any): i live at a monastery...?
[/ul]Location/Person:[ul]
[<em>]State or Country: PA
[</em>]School Type: sub-rate public
[<em>]Ethnicity: British/Russian...white American
[</em>]Gender: female
[<em>]Perceived Strengths/Weaknesses: low test scores...?
[</em>]Why you think you were accepted/deferred/denied: app not aggressive enough
[/ul]Other Factors:
General Comments/Congratulations/Venting/Commiserations,etc: Congrats to all!</p>
<p>Harvard's emphasis on athletics has always been intriguing. As I recall, Harvard has more varsity teams and sports than any other university, right? 42 + or -? So... it's a jock school it would seem.</p>
<p>The number of varsity sports seems to be mentioned along the way in admission office info sessions, or on-the road presentations, or student tours - perhaps to somehow "balance" the stellar academics that don't really need hyping given the brand name.</p>
<p>Would anyone know what percentage of admitted students have some varsity sport experience in high school/or club/travel teams? My guess is 60 or 70 percent. It's not a hook unless you are recruitable, but might be a highly desirable ec.</p>
<p>Decision: Deferred</p>
<p>Stats:[ul]
[<em>] SAT I: 2350 (800 CR, 760 M, 790 W)
[</em>] SAT IIs: 800 USH, 800 Math 2, 720 Lit
[<em>] ACT: N/A
[</em>] GPA: ~3.9
[<em>] Rank: Top 5%
[</em>] Other stats:
- Presidents Honour Society (gr. 9 12)
- 3rd highest GPA (gr. 11)
- Academic Award (Varsity Football, gr. 11)
- Man for Our Times Award (gr. 11)
- Silver Award in Hypatia Math Contest (gr. 11)
- Top 25% finish in Pascal (gr. 9) and Cayley (gr. 10) math contests
- Highly Commended Award from Commonwealth Essay Society (gr. 11)
- First place in 2005 Vancouver Literary Arts Contest for Teens (gr. 11)
- Finalist in the 2005 YWCA Real Story Competition</p>
<ul>
<li>Football (gr. 10 present)</li>
<li>Senior Concert Band; hornist, soloist (gr. 9 present</li>
<li>Senior Jazz Band; pianist (gr. 10 present)</li>
<li>Piano: classical, pop, jazz (1995 present)</li>
<li>Volunteer at at UBC Hospital (2003 present)</li>
<li>School Newspaper (senior editor, gr. 11-12)
[/ul]Subjective:[ul]
[<em>] Essays: Very good, IMO (a teacher called it "magical")
[</em>] Teacher Recs: A "good" rec and a "one of the best students ever" rec
[<em>] Counselor Rec: Solid (he doesn't know me very well)
[</em>] Hook (if any): None
[/ul]Location/Person:[ul]
[<em>] State or Country: Canada
[</em>] School Type: Parochial private
[<em>] Ethnicity: Asian
[</em>] Gender: Male
[<em>] Perceived Strengths/Weaknesses:
STRENGTH: I was a four-year football player, editor-in-chief of the school paper, and a top academic student
[</em>] Why you think you were accepted/deferred/denied: Lack of national distinctions or major awards
[/ul]Other Factors: Nah.
General Comments/Congratulations/Venting/Commiserations,etc: My sincere congrats to all those who got in!</li>
</ul>
<p>Here's my "Outsider's Take" on admissions. I believe that Harvard is looking for 1-Individuals who have a 2-high probability of becoming 3-future 4-leaders.</p>
<p>1- There are so many young people with parents who have directed the child's life that the unfortunate child has a difficult time: a) understanding what he/she wants. b) can think or make decisions on his/her own or more accurately without approval or reassurance from others. Self-assurance involves the ability to put your thoughts into actions knowing the risks associated with potential failure. In my personal opinion, I feel that many of the cookie cutter schools (science academies) that have individualized focus on one specific topic are doing a disservice to youth. In a childs most fundamental years, the vastness of opportunity should be explored. To specialize at a young age is NOT (in my opinion) an advantage. You hear be yourself when interviewing. Unfortunately many children today have never been allowed to be themselves.. to be an Individual.
2- High probability refers to past accomplishments. It is highly probably that someone with a certain track record (most, great, good or bad) will be successful at repeating those successes or failures. In this area I also include the track record traits such the ability to rebound from failure, determination to complete difficult tasks. It becomes apparent in some cases that students drop courses that they might get a B or C grade in just so it doesnt affect their GPA. In most cases the student(s) would be better served to give great effort and really earn a B. It shows persistence to complete the mission. In life you dont always get a chance to do it over and have to live with the results even if theyre not what you would have wanted. I think in this area athletes shine.<br>
3- The future is uncertain and success in areas that have yet to even be developed requires foresight, vision and dreaming. The old ability to think outside the box. This is another strike for cookie cutter schools. To be on the cutting edge of any industry or profession requires a person to be prepared with all of the best current tools while investigating and discovering new ways to do some of those things better/different resulting in new opportunities to open other pathways to future successes. Along with uncertainty of future is a certain level of insecurity. The ability to recognize ones insecurities and make rational decisions is a positive quality. In the area of insecurity, applicants who demonstrate a reasonable amount of self-restraint would be positive. Generally over-confidence can be either insecurity (which may prevent an applicant from pulling the trigger on a decision) or cockiness (which may have an applicant pulling the trigger without first thinking about the consequences).
4- Leaders are both born and made. Leaders are commonly selected as a result of the respect of those theyre working with or for. Displaying leadership is not as easy as it may first appear. Being the captain of a team is rarely by selection (mostly appointed as a result of grade and performance). On the other hand positions which require election are very disclosing. If a group of high ranking peers elect you to an office in any statewide or national program, this would verify leadership. In another sense what one does with their leadership roles also important. If the president of an organization accomplishes something unique or challenging because of his/her demonstrated leadership then it is less significant whether he/she was selected or elected. Additionally, when young people are exposed to positions of authority, (by family members or other means) the exposure provides many intangibles which are difficult to teach or train. Such elements as dignity without awe, the ability to work with and among people of worldly influence. This is where family lines have an advantage. These legacies are familiar with how the world functions at this level. These born leaders have an advantage in this area. Likewise, legacies of parallel families of Professional athletes, chiefs of surgery, CEOs of major companies are exposed to leadership roles, models, examples, business structures, character profiles, social engagements etc.. The daughter of a hog farmer in Iowa may be a little intimidated (at first) when exposed to high profile world leaders, although they do bring their own experiences. Leadership and respect go hand in hand.</p>
<p>What does the rejection letter read?</p>
<p>wow, those are some very observant and well-taken points of view!</p>
<p>Harvard seems to treat different math/science achievements very differently in admission. I'll hypothesize one such "hierarchy" - this is based partially on my own opinions about the worth of each competition/award, but it has been decently corroborated by admissions results.</p>
<p>By the way, this is only for domestic applicants. I think we're seeing IMO medalists from other countries deferred because Harvard realizes that it could fill an enormous number of spaces with these people, and thus has made a conscious decision to lower the value of the IMO (and other olympiads) for foreign students.</p>
<p>The hierarchy:
1. Every international olympiad
2. STS
3. USAMO
4. US Physics Team, USNCO (chem olympiad), USACO (comp olympiad)
5. Siemens
6. USABO (bio olympiad)
7. ISEF
8. RSI (it's not a big hook for Harvard, and I don't see why it should be - unlike the others, it's not an individual accomplishment, just another offer of admission)
9. Infinitesimally small value: science olympiad, Mu Alpha Theta, science bowl, etc...</p>
<p>This sound about right?</p>
<p>"father"--
Your long post describing your "belief" seems to be verified by admissions trends, by published results & other published materials. I also think this factor is an important part of "fit" for a student, & one too often neglected by seekers of H's "prestige," including its fine programs, track record in certain areas, etc. Nothing wrong with prestige, stature, rank, etc., but for ANY college campus (not just H), focusing on those factors apart from the student's personality & comfort level with the environment, is the wrong direction in which to go. For this reason, it is my own belief that H may have more than its share of applicants who should be choosing other institutions. </p>
<p>Not that one wouldn't benefit somewhat from receiving a degree from an illustrious institution, but for many individuals (such as a number of people I've met -- Harvard alums & non-H alums) that is all they will "receive"/earn, & all they have remembered.</p>
<p>College yrs. are not just about filling your brain: they're about discovering your fuller "self" & soul: tasks which occur best when you feel in harmony with your environment. Those tasks, along with the academics, prepare you for a career that you truly, freely, have chosen & expresses YOU. For some the environment that provides that best will be H; for others a much smaller LAC, a different Ivy, or a particular Public is where they will feel at home & hit stride.</p>
<p>Randomperson--That seems very accurate. At least in terms of the research world (which I'm most familiar with), that's absolutely correct. In terms of prestige, STS > Siemens > ISEF. As for the rest, it all seems about right, and I agree with you putting RSI at the bottom because as prestigious as it is, it is just an offer of admission and not a new achievement in itself. That's a bad way of putting it but, you know what I mean ;) The only tough part is combining the research competitions with the Olympiads, although you probably did that pretty well, too, by the looks of it. Just remember that research and the Olympiads are two very separate things (one is about pure knowledge and the other is about passion and discovery), so maybe it is indeed like comparing apples and oranges. If you're in love with research and have a shot at winning the Nobel Prize, winning STS is about as big an accomplishment as you can get, not an international Olympiad.</p>
<p>Re STS, do you mean the single person who wins it, the top ten (both are announced in March), or the 40 finalists?</p>
<p>Wouldn't being on the US Physics, USNCO (chem olympiad), USACO (comp olympiad) Teams be a greater accomplishment than making USAMO, even though there are fewer people taking the Science Olympiad qualifying tests?</p>
<p>I mean MOP> other science camps, but the 24-person US Phys. Team has to "count" more than USAMO, no?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Wouldn't being on the US Physics, USNCO (chem olympiad), USACO (comp olympiad) Teams be a greater accomplishment than making USAMO, even though there are fewer people taking the Science Olympiad qualifying tests?
[/quote]
To some extent, yes. The problem with simply making a list was that I couldn't be very specific. When I listed USAMO, I meant *winning<a href="coming%20in%20somewhere%20in%20the%20top%2024">/i</a> the USAMO, which explains its placement.</p>
<p>This is a very rough estimate, but I'd say that making the 24-person Physics team is roughly equivalent to qualifying for USAMO. Sure, there are far fewer people in the physics group, but it's also much less competitive. It might be slightly more impressive.</p>
<p>Donemom, I think he means finalist.</p>
<p>epiphany,</p>
<p>I agree..... In another post somewhere I discuss the match... It IS important. And I think all schools agree to that. Nobody wins in a mismatch. Many adult (parents) would trade their childs happiness for the status of H or others. For the spirit of the student to thrive it must be of free will.</p>
<p>randomperson,</p>
<p>I put all of these "bowls" in one basket. Achievement. While one year H may select two or three from X bowl.. next year it may be different. They all have similar traits, statistics, academic performances, all in the same Math Bowl, Science Bowl, etc. What make one stand out over another is NOT 1st place or 2nd place. It is all of the other things on the application. My Opinion</p>
<p>so, what do you have against the Bio Olympiad?</p>
<p>Donemom--The higher you place the better, but I would imagine that the big thing in STS would be making finalist (that is, top 40).</p>
<p>I believe that the order for improving chances at harvard is:</p>
<ol>
<li>Every international olympiad (must win a medal)</li>
<li>STS (finalist and top ten to be above isef 1st or higher)</li>
<li>ISEF (1st place or higher to be above siemens national finalist)</li>
<li>Siemens (must be national finalist to be above #5- U.S. teams)</li>
<li>US Physics Team, USNCO (chem olympiad), USACO (comp olympiad)</li>
<li>USABO (bio olympiad), USAMO</li>
<li>JSHS (Harvard is a sponsor)</li>
<li>RSI </li>
<li>Infinitesimally small value: science olympiad, Mu Alpha Theta, science bowl, etc... However, when coupled with the above, can be of reasonable value (esp. if pres./captain of team)</li>
</ol>
<p>ISEF is probably too high. A rather large number of people make it and the judging is often done by people with no experience in the particular field. I hate to sound biased but Siemens selects a very small number of people (more selective, that's a big thing) and they read your paper heavily before making any decision on you; at nationals they even get a judge for each project that is doing exactly the same kind of work.</p>