<p>We all know what the colleges all say -- that they take a "holistic" approach to reading apps, and that they consider the whole application. </p>
<p>But really, come on. I've heard from others that there is basically an elimination process, where admission officers make cuts in several rounds, based on SAT's, GPA's, etc. until they've got a pool of pretty good applicants, and then they start really looking at the 3000+ applications of acceptable students. MIT I've heard has seven or eight of these rounds, apparently. :P</p>
<p>So anyone have any insider's juicy tidbits on how it's supposed to work with Stanford, or any other prestigious schools, for that matter? I would really like to know.</p>
<p>no one really knows, all i know is that there is a college formula (like if you have leadership, +1, you made school website +2, sports +1 something like that, good GPA is like +4) then they make cuts and then the rest they group together and they have people from certain regions select and goes to head reader, or something like that</p>
<p>There is no way the process is entirely holistic. The regional director takes the files he likes to the committee, where they discuss and talk and debate. </p>
<p>I think they try to make it as holistic as possible. The rounds your talking about probably exist. First and foremost they have to look at your grades and scores. If you don't make that cut, then you get the axe right away. After that I think they go deeper. Though they say there aren't really any minimums in college application, I'm sure there are.</p>
<p>i think most colleges do take a holistic approach for admissions... except for stanford. they are notorious for denying the laws of gpa, sat, and act. i guess they really look at an applicant as a whole and i think that the short essays and personal statement that we wrote are EXTREMELY significant if they hit the right note for the adcom.</p>
<p>Stockguru, I think that could be true for almost any college out there. After all, you're trying to win over the admissions committee, if you can't do it with numbers, there's always a chance you'll do it with words.</p>
<p>That was a very informative article...now I wish I had read it before I applied. I just hope that my intellectual vitality essay was creative enough-as creative as peter's.</p>
<p>ahh Im like the katie girl.... like exactly. Grrr. Except I will have an internship this summer with a publishing firm and a job I hope... plus yearbook camp/journalism camp three years in a row at chapman... buttt those kind of go along with my EC's
this is very depressing</p>
<p>On a positive note, however, my grades aren't 100% my fault. It's due to my parents' divorce and me virtually becoming my little brother's mom and becoming completely responsible for me and him literally 90% of the time. But I guess if they only look at grades... before they toss people out then I won't get in. A's and B's.... psh.</p>
<p>"In the first essay, students write about a meaningful activity. Adrienne writes about her participation in the National History Day competition and how it gave her the opportunity to work with "four brilliant, neurotic perfectionists toward a definite goal." Thompson likes the fact that Adrienne can step back and see that about herself and her peers."</p>
<p>I don't want to copy her, period. I just simply want to know how she would approach the essay . . . I mean how did she show rather than tell, you know? Its pretty hard to do so . . . isn't it? Anyone have an example?</p>
<p>I mean would you describe what actually happened that day? Or would you say I found how important "teamwork" is, or something?</p>
<p>lol@ashwin, I will tell you this right now, they can smell the people who write Adrienne type essay and assuming that many stanford applicants who apply are going to write like her....</p>