<p>There's really no need for you to express such delight over the talented students Harvard rejects. Very much like school in July - no class.</p>
<p>Hm, maybe Ammar was just one of those losers that spent all his time studying for his standardized tests and had 0 ecs and no life. Chances are, if he had anything decent BESIDES his test scores, like the rest of the people that get into these schools, he wouldn't have gotten waitlisted at "nearly all of his top college choices, including Princeton, Yale, Stanford, MIT and Columbia." Personally, I'd rather go to school with smart people that actually have some personality, rather than some SAT/ACT geek who doesn't know how to have a good time, and spends all his time studying.</p>
<p>Perhaps Ammar should read THIS BOOK:</p>
<p>"Johns Hopkins is still pretty good."</p>
<p>This sentence pretty much sums up the entire article.</p>
<p>Hey now. Let's not jump overhastily to ridiculous conclusions. He got a perfect ACT, therefore he must be a loser with no other credentials? The fact is, we really know very little about his application as a whole. Even saying "maybe" is feeding to a stereotype which is really unfair. My 2400 was a lot of luck. I got a 2160 the first time, and I assure you I didn't spend hours upon hours studying after that. I'd like to think I'm not merely "some SAT/ACT geek who doesn't know how to have a good time, and spends all his time studying." I know you were talking specifically about Ammar, but your statement is a generalization directed to all perfect test scorers - and that's, well, unfair.</p>
<p>What we do know is that Ammar was waitlisted at some top schools - which, I hope, suggests to you that he isn't a faceless, lifeless drone with 0 ECs. </p>
<p>Byerly, that's a great story, haha. But not required reading for everyone who gets a perfect score. Why do the perfect scorers get all the flak? They say, correctly, that numbers aren't everything, yet in the same breath go on to indict only the 2400s/36s, because, apparently, the difference between a 2310 and a 2400 is all the difference in the world. It's not.</p>
<p>Anyway. Apologies if this sounded overly sharp or anything, I'm just tired of the assumptions people make whenever they see a perfect score coupled with tough luck in the admissions game.</p>
<p>It has ever been thus ... when you're at the top you become a target for those lower in the pecking order; this is true for applicants (1600-scorers) and even for colleges (Harvard).</p>
<p>The reason we assume he had no outside life from school is that the article never illustrates how (if) he enjoyed volleyball, cooking, painting, etc. We can only draw conclusions.</p>
<p>Stereotypes are there for a reason... just kidding take it easy zoogies</p>