Stanford and Private School Admissions - A Mystery

Colleges and Universities A-Z Stanford University
101

<p>mathboy, you and I can agree to put a stop to this. All I am saying is that there is tremendous research, beyond personal experience of one math professor or one clinical psychologist, as to what IQ is, its relation to math ability, what math ability is in relation to abstract thinking, and the inter-test reliability between SAT and IQ.</p>

<p>It seems to me that you are trying to say that current math/sci tests have a low ceiling. Actually, so does the Wechsler IQ test in relation to the old Stanford Binet. The stats I am talking about are on the websites: the no of students who get 5s on AP tests, maybe difficult to find out how many do so on 7 or 8 of them, but National AP Scholar comes close as does AP scholar with distinction. I repeat, adcoms calculate the Academic Index, based on SAT scores, then use AP scores and GPA and rigor to get pretty good idea of the top students.</p>

<p>This is not to say that AP Calculus or AP Physics are very difficult. I do not know what a standard student body is. Most kids in America do not even take many APs, do not score highly in them. We cannot construct policies around a few top high schools. A more difficult test would only cater to a minority of students.</p>

<p>Sometime ago I spoke to a Princeton math prof on advanced math in high school. He said the vast majority of kids who take even diff eq and Lin Algebra at high school are not well versed, that Pton has them repeat these courses, that most high school teachers do not teach these higher level courses all that well, and that other than a few geniuses taking advanced math courses in high school is pretentious since the quality of abstraction does not develop until later teens. Again, one prof's view, needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.</p>

<p>Best wishes.</p>

102

<p>OK, I think I see some of what you're saying now and I can agree with what I think I understand -- I am realizing that you're not using the SAT in a really nitpicky way to distinguish students, i.e. if your threshold was 2200 or 2250, I think I agree that SOME use of the SAT I likely is a good idea, and however weird of a test, if there is correlation, I respect of admissions committees use it to an extent. What I was probably averse to was letting the SAT I be used like an end-all exam, where say a 2300 unconditionally beats a 2250. I think such correlations can be good info, if we be sure to use several factors in the given process as you say, and start lessening the importance of the SAT once a score like 2200 or 2250 is achieved.</p>

<p>Now, I may not have made this clear, but my concern is what to do WITH those, say 10,000 with such a score. Unconditionally favor a 2280 over a 2250? From your points above about bashing heads in the IIT system, I think neither you nor I would be in favor of this. </p>

<p>So now, how to pick out the best math and physics minds? See, there are also outliers which don't match our SAT I correlation, which we must take into account as best as we can. My friend applying to math grad schools scored well above the 90th percentile on the subject GRE (and has had only A's and A+'s in Berkeley math courses), which is insanely good, but he'd probably do awfully on a test like the SAT I with subjects like CR and W, given how he did on the general GRE. </p>

<p>We have a crucial task to neither violate your nor my criterion. Yours being to keep high school curriculum open to many students. Mine to have it still distinguish the top students like my friend (and you can be sure he's way above the caliber of your every day 5-er in AP Calculus!!). WITHOUT making the only outlet Olympiads and optional competitions, i.e. making it a central part of the application to look for these students. </p>

<p>I'd say the way to do this is to just up the curriculum for AP and honors courses, but now have it be OKAY to get a B or a C in an AP course for a good student. That's how it is in college!!!!!!!! Let students take dozens of HONORS courses, why not preserve the integrity of what an AP course is supposed to mean -- i.e., reflect the intensity of college studies in the subject? Look, half the students who aren't top students take calculus in college after having taken the AP test, and do pretty poorly! The course is still accessible to them! It's just, they get a reality check, and get evaluated on a fairer scale. In my opinion, this isn't bad to implement in high school, because you don't alienate anyone, you just make it harder to say "I got an A." Some schools already do this, but not all do, and the only way I see to make standards go up overall across the board is to make the AP curriculum and exams more reflective of college.</p>

<p>This way, someone who has A's in AP Calculus and AP Physics is actually a RATHER GOOD math student. We do need to account for outliers if we're not going to lose students to statistics. For I'm sure you'll agree, a student with 8 AP's can very well be less promising in math than a student with 4 AP's. My friend from above is only one example.</p>

<p>Anyway, thanks for your input.</p>

103

<p>mathboy, it seems we are getting somewhere.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>The SAT 1 is never an end all, has never been so and I do not advocate it either. It is one way to triage 22000 applications. There is only so much labor available in the adcom office.</p></li>
<li><p>To use your example, the trivial difference between 2280 and 2250 will not be emphasized by the adcoms. What you seem to be overlooking is classroom performance and teacher recs.</p></li>
<li><p>It seems to me, how to distinguish a top math/physics student who does not get to go to Olympiads (for whatever reason) when the ceiling in the AP exam is so low that his 5 will be seen as no different from the 5 of a less able student who may struggle with math in college. That's what you are agonizing over, right?</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Your friend, to take the example, will get, let us say, 800 Math, 650 Cr R and 650 Writing, and 800 SAT 2 math, 800 SAT 2 physics. Many will get this pattern, remember, only some will be top math/physics students, others will not be outliers in math and physics but may be OK students in math / physics (and poorer in writing/reading). That is, when you see many of these students rejected please do not assume they are all like your friend. Your friend will be rare in this group also.</p>

<p>This is where teacher recs and grades come in. Ok, you may say that OK students will also achieve good grades since the curriculum is not too tough. But the teacher will rave about the genius. You seem to be preoccupied with test scores (are you of subcontinent origin like myself?) but you keep overlooking the fact that adcoms are very aware of this, look for patterns in transcripts, call teachers and speak to them. I have spoken extensively with directors of admissions at Caltech, MIT (Merilee Jones), Princeton, etc out of curiosity about the process and they all said they are hunting like detectives for the true spark.</p>

<p>True, they will miss a few, all of us make mistakes but the top schools get it right for the most part. The problem with upping the curriculum, introducing another tough test etc would be a) cost b) labor c) test development d) then you have to devise tests to identify the Renaissance scholars and psychology geniuses etc all for just a few students when the vast majority of students right now do not take even the current AP tests.</p>

<p>Nationally, the average high schooler takes 1 AP or less if you take the 2.2 million HS grads and divide by the no of tests taken, etc. Also, the current process catches the reverse too. That is, the student who gets 700 in SAT math/physics because of boredom, poor teaching, domestic problems etc and blossoms in college. Also it weeds out the superstars who may score perfectly in your tough test yet to be devised, but slacks off in college, has no passion, is lazy, etc. In other words, brilliance has to be married to drive and persistence for success, hence a slightly lower score in an athlete may mean the vigor to do something with one's life versus the genius in the attic who brings no work to fruition. There have been many articles on the two models, best scholar (Indian/European) versus the best futures (American). I respectfully suggest that it seems you are new to the admissions process. </p>

<p>Anyway, nice talking to you, please feel free to PM me.</p>

104

<p>These are interesting points, and to all who're still interested, continue posting your thoughts. I am PM-ing the above poster, so we can carry on our discussion, which others may have lost track of due to its length! </p>

<p>I don't claim to be an expert, but am reporting of my own findings. I still feel like there is quite a bit of a mystery to the process. If people like my friend were caught consistently by teacher recommendations, I'd be glad. I suggest, though, that people like my friend end up REALLY shining in college, where they have all sorts of insane curricula and professors to work with and shine. And I feel that a teacher can say more about such students if the curriculum he is instructing the student under really explicitly brings him out on top! </p>

<p>Anyway, I do not claim to know about the practicality of my solution, but idealistically, I think we can agree that if classes are still accessible, a more realistic reflection of tough college math and physics is not a bad thing for our high schools!</p>

105

<p>In other words, I agree with the philosophy of the system we're working under, acknowledge that drive is crucial, and tests aren't everything. But rigor of curriculum and reflection of the level of college is, to me, something very important, and I wish it were better paid attention to by the college board.</p>

<p>This is more for the benefit of continuing this thread for interested posters than Ramaswami, because I've already PM-ed him.</p>

106

<p>So, I just wanted to say something quickly...</p>

<p>Most of my life I lived in Brazil. And the college admissions system there is VERY different. Basically, you take a test, a test that is specific to the school you want to go to, and the X number of people with the highest scores get in. The rest, tough luck.</p>

<p>So basically, you can get Fs your entire high school career, colleges will never see them. You don't write any essays. You don't send recommendations. Nada. Just as long as you do well on the test, you could end up going to one of the best schools in the country. </p>

<p>That system sucks. I saw dozens of people who did nothing but talk in class, who tried to do voodoo every tuesday with other people's hands, who through eggs out the window at freshman and did a number of other completely insane things instead of studying. But then, their parents could pay for good private tutors who told them exactly how to take the test and, voila! THey end up getting great scores.</p>

<p>I think the American system is incredible. It's more than just numbers. From my experience, it comes pretty close to being the perfect admissions system. And when we apply to Stanford, Harvard, Yale, or whatever, we know what we're in for. We know that sometimes it's just luck. </p>

<p>And not one thing I said about Brazil is an exageration. It may sound awful, but it's really not. I'm in complete love with my country, I just don't like its college admissions. :)</p>

107

<p>Thanks for your thoughts on another system! I very much like that we have a system which weighs many factors as well.</p>

108

<p>"It's more than just numbers."
True.</p>

<p>"it comes pretty close to being the perfect admissions system."
False.
Because it beats the brazilian system? Nothing really to be proud about.</p>

109

<p>Well why couldn't that be something to be proud of? Of course it's not perfect, because no system could possibly be perfect. There will always be extremely accomplished, deserving students getting rejected. No way around that. And we all know this when we apply. </p>

<p>But I think we have a very good system. Comparing it to other countries or not. I think it's just plain good.</p>

110

<p>I am glad miawrites likes our system. My view has been consistent, which is it's good in philosophy, but not ideal in rigor. </p>

<p>And, the reason I (faraday may feel similarly) still can't be <em>proud</em> of our system is that I still find it's really really mysterious, and tries to measure success in college independent of a curriculum which really reflects the rigors of college in key areas. I have now understood Ramaswami's point, which is that the personalized touch of recommendations is to distinguish those with a special spark. I think recommendations are a great way of communicating something extra to colleges, but find something a little sickening about a system whose college level "AP" stuff can be shallow. Even aside from how few mistakes are made in the admissions process (I don't like the mistakes I've seen myself)...a majority of my acquaintances studying math or engineering have the attitude that a bunch of our AP's were a waste, and find college work a lot tougher.</p>

111

<p>I mean seriously....part of making math challenging is that it should be fun!!!! At least one grad student I talked to mentioned not being into math at an early stage, and that his honors courses at the lower level of college were what got him excited! </p>

<p>I feel like our system mass produces AP Calculus 5-ers, and then leaves them to figure out what actual math is like in college. </p>

<p>Still, I have to concede that I don't know what resources are required to change things. But I can't say they're to my taste perfectly the way they are by a long shot.</p>

112

<p>Well, if academic numbers are de-emphasized and fuzzy things like essays and 'sparks' are over-emphasized, then you can build a class to any ethnic or social quota you want. Nobody will ever be able to prove its not fair, or even that there is a quota, because they can say, 'well sure, 1900 SAT, but the essays were redolent of sheer brilliant leadership potential'.</p>

113

<p>The fact top schools can scoff at a bunches of AP's, at test scores, and multiple 750's+ on subject tests tells a lot about the actual rigor and quality of such tests.</p>

<p>Actually, I'm OK with AP tests as academic factors, but the problem is that they are NOT required for college admissions. And secondly the grade increments are too large. A 5 in AP Calculus could mean I'm a grade grubber that crammed the week of testing just as well as I'm a strong person who is able to carry out delta-epsilon proofs and understand the notion of limits. Such a range of error is inadmissible for top college admissions. Finally, there is much less emphasis on AP's for admission than on the notorious SAT. This is just inadmissible. Some schools literally says they don't care how much you score on AP's, and won't consider it as an admission factor.</p>

<p>If AP's were given grades out of a 100, maybe more difficult (but less time pressuring), then I'd be FOR the actual AP test as an academic factor. Remember I have just dealing with the academic factor right now, because it is the most objective one. I'm against using tests only for admission. However, I am inclined to make the system better, so that tests actually mean something to top schools, so that the academic factor (trust me, however you want to put it, studying is still a large part of college) can actually play a larger role in admission.</p>

<p>The problem with recommendations is that they are very subjective. Shy people who are really strong would usually suffer. And the curriculum currently offered at most schools (including AP classes) is so weak that even though the teacher writes you a very strong recommendation, your actual potential is rarely revealed because you never had to tackle difficult stuff. Think about it, if you were in AP calculus, does computing integrals fast and making 100's on tests really mean that you are brilliant and "shine" academically? (even though you got a remarkable recommendation b/c most of the class can't compute derivatives as fast as you do?)</p>

<p>If proofs became taught in AP classes, there's is more opportunity to "shine" and to actually show your ingenuity.</p>

<p>The SAT is just stupid.</p>

<p>Some people seem concerned about grade deflation. All I can tell is that some serious grade deflation will help a lot the educational system. One of the best way to prepare for college work is a rigorous curriculum, **an ability to fail and get up<a href="as%20emphasized%20by%20MIT">/B</a>, and a strong work ethic and work habits (moderation is key).</p>

<p>PS: There is a certain trend in US education that once academics are "past" a certain cut-off, which are at best good, then you can only "shine" through EC's. What I want is to provide another opportunity to "shine" academically, other than Olympiads (which has very special style, and which most people don't take). Trust me, ingenuity can occur in a classroom just as well as on a student club meeting.</p>

114

<p>Faraday, let me guess, you did not do so well on the SAT, did you? No, sir it is not stupid. Also, colleges do not scoff at a ton of APs. They are aware of the subjectivity of recs, they are very aware of strength of curriculums, in fact Bill Fitzimmons of Harvard says they know about every school in the country, they keep detailed notes, they know the teachers who teach and their grading rigor.</p>

<p>So, in sum admit decisions are not based on one or two or three factors. After 3 SAT subject tests, one SAT reasoning test, 5 or 6 APs, teacher recs, grades over 4 years, strength of curriculum, etc one gets a good idea. Kindly read Rachel Toor's book, Admissions Confidential, and Hernandez's book, A is for Admissions, to know how it is done, they are two former admissions officers, then you may be able to make meaningful contributions. Sorry to sound insulting, but right now there is tremendous ignorance in your lack of knowledge of how it is done, I am not questioning your smarts but it seems you and mathboy don't have a clue.</p>

115

<p>
[quote]
Sorry to sound insulting, but right now there is tremendous ignorance in your lack of knowledge of how it is done

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Faraday has a point. I mean, the AP exams are really not that hard to tell you the truth. Try out the IB exams. Each subject has three, not one, exams; now that tells you the rigor of the IB program. The only two universities that I know that know a lot about the IB program and favor IB Diploma students in the admission process are University of Chicago and Cornell University.</p>

<p>I am a student who is in the IB program but also took the AP exams when I was in Grade 11. I went and tried three AP exams, based on my knowledge in IB. I didn't study for Calculus AB, Biology, Chinese Language and Culture and got 5's on all of them. I really didn't study that hard for it.</p>

<p>When it came to me self-predicting how I will perform on the IB exam. I predicted myself a 6/7 for Math, 6/7 for Biology, and 7/7 for Mandarin. I understand the rigour of International Baccalaureate.</p>

<p>
[quote]
... We already have in several hundred high schools a program that teaches critical thinking and measures the results with depth and clarity. That would be the International Baccalaureate program. Its three- to five-hour final exams at the end of college level courses in all the major disciplines - no multiple choice questions allowed - provide a more sophisticated assessment of student learning than anything else in American public schools ...IB "is built on the principle that students can and should master both basic subject matter and higher-order skills." I think Advanced Placement, which also offers college-level learning and assessment in many more U.S. high schools, does the same thing, even if its final exams are not quite as good [as those of I.B.'s].
- Washington Post

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't want to get this into a debate between AP and IB, but this shows you the kind of rigour the European system has.</p>

116

<p>^^ I did fairly well on the SAT, got into Stanford, and have received 5's on my last 6 AP exams...oh, and I agree with mathboy and faraday. They also express their views without launching ad hominem attacks.</p>

117

<p>Raswamani:</p>

<p>Uhmm.. apparently, my SAT score was enough for me to get into Stanford. But if you really insist, I actually got a 2300. You can check my post record, I think I mentioned it somewhere else.</p>

<p>What makes me sad is that this SAT score does not demonstrate much about me, except for that I'm good at taking the SAT.</p>

<p>"So, in sum admit decisions are not based on one or two or three factors. After 3 SAT subject tests, one SAT reasoning test, 5 or 6 APs, teacher recs, grades over 4 years, strength of curriculum, etc one gets a good idea"</p>

<p>THat is a common fallacy. Our school is kind of considered top, and about 5-10% of the graduating senior class match that description. How many of them are actually academically qualified in the "subject tests" they aced, or have shown some real ingenuity? about 5 among those top guys, and dozens more that do not fit the top score description. And many of those grade-grubbers who represent 90% of those top scorers have small intellectual interest or vitality. And sadly, many of those get into top schools, while too often, those 5 guys I'm impressed with get rejected.</p>

<p>PS: top score description is from a top university pt of view (5-8 5's on APs before senior yr, 2250+ SAT, 2300+ SATII's)</p>

118

<p>And remember, one of the things both mathboy and I agree about is that the rigor of the current education style AND testing system lacks.</p>

<p>We don't mean that the philosophy of multifactorial admission is defective.</p>

<p>Some people say AP's are already too hard. They are hard because they SHOULD be. AP's are called college-level classes, and thus must reflect college level exams. Try to compare MIT's 18.012 midterms with the AP C mechanics. There is a striking disparity both in the rigor (vector notation and generalized for of reasonment) but also in difficulty. As it is now, you do not shine in a top college admission by doing well on AP tests. You can get 15 5's, but quantity will not remunerate quality.</p>

<p>Making AP actual college level , with a more gradual scale will:</p>

<ol>
<li>create grade deflation, which is good because there will be a difference between talented and good students.</li>
<li>Teach students that imperfection is normal (trust me, many people have OCD's with not being perfect, even some top school admits)</li>
<li>Build self-confidence when you start actual college classes</li>
<li>Create a more reliable academic factor. Stanford can now look at an applicant's file, and using standart measures (not Olympiads or research), say "wow, this guy is strong in physics." Instead of "yeah, this guy is good enough to pass a cut-off, now let's see the other stuff."</li>
</ol>

119

<p>To Ramaswami - I thought you had decided to stop commenting on this material. If you're interested, in your frustration I suggest you don't pass arbitrary judgment on how well people did, and their beliefs. </p>

<p>Come on - I have it from a fellow 14 AP 5-er, 2390 SAT, straight A valedictorian who's doing insane things in college that the SAT is really a silly test. </p>

<p>Forgive the impatience, but give me a break!! We're not talking rocket science, or heavy psychological games, or claiming we know what the Harvard admissions committee is thinking right at this moment. We're not claiming to have read 40000 books on how admissions are done. See, we're not even commenting on how we think it's done. </p>

<p>We're making a simple claim about the curriculum. One of Ramaswami's arguments was that the Ivy Leagues don't want pure brilliance, but other qualities. FINE! Great! I'll leave them alone, and they can do what they feel like. Does that somehow relate to how the AP curriculum isn't lacking? </p>

<p>Not all of us are posting about admissions tricks and treats, some of us are really talking about hardcore curriculum. The only relevant suggestion I've heard from Ramaswami against what many of us are saying about the curriculum is that easier AP's will make them more accessible, and contribute to some mysterious academic indexing system, which admissions officers will take into account. Then, he goes on to tell us we have no clue about what we're talking about, and sites a plethora of articles that tell us how admissions is done. </p>

<p>"Hey here is a suggestion!"</p>

<p>"Nope -- you don't have a clue how admissions is done, and everything you say is wrong. You probably failed your SAT."</p>

<p>I am not in favor of this sort of bashing, and hope we can keep it somewhat civil from now on.</p>

120

<p>Also, to faraday's point that the AP even be better considered as a good part, plus graded on a scale more prone to differentiation, good idea.</p>

<p>Though, ideally, grade inflation stops, and consistent effort in an AP course over some semesters actually means something substantial.</p>