***Official Stanford 2013 SCEA Decisions****

<p>Congratulations btw.</p>

<p>Well, at least we can agree that poor, first-gen immigrant Asians are screwed over in every way for college admissions </p>

<p>:D</p>

<p>:'(</p>

<p>truth.</p>

<p>and thanks!!!</p>

<p><3</p>

<p>@LightBright</p>

<p>Apparently you're the one that didn't get my post. The point that I was trying to make was that you have no clue whether or not the essays of applicants who got denied were good. For the most part, I would say that they would be...</p>

<p>the thing is, in england we have the same issue between private and state school kids. the private schoolers hate the fact that the government force all the unis to take a quota of state school. so even though theyve had better education standards, more opportunities, smaller classes, more resources - the private school kids ***** and say its easy to get in to oxford and cambridge if youre state school. </p>

<p>to relate it to this. being a URM (if you are low income - which statistically youre more likely to be) isnt some MAGICAL BLESSING. its just the situation youre in.</p>

<p>i think amicw actually owes an apology to the board for some of what he was implying, but lets leave that</p>

<p>stoooooppp!
why are you still going on!!!?</p>

<p>@bob:
And the essays of those accepted could be wonderful as well.</p>

<p>To be honest though, high SAT scores, high GPAs, high etc. do not equate to good essays. I know someone last year who had one competitions in Science Fairs, had this crazy high GPA, got an 800 in the math sections for SATI and SATII, and yet managed to produce pretty bad college essays, and was therefore rejected flat out from MIT.</p>

<p>I'm not going to say I know everything about the admissions process, but the admissions officers know more than I do, so let's leave it at that. :] We can only make guesses.</p>

<p>OKAY, ANY FURTHER RESPONSES TO MY POSTs GO TO MY PM'S. K?
K.</p>

<p>No more spamtastic spamming.</p>

<p>SamuraiBoy:
My dad went [to Stanford] as an undergraduate along with my uncle and cousin for grad school.</p>

<p>Amid the carnage of the Stanford Slaughter, your Deferral stands out as especially egregious. You are a bona fide legacy with a 4.7 W GPA and 2320 SAT's. In the entire US in 2007, only 3870 scored 2320 or better on the SAT. Stanford accepts 2500 to fill its class. Such is the competition from HYP, MIT, etc., if Stanford tried, it couldn't fill its class with those scoring >2320, but instead would need dip down into lower scores. But thats not all. You have a GPA W of 4.7, which is presumably a UW >3.9, which means at worst that somewhere you might have gotten a B. Horrors.</p>

<p>Okay, so Stanford wants intellectual vitality, and evidently didn't find sufficient quantity of this chimerical quality in your application to make the reader's leg tingle. You'd think that the legacy would have made up for that.</p>

<p>My S will be applying RD as a legacy with 2270 SAT's and 3.7 UW GPA. If he gets rejected he had it coming, because his GPA is below par, and his SAT's are just average for Stanford. I certainly wasn't suprised when my first S was rejected with 3.5 2240's last year. </p>

<p>But if your stats are what you say, and there isn't any back story, your deferral is a stinging rebuke to alumni who thought that when it mattered their loyalty to and love of Stanford would be requited. </p>

<p>If my S's had stats like yours, and got a measly EA deferral, I'd be spitting nails.</p>

<p>@LightBright</p>

<p>Sorry I really don't feel like PM'ing but you can leave it at this if you want.</p>

<p>I wasn't saying that the ones who were accepted had bad essays, I was saying it is unfair to say that those who didn't get accepted had bad essays. I'm not trying to argue with you, I really don't want to. I'm just making a point.</p>

<p>I don't recall saying that they had bad essays. :/</p>

<p>I'm just saying, that from what I've seen, though their stats are impressive, they sort of all mold together. idk. I'm not an admissions officer.</p>

<p>Oprah>>stoooooppp! why are you still going on!!!?</p>

<p>Oprah, Congratulations to you on your acceptance.
You may created the thread, but you do not have power to stop it. You do have the power to stop reading it if it is not of benefit to you. Looking at the post count and view count, it seems to be of benefit to some folks.</p>

<p>no, it does not benefit anybody, you guys are embarrassing to people from other boards who come to look at stanford applicants.</p>

<p>This is the only board that erupted like this in response to decisions, it's just bad taste.</p>

<p>exactly
and it's just a ridiculous argument that can never be won</p>

<p>Tyler09>no, it does not benefit anybody,</p>

<p>Going by the post of at least one person in this thread, who has now decided not to apply to Stanford in RD, due to discussions in this thread, I can tell you, Tyler09, that this part of your statement is wrong. </p>

<p>I agree w/ you on your other points.</p>

<p>I feel sorry for the URMs who were underqualified and accepted because when they get to Stanford and everyone is better than them, they may likely feel terrible about themselves, always in the shadows of their daunting peers. There is no winner in the Stanford equation.</p>

<p>I'm sure no URMs accepted at Stanford are underqualified. It's Stanford, and they make sure all they accept will prosper and succeed at their university and amongst their peers.</p>

<p>similar to what olive_tree has said, some may think some URMs who have been accepted are somewhat not as qualified as ORMs that got rejected, but these URMs are still pretty spectacular in their own right. </p>

<p>skscherTX, you appear to have little respect for Stanford as an institution if you believe Stanford would pick students who have little chance of completing an education there.</p>

<p>I still have great respect for Stanford, however, I believe the rejections they handed out on Friday destroyed the dreams of thousands including many a perfect applicant, and for that, I will always hold a grudge.</p>

<p>I've never met a perfect applicant. I know some very amazing applicants, but they are all fallible human beings. Moreover, just being amazing doesn't necessarily mean an applicant is the optimum fit at a particular college.</p>