<p>The race factor is easy to determine:</p>
<p>Would someone with the same stats get in if they're Asian or white? If so, then it was the stats. If not, then it was the URM status. No one is blaming anyone else. But in some cases, race WAS the tip factor. In other words, applicants on the bubble were thrust inside it because of the URM status. To deny this is sheer folly.</p>
<p>^ agreed, URM status does wonders to the application</p>
<p>Thank you. Its good to have someone who was admitted, and thus can't be accused of bitterness, corroborating my statements. I'm sure URM isn't as big of a factor as HYP, and for that, I think many rejectees here can be very glad.</p>
<p>I got in and I would have to agree with amciw on most of his points. This student from my school who had 2400 SAT, 2400SATII, debate captain, academic team captain, many other things, and was an all-around cool guy got rejected, not even deferred. The only thing the whole affirmative action process makes me do is subconsciously expect less from any URM I would see at Stanford because of threads like this where the effects of AA are clearly and repetitively expressed.</p>
<p>Stanford's decisions almost rival Dartmouth's in terms of blatant AA being a factor. Thank you, too, for agreeing with me.</p>
<p>The only person from my school who got in was a URM. The rest of us (four others) all had SATs above 2300 and were in the top 10 in our class. This appears to be the case across the board, based on what I'm seeing on this forum. Stanford used AA to an absurd degree this year.</p>
<p>i think it's funny that people still think that high sat scores and gpas nearly secure admission to a top university.</p>
<p>We aren't saying that at all.</p>
<p>i agree, Ykim97</p>
<p>and despite all this talk of the unfair advantage given to URMs, URMs are still a very low percentage of all applicants accepted to most universities. you are looking at individual cases of acceptance as provided on this board instead of the big picture. AA may still be in effect, but it's no reason to be so absurdly bitter about it all. </p>
<p>don't worry, AA hasn't completely skewed acceptance rates for ORMs.</p>
<p>He's saying that people with all high GPA and scores PLUS good EC's and essays are being denied while URM with lower/way lower test scores and GPAs are getting in.</p>
<p>Which, sadface, is completely true...hell, there's proof on this board.</p>
<p>Olive_Tree, I agree that it is demeaning to dismiss URM's acceptances as solely a byproduct of affirmative action, but in some cases AA clearly played a decisive factor.</p>
<p>I hope seawolf will not be upset by this, but it is exceedingly clear he would NEVER have been admitted if he were a white or asian applicant. His accomplishments (and I don't just mean SAT/GPA, but ECs as well), while impressive compared to most teenagers in America, are extremely weak in the Stanford applicant pool. </p>
<p>However, I have seen your stats and accomplishments Olive_Tree, and obviously you would be very competitive regardless of your ethnicity. </p>
<p>Some bitter rejectees have taken this too far, but clearly there is substance in their arguments when Stanford's most underrepresented ethnicity is caucasian, by a large margin.</p>
<p>PS: I didn't apply to Stanford and was accepted ED to an Ivy League earlier this week.</p>
<p>"The rest of us (four others) all had SATs above 2300 and were in the top 10 in our class."</p>
<p>just making a comment on something i read.</p>
<p>
[quote]
He's saying that people with all high GPA and scores PLUS good EC's and essays are being denied while URM with lower/way lower test scores and GPAs are getting in.
[/quote]
but why compare yourself to the small % of URMs being accepted? </p>
<p>you had high GPA and scores, PLUS good ECs and essays applicants, okay. so why not compare yourself to the other applicants who were like you? there were thousands more of them than URMs.</p>
<p>i can see why AA would be a scapegoat for many, but get real. your application was likely compared to many other applications that were nearly identical, and you were accepted/rejected based on whether you stood out or not.</p>
<p>i can point out like 5-6 posters in this thread who had nearly identical stats, with some rejected and some accepted. obviously, those people were your competition. some stood out, and some didn't. URMs were likely competing with other URMs and not you.</p>
<p>^ Exactly, cookietime</p>
<p>No one, even amciw, is claiming that all URMs are underqualified. But the fact is, and it's true, that even some affluent URMs with the same opportunities as similar or better-qualified ORMs were accepted with incredibly low stats. Show me the ORMs with incredibly 'weak' stats and I'll buy that they got in because of the essays. The fact that there are NONE speaks volumes to the credibility of my point.</p>
<p>baelor, what do you call "incredibly weak stats"? SAT scores below a certain level you have defined? Not enough AP classes? Not a long enough list of ECs? What?</p>
<p>Weak stats by the standard of the applicant pool. I'm seeing a trend of URMs with stats comparatively lower than ORM applicants, coupled with unspectacular ECs, getting accepted, while ORMs with excellent stats and activities are getting rejected. That's just not good.</p>
<p>Low compared to ORMs who have had THE SAME OPPORTUNITIES.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Weak stats by the standard of the applicant pool. I'm seeing a trend of URMs with stats comparatively lower than ORM applicants, coupled with unspectacular ECs, getting accepted, while ORMs with excellent stats and activities are getting rejected. That's just not good.
[/quote]
how "weak"? so weak that they cannot possibly benefit from a Stanford education? or just weak by the standards you hold?</p>
<p>nobody that gets into Stanford is a "weak" student, or unqualified. i wouldn't use such words to describe anyone at a top 5 school on merit.</p>
<p>Weak in comparison to the applicant pool, blu_g8orade. Take the stats of a random accepted URM and compare them to a random rejected ORM, from what I've seen here it's likely that the ORM will look better in nearly every area save ethnicity.</p>