<p>Let's say Student A and Student applies to the same selective colleges (HYPS..etc)</p>
<p>Student A: 3.7 GPA, 2050 SAT, excellent EC's (sincere passion for some EC, leadership, essay that clearly "stands out")</p>
<p>Student B: 4.0 GPA 2400 SAT, Ordinary EC's (Few or no leadership positions, involved in many clubs, solid essay)</p>
<p>So who do you think will get admitted?</p>
<p>Obviously Student A.</p>
<p>Student B would do well in University of Chicago though :P</p>
<p>Neither.
Student C: 4.0 GPA 2400 SAT, excellent EC's (sincere passion for some EC, leadership, essay that clearly "stands out")</p>
<p>actually, Student A has possibility.
Although he didnt do that well academically, his outstanding EC and essay will make up for it and has possibility of admission.</p>
<p>I heard a person with a 3.5 GPA got admitted in HARVARD just cuz he had a perfect essay describing his hard circumstance and all</p>
<p>I love that pessimistic view. Obviously colleges could fill up there schools with Student C... The answer is Student B. Stats will still take precedence over all else, and Student B's stats are perfect.</p>
<p>Nope....Student myself 3.4GPA ACT 34 SAT 2180 SAT2:Math 750 Physics 750 Chemistry 700...Brazil rules!!!!</p>
<p>koolcrud,</p>
<p>HYPS look for students with an ACTIVE life.
They dont' want someone who just sits on chair all day with pencil in his hand. They prefer someone with leadership ability and active participation in various organizations making contributory impact on community.</p>
<p>Dito!!!!!!!!!!!!</p>
<p>how do you guys know what colleges want?</p>
<p>have you actually been inside their admissions processes?</p>
<p>ouch...............</p>
<p>I bet that good grades and just being a normal person is enough. Being a college whore that slaves away and is in many clubs and leadership positions and has "passion" in an extracurricular does not mean you are a good match. If I was a college admissions officer, I would be sick of these college whores who shadow doctors, volunteer at hospitals, and such just for college and twists these activities that he hates into some great passion he loves in his essays. </p>
<p>I am just going to be honest and say "I want to go to _____ college because I want to be the best I can be and succeed in life."</p>
<p>I concur with fastMEd. My cousin was a prestige whore. Driven by her parents (one of them is Asian who thinks if you don't go to Harvard then you will die poor) she was practicing SAT questions in her 6th grade! Took a ton of SAT-IIs and APs. She did all her ECs with HYPS in mind. I must admit she is an unbelievable hardworker and got near perfect scores. She was accepted by all the top schools (Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Yale, Stanford, etc.).
She went to Harvard and just graduated majoring in Biology. She has no interest in it actually. Her parents wanted her to do premed, but she lost interest in that while at Harvard. She didn't pursue any of her ECs at Harvard. She recently was wondering to me about the point of working hard all of one's life. She said "It's like I needed to work hard in school so that I can get a job where I can continue to work hard!" Now she is thinking of studying Political Science in grad school.</p>
<p>agreed, but definetely (almost obviously) a 4.0 2400 student with a buttload of EC's >>>>> 4.0 2400 student with none or minimal =O</p>
<p>but if they have a buttload of ec's it shows that they don't have a passion for anything, and the chances of them having leadership roles in those buttload of EC's aren't that high either, thus there are still many kinks in the many, many EC's system.</p>
<p>You can't really play this game because everything is really in relation to the context to the rest of the applicant pool and what specialties have already been fulfilled.</p>
<p>thats true stupak. they do like focus. my bad. :D but you could rewrite my argument a lil differently and add your thing, and it'd work ^_^</p>
<p>
Just because they have a lot of EC's, doesn't mean they can't still be focused. If someone did MUN, Model Congress, JSA, forensics, student government and Amnesty International, they could be pursuing a career in government or international affairs or law, and have a lot of EC's to show for that.</p>
<p>But even that is arguable. That would be a lopsided individual. Colleges are looking for well lopsided individuals. That means one or two areas of expertise, and a few other hobbies as well. So the hypothetical person described above with those government-focused EC's could also play a sport, sing, and act, and that would make them a more desirable candidate.</p>
<p>I think student A has a better chance. If you just compare student A to student B, it would be hard to say who would be the better candidate. I look at it this way(just my opinion)
Student B has perfect scores and all, but there are a lot of kids with exactly the same stats. Any school can only accept a certain number of 2400 superstat kids;therefore, student B would be competing with other kids with perfect stats, who are likely to be also good leaders and have good ECs, aka student B actually doesnt stand out at all. Student A on the other hand, seems to be a poor candidate but even the "top" scools accept relatively "mediocre" kids. However, this kid with his essay, which i think is very underated, and ECs stands out among others with 2050 score, so if any mediocre kid is picked, it would be him.</p>
<p>The problem with this logic though is that you don't have to stand out as much when you have a 2400 since there are less people with 2400s. When you have a 2050, you really have to stand out with your ECs and essay. So I guess the answer is who knos. and there are probably a lot more variables nd factors that I just can't think of on top of my head.</p>
<p>No there are not a lot of kids with the exact same stats. There are less than 100 actually.</p>
<p>maybe not 2400s but from 2350 and up I am sure there are quite a few. I know 3 people at my school got 2390.</p>