<p>What do you think are the main differences in the admission/application process and selection criteria between Stanford and HPY (or MIT, r any other really selective schools)? Is the emphasis on creativity and passion stronger?</p>
<p>Yes. Stanford 25/75 is 2040-2330, whereas HPY 25/75 is around 2100-2380. Ivy League admissions are way more objectively influenced than those of Stanford.</p>
<p>While by no means an expert on this subject, I think that Stanford prefers somebody whose traits include being frank, personable, and motivated, whereas HPY prefers someone whose exhibits an excellent work ethic and ambition (this is not to say that these traits are not highly valued all of these schools).</p>
<p>test101, I don’t really think you can point to a 50-60 point differential in test scores at certain ranges, and conclude on that basis that some schools are “way more objectively influenced” than others. That’s a pretty small differential on a percentage basis, and also only a single data point among an array of “objective” factors (to the extent that scores, gpa’s and the like are objective). Incidentally, some of that small differential is purportedly attributable to Stanford’s aggressive recruitment of athletes and of first-generation college students. </p>
<p>@GlobalDolphin: Stanford does, of course, look for focused, creative , highly capable students, but so do all of its peer schools.</p>
<p>"Yes. Stanford 25/75 is 2040-2330, whereas HPY 25/75 is around 2100-2380. "</p>
<p>One can not add all the bottom scores and top scores in each section of SAT to come up with these ranges. It is not accurate that HPY have 25% or more candidates that have scores of 2380 or more since they do not publish such totals.</p>
<p>Princeton shows 31-34 for their mid 50 ACT score and 34 translates to 2260. This seems more reflective of the 75% and above number.</p>
<p>I agree with Zenkoan’s post</p>
<p>@test101, as in pure academics are less important than at HPY for an application?</p>
<p>If I am going to speak purely from an anecdotal perspective, I would still be partially inclined to agree with test101. High-scoring/award-winning vals and sals from my area most always go to an HYP, but not a single one gets accepted to Stanford. The few who do get in seemed to be deeply involved in a unique EC- spoken word, for example. They weren’t the kids with 4.0s/2400s. </p>
<p>Granted, you’re gonna get some sampling bias from me here, but I would venture to guess that Stanford admissions places a greater emphasis on truly innovative/unique ECs and accomplishments (but there is, by no means, a paucity of such innovation at other top colleges as well).</p>
<p>There is no shortage of 4.0/2400 types here at Stanford, ojo, so I guess that just serves as an illustration of the very limited value of anecdotes based on a single high school.</p>
<p>From my understanding, it goes everywhere that academics are the main determining factor and that “soft” factors like passion are used to differ between similar candidates but can very rarely make up for sub-par academics.</p>
<p>it’s crazy to make sense out of admission process at top schools, except may be at cal tech. too many intangibles, unfortunately.</p>
<p>I agree with the notion that the foundation of academics is expected to be there for all these schools. It has to be or the student will have been drawn into a situation where they could readily fail- and that is a poor situation for everyone involved. </p>
<p>From there it is likely (my guess) a matter of the school’s philosophy and approach to “building a class”. What is important to that school, what are they aiming for, how do they reach those goals? It likely gets tweaked over time, the focus changes, administration changes. But I think it likely that there is are directives and influences from the Presidents and others of influence and status at these schools that have an effect on what the Admissions Offices understand their decision making is supposed to reflect.</p>
<p>There is and isn’t a recipe. It’s like those cooking shows where each episode they throw in a unique “secret ingredient” challenge to the chefs and let them go! Controlled creative chaos with tangible results!</p>
<p>Go Cardinal!</p>
<p>This is interesting but from the stats of the kids (I know) who got into HPS, it seems that Stanford does tend to look at essays more and what they bring to the campus. Of course, since I am talking about CA, maybe they do get admitted to S more often than H, due to the yield factor and from the local schools that adComs are familar with. And being a varsity athlete /musician is a definite plus (more so with Stanford - I feel).</p>
<p>And I know some full-pay internationals who got into S but not HYP…guess full pay and being interesting candidates helps at Stanford :)</p>
<p>^full pay and international helps with Stanford. Being full pay and living in US does not contribute to the Stanford’s diversity goal.</p>
<p>They need individuals from each country but have a limited FA budget for internationals. So if one applies from Cameroon and fullpay, they have a good shot.</p>
<p>Harvard and Princeton claim that they do not discriminate for FA based on nationality and so being a fullpay from Cameroon is not a decider for them. I am not certain if Yale looks at internationals as need blind or aware.</p>
<p>Recruitable/varsity level athletics matters a lot, both at Stanford and at peer Ivies. There was an interesting article a couple of weeks ago in the New York Times about the fact that top Ivies are using their newly-expanded financial aid initiatives to target more middle-class student-athletes. One of the main points of the article was that, while Stanford has designated scholarships expressly for top athletes, the practical effect of the new financial aid intiatives at the Ivies has been to extend more financial aid to high-level athletic applicants who previously wouldn’t have been eligible for need-based aid.</p>
<p>As to the need-awareness for international applicants at Stanford, that is a policy that has long been under review and may soon change, I have been told by members of the faculty senate. There’s pressure to change the policy, as Stanford’s rate of alumni giving is typically the highest among all colleges, and as endowments continue to recover solidly from the crash of 2007-2008. Stay tuned.</p>
<p>For Class of 2014, Stanford admitted 1020 HYPSM cross-admits (out of total 2340 admits), or about 44% of Stanford admits were also admitted by HYPM. I don’t see any significant differences in admission process among them.</p>