<p>In april, many of us find out we have been rejected/waitlisted/accepted. After a period of rejoicing some of us start wondering "What if I got in with luck?", "What if the only reason I got is was because of my hook(urm/athlete/legacy)?", "What if I can't succeed at the college that accepted me?", "What if I can't make the grade at the college that accepted me?"</p>
<p>The only reason I am asking is because I just got off the waiting list at a school that I applied to, but don't think I have what it takes to succeed there. I mean if I end up with a low gpa was going to a school that I was not meant for, really worth it?</p>
<p>The other thing is how do colleges factor in taking kids that have lower stats than those who don't have hooks, especially athletes/legacies/urms...What if those kids can't succeed at the elite college that accepted them. What if kids that got in with hooks can't make the grade?</p>
<p>Don’t beat yourself up because you got off the waitlist. Kids who are waitlisted are qualified applicants who could do the work but who aren’t admitted due to space limitations. </p>
<p>what school was it that you got off the waitlist?</p>
<p>statistics show that at TOP colleges, hooked admits like athletes/legacies/URMs do not lag behind academically. well, i don’t know about legacies specifically. but i’ve seen stuff posted here about athletes and URMs, and typically they maintain good GPAs and graduate at the same rate as everybody else.</p>
<p>the thing is, elite colleges provide so many resources for their students. that’s why they’re elite. so as long as you have the willpower, you shouldn’t be afraid of flunking out. well you should, because it would motivate you… but in reality, you shouldn’t think the school will be too hard for you. they wouldn’t have accepted you, waitlist or not, if that was the case.</p>
<p>^They are right in a sense. The Ivy’s for example have increadible grade inflation. They don’t want to see there students flunk out (it takes away from their glamourous image).</p>
<p>I have seen kids on cc, that had a mediocre stats and got into top schools. I just don’t understand how someone with average stats, can succed at top schools. How are kids with mediocre stats able to absorb the material and perform well on rigourous tests, it just doesn’t make sense to me.</p>
<p>in terms of GPA, sometimes they’ve improved since freshman year, and sometimes people aren’t as good at standardized tests as they are at essays, true critical thinking, etc. being good at the SAT generally measures being good at the SAT. besides, what is “mediocre” in your eyes, and what are “top schools”? if we’re going by the CC definition of mediocrity, which is less than 2200 on SAT, then… i think we’re going about this the wrong way…</p>
<p>In my case, I almost aced standardized tests but had a relatively low GPA, below the number stated above for a top 20 school. A lot of that is due to my freshman and sophomore year (my first A came halfway through sophomore year, for instance), where I wasn’t mature enough to want to succeed. But even now, I have a hard time getting As in english, spanish, and history. But, I want to be an engineer, so that doesn’t matter too much. What I think matters is that I have straight As in math/science classes since sophomore year and am extremely passionate about learning, especially in science. The people I know in those classes are amazed at how low my GPA is and why I didn’t get into more schools that I applied to, just like the people in my english class literally can’t believe how I got into some top schools. </p>
<p>Am I some special case? I don’t think so. Even if my story is somewhat unique, there are thousands of explanations for low grades and test scores. So please, just don’t look at numbers. That is doing a complete injustice to the potential of man, by limiting one’s future successes to GPA and, moreso, test scores in high school.</p>
<p>Very interesting topic. I have though about this too but never made an effort to question it more thoroughly. From what I have heard, those who are waitlisted are generally as equally qualifyed as those who are accepted, except they lack some unique quality or talent that make them stand out. Thus those who are waitlisted are mostly commonplace applicants who are smart but don’t have much to add to the diversity of the school.</p>
<p>There is a misconception that one can get into a top college with just a hook, regardless of their academic record. Untrue, while a hook helps, and may even make up for a few points in gpa or tests scores, colleges will not accept students that they don’t think will succeed. </p>
<p>And with top colleges that can fill their freshman class several times over, WL candidates are not going to be any less qualified than those initially accepted.</p>
<p>^^^ well, I know athletes at my school who got into brown and yale, but had to drop 12th grade pre-cal, because they were failing…I mean if you are in a class full of kids in pre-cal as a senior, and you can’t pass, then what chance do you have at yale or brown in Intro Calc 101 (By the way, I was taking pre-cal as a sophomore, so I was in their class)</p>
<p>^^^ I also have a urm friend who got into columbia with a 2000 sat score. She didn’t have lots of ecs, or a really high grades…She took a lot of blow-off classes in high schools…I don’t know how she will be able to handle the coursework…</p>
<p>My point is how can these kids succeed at rigorous schools? It just doesn’t make sense to me…Are the classes at top schools easier, than a state school? Thats the only answer I can find…</p>
<p>I also wonder about that…At my school the only kids who got into top schools/ivies are all minorities (FL public school). Two kids had like 1330s yet one got into UPenn Wharton and the other kid got into Columbia. Theres also this other kid who got 26 act and didn’t get into UF but got into Cornell. And there are a bunch of other minority kids who are good students but they got into amazing places like Stanford, Upenn, JHU, Northwestern, Rice, Swarthmore that many kids in the top ten (including val and sal) couldn’t get into.</p>
<p>Interesting topic, this has been on my mind. I’m a recruit at a top 10 school and I got in with pretty horrible scores compared to you all. I’m nervous to see how well I’ll do…</p>
<p>again, if we’re going to make this about minorities, there is data showing that they graduate/succeed at the same rates as everyone else at top schools.</p>
<p>obviously, no college is perfect. they will inevitably admit some people who probably don’t have the fortitude to keep up academically, whether they got in as URMs, athletes, legacies, or even just "unhooked applicants. but by and large, we’ve seen that most of the students admitted to these top schools can do the work.</p>
<p>^^^ its understandable that people with “hooks” may graduate at the same rate as those without hooks, BUT, will they have a lower gpa? Was going to a top school really worth it, if you end up with a 3.0 after 4 years?</p>