You may not have seen this story that was discussed on these forums some years ago, where someone applied to 9 colleges (HYPSM and 4 UCs), got admitted to all of them, and got a large outside scholarship as well:
https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/California-Teen-Student-Full-Scholarships-Ivy-League-Lloyd-Chen-210351501.html
Harvard makes a concession to a limited pool of top math-sci kids. Other than that, this just isn’t about being “the best stem students.” Nor is it about taking every super candidate from one limited area. Understanding this is part of any applicant being informed. Holistic issn’t rack and stack. Two different approaches.
What do you mean by rack and stack, that’s it’s just test scores and gpa? These kids are lot more than that, they fit the holistic criteria a lot more than the people that Harvard accepts.
It needs to be said again: I admire most of these uber stem kids. They’re often rounded, connected, humorous, and more.
But the point is, this is not about “best” in terms of stats, as some publics admit (rack and stack.) Nor just about adding in rigor. It’s a finer look and more comprehensive. The whole matters and the full app/supp is the vehicle. That’s where the applicant makes decisions, what to present and how. And it represents thinking and how informed about this task: applying to a tippy top.
Eg, blow the Why Us and you set yourself behind. Write an essay about your cat, reap the results of that decision. There’s a lot ofemphasis on CC about the CA essay and people forget how important the supp is.
I don’t think just looking at this from what anyone knows about them in hs ncessarily shows how they come across in the actual app package.
Asian stem students do not write about cats, you keep perpetuating the same stereotype that Harvard does. They’re a lot more eloquent than you’re making them out to be.
Even with the fine look and comprehensiveness, LoRs, interviews, the Asian applicants score higher.
Once you bring in athletes (and not just Harvard) holistic is pretty much out the window. The corruption in college basketball (including places like Duke), the exploitation, money, in big time college football (head injuries etc.) are just the tip of the iceberg.
If I may quote from a juror in a highly public trial - we thought he was guilty but the evidence wasn’t there to convict him. Same with Harvard, they’re pretty much guilty, is the evidence there though? Not sure on that.
No. I just said above I admire them. And I have seen their apps. I know about eloquence, their breadth, and more. Not all, of course, even with top stats and rigor. Look back, Ive often gone to bat for them.
But not all can get into a tippy top, with limited space. And it’s not just based on stars and rigor. or fine ECs. Or eloquence.
The cat example is generic. Kids DO. All over CC, adults advise them not to create an application package for the college, just to be who they are. To me, that’s counterintuitive. I use it as an example. I could name more specific mistakes.
Personally I hope they do at least restrict or even get rid of this obvious race quota system. They will have a diverse class (including by race) if you put an emphasis on admitting first gen and those from tougher socio economic conditions regardless of race.