<p>OK, this is my first post. My son is a Junior in HS and I graduated from Stanford (so he is a "legacy"). He's a typical straight A's high achiever from a good public HS. All AP courses etc. and just got SAT's: Reading 740 Math 770 Writing 720. We're from the Midwest. What are his chances when applying early admission?</p>
<p>Based on some stats I saw a few years ago, being a legacy at Stanford basically doubles your chances - from about 10% to maybe 20%. But of course that means that about 80% of all legacies still get rejected.</p>
<p>That's encouraging.</p>
<p>I'm sure you have received the letters from Stanford explaining that legacies have virtually no impact on admissions decisions. Also, I'm sure if you check around you will find that many of the children of your Stanford classmates have been denied admission. With that in mind, S of Stanford graduate was admitted SCEA class of 2010. SAT scores were higher (2390), IB diploma, 5s on all APs, good ECs, but no national awards or athletic stardom. Zip code was affluent suburb. He exhibited a strong passion for his primary interests and that was reinforced in his essays. Did the legacy help? I really do not imagine it did since we are not big donors or active in the alumni groups. But it may have given him a point that bumped him slightly above those with identical stats. Also given the fact that he received early writes to other prestigious schools, I would think the legacy had little or no impact. I suggest retaking SATs and concentrating on your S's area of interest in both classes and ECs. Stanford superscores the SATs so they will take S's highest of each area. Thus he can keep this Math if he goes down when he retakes (chances of going down from a 770 are much higher than going up) and will take the scores of the second tests reading and writing if they go up. He really can't lose as long as he does not take the SAT more than 3 times. Good luck. We have a junior also!</p>
<p>This summer he won a science internship for 6 weeks at Hebrew University in Israel - so he is filling out his resume. But you really think he needs to retake his SAT's?</p>
<p>That sounds like a very nice gem for his resume. Travel and research combined. I presume science is his passion and it will serve him well to pursue his research interest after he returns home.<br>
As for the SATs, it is just my opinion, but I view it as a threshold. I think the student must achieve certain scores in order to receive the "ticket" to the "lottery". Because after you meet the basic requirements, who knows who they will admit and why. Just read the Stanford admit/reject board today and look at the stats the kids report. Yesterday was decision day for Stanford RD. The rejected look the same (and sometimes better, than the accepted. It is crazy. And the class of 2009 is the peak in size.
But as I said, this is my opinion. I am having younger S retake for 3rd time in the fall just to raise his writing score (which some schools (MIT) ignore). His CR and Math are high enough for any college, but I don't want his combined 3-part score to put him in the pile of applications that are not closely reviewed.</p>
<p>Thanks, his first response was he wanted to retake the SAT's. I didn't think it was necessary. Don't you think that retaking them with decent scores might make the admissions people think you're too obsessed with getting in.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>Don't you think that retaking them with decent scores might make the admissions people think you're too obsessed with getting in.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>No. Taking them twice won't give them that impression. If he wants to retake, I'd say go for it. </p>
<p>When older D applied to Stanford, we received a letter from the admissions director that told us how much Stanford values its legacy applicants. The letter basically said that if two students were exactly alike, the legacy tip would favor the legacy applicant.</p>
<p>But in reality, no two students are exactly alike...so the legacy tip is a very minor factor indeed. And as coureur said, even double the rate of acceptance means that over 80% of legacy parents will be disappointed.</p>
<p>His scores will not keep him out anywhere (and higher ones will not by themselves get him in if he would have been otherwise rejected). He needs to take SAT IIs though (MUCH more important than retaking SAT I).</p>
<p>If he has nothing better to do on Sat mornings, he can also try ACT, and decide based on the score whether he should send it or not.</p>
<p>I agree with the ACT comparison. If he scores relatively higher on the ACT he can send both scores.</p>
<p>ACT is definitely a good option too. I think all students should take both once. However since his Math SAT is (I believe) in the 99th percentile, I think it couldn't hurt to try to get the other two sections up into that range. It appears that he is an excellent student and with a few practice tests could improve. When you look at the score report, it shows the range of scores around your child's scores. My understanding is that this range is what the colleges consider. A 770 probably puts you son in the top range for Math. But I don't think the other two do.<br>
He definitely needs to take the SAT subject tests for Math II and a science. I think Stanford does not require specific subject tests, but some schools do so he needs to check that. June is a good time to do subject tests.<br>
By the way, a nephew of a grad I know and cousin of a current student was just accepted to Stanford. He has a very unique zip code though.</p>
<p>I agree with most of the responses that have been stated here. I don't think that it is necessary to retake the SAT-- someone mentioned a "threshold" for consideration (which is pretty loose, at that) at which Stanford appears to consider most people equal, and the OP's son's SAT is well over that threshold. I agree that maybe a try at the ACT could be valuable, and also effort should be made to get some 800 SAT II's under his belt.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I agree with most of the responses that have been stated here. I don't think that it is necessary to retake the SAT-- someone mentioned a "threshold" for consideration (which is pretty loose, at that) at which Stanford appears to consider most people equal, and the OP's son's SAT is well over that threshold.
[quote]
I agree. I think that after the threshold-which I take as the average entering score (look up on collegeboard)-your scores lose all value. I think perhaps that Stanford seems to use them as a means of weeding, but not selection.</p>
<p>Once the admission process rolls around next year for your son, statistics, grades, extracurriculars, accolades, etc will be virtually immutable. Your son must employ the majority of his efforts on creating creative essays. Based on the strength of this years applicant pool, and the strength of my application in contrast, I believe that the primary reason I procured admission was really because of the strength and creativity of my essays. Your son must really focus on clearly conveying who they are as an individual and what seperates them from all of the other students with identical resume's. According to the Stanford representatives I've talked to, Stanford is also looking for students that exhibit and demonstrate passion, inquisitiveness, and I quote almost verbatim, "a love for learning".</p>
<p>When everything else is written in stone, like accolades, grades, and extracurricular's, really strive to answer the essay prompts as honestly and lucidly as possible, as to reflect WHO your son or daughter is as an individual, and not only as a student. Avoid recapitulating or overemphasizing his/her accolades, grades, and extracurriculars in the essays. Be honest, be sincere, and be yourself. </p>
<p>Essays are the ultimate factor that bifurcate the students who get in, and those who do not. Best wishes!
(Sorry for the stream of consciousness style of my writing!)</p>
<p>@Limon08,</p>
<p>Congratulations on your acceptance to Stanford! </p>
<p>However, I can assure you that many of the 22000 rejectees also used creativity and originality in their essays and were still rejected. </p>
<p>If anything, it appears to me that there is an "overachiever" weeding process in Stanford admissions decisions. I would caution against being "too perfect" (e.g. the CC poster who was rejected with 2400 SATS, 8 scores of 5 on AP tests, leadership ECs, etc.). I'm aware of many stellar students who were rejected from Stanford who are fantastic writers (i.e., no doubt they're essays were top-notch).</p>
<p>Take Limon08, for example. Sounds like a great person, but the post had several misspellings (e.g. seperate, not separate) and misuse of words ("bifurcated" when actually the decisions are "trifurcated" - admit, reject, waitlist). </p>
<p>I can remember way back when my "ancient rear end" was a senior in high school and the one guy to get into Stanford was not the smartest (not even close) or the most well-rounded student either. It was random back then, and it's even more random now.</p>
<p>All I can say is that when I applied to Stanford (class of 1979) it was only because someone gave me Stanford's application and said "I think you'ld like it there" (and she decided not to apply). I filled out the application for the heck of it because I really wanted to be a 6 year med at Northwestern or go to Brown. I didn't get into Northwestern's 6 year med but got wait listed at Brown. That same day a fat envelop from Stanford came and by the time I got accepted to Brown I decided to go to Stanford (sight unseen).</p>
<p>I think I got in because the essay I wrote was truly honest and from my heart -- I wasn't trying to impress anyone at Stanford since I literally didn't know anything about the place.</p>
<p>Pure speculation regarding why you got in. </p>
<p>How many of the 22000 rejectees were "truly honest" and wrote "from the heart"? Oodles and oodles, I'm sure. </p>
<p>Wow . . . there aren't many people who literally don't know anything about Stanford and apply there any way. I think you might have hit on something though . . . on your "Why Stanford?" essay question, you should write "I have no idea. Don't know a thing about the place."</p>
<p>Maybe that works more than acting like you really want to go there.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If anything, it appears to me that there is an "overachiever" weeding process in Stanford admissions decisions. I would caution against being "too perfect" (e.g. the CC poster who was rejected with 2400 SATS, 8 scores of 5 on AP tests, leadership ECs, etc.). I'm aware of many stellar students who were rejected from Stanford who are fantastic writers (i.e., no doubt they're essays were top-notch).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sorry, but that is just ridiculous. No one gets rejected from Stanford for having "too good of a score". They got rejected despite those scores.</p>
<p>There are way too many qualified applicants at schools like Stanford. The adcom is building a class by picking various individuals from that pool. They always say that they could easily admit at least two full classes of perfectly qualified students that would be equally great. </p>
<p>Some people get rejected just because there is no place for everyone. A student with 2400 on SAT is no more qualified than one with 2330. At that point other considerations are taking place, and there is no way to know what they are. But no one gets rejected because their scores are "too perfect".</p>
<p>nngmm,</p>
<p>That's your opinion. Based on my experience back in the 80's and my knowledge regarding this year's applicants, Stanford clearly rejects a disproportionately high number of top academic achievers. And they have every right to do so.</p>
<p>This thread was started by a Stanford alum who got in when (as he readily admits) he knew nothing about the school and he had already been rejected by Northwestern.</p>
<p>As I stated . . . random.</p>
<p>OP was rejected by Northwestern's 6 year medical program, which is way tougher to get in than any undergraduate school, even back then. I am including Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and MIT. So the fact that he was admitted at Standford and not Northwestern's HPME is not in any way random.<br>
Being the parent of a current Stanford student, my observations lead me to conclude that there is a threshold SAT (and I do not mean the mean). Depending on the student's hook, this threshold must be surpassed for the app to be placed in the right pile for further consideration. Different thresholds for different hooks such as athletes etc. When the applicant is your typical A student from a suburban high school, the SAT scores had better be at the top of the range to get the app into the right pile. Then, I agree, it is the essays and the clear expression of the student's passion. What lextalionis calls top academic achievers may get into the right pile, but if they don't show a passion and appear just like every other over-achiever, they probably will not make the accepted list.
OP: Good luck whatever you and your son decide on the SATs. But please make sure he applies to several schools.</p>