Rank these Stanford Applicants

Chance Me / Match Me!
1

<p>Rank and chance these applicants for Stanford, assuming equal ECs. All from the same school.</p>

<p>APPLICANT 1:
GPA: 4.16
SAT: 740R, 800M, 780W (2320 total)
SAT II: 800 Math2, 800 Bio, 800 Lit
APs: Biology 5, Calculus BC 5
National Merit finalist
Two cousins attended Stanford</p>

<p>APPLICANT 2:
GPA: 4.23
SAT: 730R, 800M, 760W (2290 total)
SAT II: 800 Math2, 800 Chem, 800 Phys, 790 Bio
APs: Biology 5, Chemistry 5, Physics B 5, Physics C Mech 5, Physics C E&M 5 (self studied), Computer Science A 5 (self studied)
Sibling's spouse attended Stanford</p>

<p>APPLICANT 3:
GPA: 4.07
ACT: 36
SAT: 2240
SAT II: 800 Math2, 800 Bio, 780 Chem, 720 World History
APs: Biology 5, Spanish 5, Calculus BC 5, Music Theory 5 (self studied), Psychology 4 (self studied), Chemistry 4
National Merit Finalist</p>

2

<p>Are they all from the same school or have access to the same APs? Should we assume course rigor based on AP results?</p>

<p>If so, II wins clearly. Great everything. Then III probably, then I.</p>

3

<p>They're all great so long as they are pleasant and motivated students.</p>

4

<p>Impossible with what you've provided. First, we's need to understand GPA in the context of their schools. Second, S is all about EC's once the stats are there. None would be a shoo in based on stats, many kids with their stats get in but most with these stats are rejected.</p>

<p>The "legacy" relationships you list for 2 do nor make either a legacy and don't matter</p>

5

<p>hmom5, you forgot that the relationships for 1 basically don't matter either. Cousins attending...?</p>

<p>By the way, my ranking was of stats only assuming they have all had the same opportunities. That doesn't mean that in the context of their life, nationality, history, etc., they are the same.</p>

6

<p>yeah, not enough info, but just on what's given, i like #3</p>

7

<p>I like #2 because of the higher GPA and better AP test results. Plus he/she self-studied which shows motivation and independence. This follows with #3 too, along with an outstanding ACT score. However I would put #2 <em>slightly</em> ahead because of the AP test (both in score and in subject). #1 trails behind; however, all three are outstanding. What will really make or break the decision is the other facets of their application. Assuming they all have equal background, then I would choose #2, then #3, then #1.</p>

8

<p>2
3
1</p>

9

<p>Yea, #2, then #3, then #1. But where are the extracurriculars? sports, volunteering, clubs, music, arts, math/science, groups, etc...</p>

10

<p>None. Unless any are URM, sports recruiting, or parents are alumnae.</p>

11

<p>^ That's just stupid.</p>

12

<p>^Or it's how people justify not getting in themselves. To each their own.</p>

13

<p>bump</p>

<p>10char</p>

14

<p>bump</p>

<p>10char</p>

15

<p>I think most people agree that it's 2 then 3 then 1.</p>

16

<p>2, 3, then 1.</p>

<p>They look for GPA a bit more.</p>

<p>Could you chance me?
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/what-my-chances/601962-asian-actor-ivies-stanf-uc-s-usc.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/what-my-chances/601962-asian-actor-ivies-stanf-uc-s-usc.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

17

<p>
[quote]
but where are the extracurriculars?

[/quote]
. .

[quote]
, assuming equal ecs. All from the same school.

[/quote]
</p>

18

<p>they're all close enough that their stats won't be the main factor that gets them in/kicks them out. it'll come down to ECs which can never be equal. each adcom will view a seemingly equal set of ECs differently. assuming even then they're equal (highly unlikely) then it'll come down to recs and essays (which will never be equal). so judging from the stats here, anything could happen, it comes down to the other factors.</p>

19

<p>In case you guys were curious, 1 was rejected early action, 2 and 3 were deferred.</p>