<p>Is Texas well-represented at Columbia, and if not, would I have any sort of small advantage by being a Texan?</p>
<p>considering its one of the biggest states...yes it is well represented</p>
<p>Well, it may be the biggest, but per capita, we don't have that many Ivy League-caliber students compared to other states. For instance, Texas sent 44 to Princeton a couple of years ago, but we have about a quadrillion students in our state lol. There are Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston. That's it haha. </p>
<p>But I see how it's well represented nonetheless</p>
<p>yea, the best-represented states at columbia are prolly nj, ny, cali, ct, pa, and texas, kinda in that order.</p>
<p>From Columbia's site:
New York
New Jersey
California
Massachusetts
Pennsylvania
Connecticut
Florida
Maryland </p>
<p>Looks like I have a worse shot at admission than I expected as a Marylander!</p>
<p>Ultimate flaw in logic, these people are from the best represent states, so there are the most slots to fill with people from these states, lets say you are from montana, and 2 people from montana apply early decision, or one applied early and got in. Why would columbia want to take the other person from montana if their main hook is state location? </p>
<p>Its good that there are many spots available because you can allow for some of the ubergeniuses to get accepted in the upper spots before you. </p>
<p>As for texas, I know a lot of people from texas, but most are from or around the major cities.</p>
<p>As I suspected, even though our student population is one of the highest, if not THE highest, we're not even in the top 8 as far as representation goes.</p>
<p>Basically, Texas has quantity but not a whole lot of quality....which hopefully allows some of us to stand out :)</p>
<p>After the first person is taken from each state (sometimes not all), state hardly matters anymore, they take fewer people from texas because they probably get qualified few applicants from texas in the first place. top applicants would apply to duke, rice, vandy, harvard, stanford etc. Columbia isn't as well known in the south. Obviously columbia will attempt to maintain some level of diversity.</p>
<p>and uh...at the bottomline, Columbia's not going to discriminate against you based on the state.</p>
<p>Well at least not explicitly. I think in actuality that it can go both ways. It's entirely possible for Columbia to compare applicants to a state admission pool rather than a national pool. There's simply no good standardization within a national pool, especially if you consider the drastically different circumstances that applicants draw their education from. If you look at the cutoffs for acceptance into National Merit Scholars, the numbers vary state by state, sometimes to a wide degree. </p>
<p>Personally, I think that your application is considered from your state's background. Yeah, there are more superstars in New Jersey than Wyoming but those states don't have the same level of education. More important than your baseline performance is how well you did with the resources given to you. Some states simply have better numbers in standardized test scores, and this isn't a surprise. That said, I don't think the board places as much importance on the numbers as the rest of the application such as the essay. While our education system can certainly coach higher test scores, I think it's much more difficult to coach stronger passions, interests and ambition. Of course, I have no numbers to back this up and it's all just a shrewd guess.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well, it may be the biggest, but per capita, we don't have that many Ivy League-caliber students compared to other states. For instance, Texas sent 44 to Princeton a couple of years ago, but we have about a quadrillion students in our state lol. There are Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston. That's it haha.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Um, states that are truly underrepresented send a handful of people to Columbia every year. Texas isn't Mississippi or North Dakota -- it's got several major cities with solid high schools.</p>
<p>Advantages of being from a less represented state: Fewer applicants (and a chance to stand out from the crowd a bit) and a minor potential bump for geographic diversity. </p>
<p>Disadvantages: Admission reps spend less time in your state and visit fewer schools and learn less about those that are not on their radar; harder to visit and be as familiar with the campus; have to work harder to get admissions folks to believe you'd actually attend if admitted because it is such a big change. </p>
<p>Neutral: Looks like, generally, the percentage taken from the less populated states mirrors the national admission percentage (or is even a little lower when the candidates are not as impressive); tend not to get an interview; you're not getting in no matter where you're from if you're not a stellar applicant.</p>
<p>This is just my own analysis as the parent of an Arizona applicant and admitee.</p>
<p>there are no quotas. you'll be evaluated on your own merits. the only regional issue for you is the academic quality of your high school.</p>