<p>I am an American citizen currently living in Canada, when I apply to school such as Brown, do they consider me in the International Pool or do they put me with everyone else in the states applying.</p>
<p>For the purposes of financial aid, you are considered American, not international. </p>
<p>In terms of division of labor, your application will probably be handled by an admissions officer assigned to Canada, which means it will be read first by this person, and s/he will advocate for you. </p>
<p>Why is this so urgent and why do you want to know?</p>
<p>Because if I am considered as an International, don’t my chances lessen?</p>
<p>You will not be included in the international “quota” because you are a US citizen</p>
<p>1) This question doesn’t impact anything that could be considered “urgent” except for financial aid, where it isn’t a question.</p>
<p>2) There is no ‘international quota’.</p>
<p>3) Where on earth did you get the idea that being an International student lessens your chances?</p>
<p>I think that the idea that an international student is less likely to get in with the same credentials as someone from the states is pretty well established. As well, isn’t the applicant pool larger?</p>
<p>“I think that the idea that an international student is less likely to get in with the same credentials as someone from the states is pretty well established.”</p>
<p>You do seem to have that impression. It’s wrong. My question was where you got it.</p>
<p>“As well, isn’t the applicant pool larger?”</p>
<p>There’s one application pool, with one set of available spots. It makes no sense to think of separate application pools.</p>
<p>mgcsinc: where do you get the idea that international applicants aren’t judged to a different standard? Look at the percentages of acceptees year to year. Internationals curiously stay the same. Yet we know that international applicants, as a percentage of all Brown applicants has consistently risen over the years.</p>
<p>There’s definitely an unspoken quota for internationals (and every other sub group within the aggregate pool). This is the case with all the selective colleges. You could fill the entire entering class of 2014 with applicants from China, India, Korea and Singapore if you wanted.</p>
<p>Since the int’l applicant pool has ballooned faster than other subsets of applicants, they suffer a harsher standard.</p>
<p>You said:"It makes no sense to think of separate application pools. "</p>
<p>Think about this: a pre-determined number of slots will go to athletes, development kids, legacy kids, URMs, super-star academicians, and the list goes on. Whatever Brown deems important at the moment. </p>
<p>And you can bet that every subset has advocates who demand of Brown Admissions that more slots should be allocated to their subset. But slots at Brown are finite, aren’t they? If you decide to add two women athletes, who loses two slots? You wanna increase Brown’s international prestige by adding more kids from overseas? OK. But which domestic subsets do you decrease admittances?</p>
<p>This is the constant refrain that top school admissions deans face every year. You don’t think it’s thought of in advance and worked and re-worked?</p>
<p>Think about it.</p>
<p>For you dude: since you have US citizenship, you could reside in the International Space Station – you’ll still be judged against your domestic peers. Got it?</p>
<p>“mgcsinc: where do you get the idea that international applicants aren’t judged to a different standard? Look at the percentages of acceptees year to year. Internationals curiously stay the same.”</p>
<p>International students are <em>differently</em> qualified. They must be judged differently on almost every dimension from their American counterparts, because their qualifications are different. It is this apples-and-oranges aspect that causes the statistical effects you cite.</p>
<p>dude said: “I think that the idea that an international student is less likely to get in with the same credentials as someone from the states is pretty well established.” That is hogwash. In fact, common sense would suggest precisely the opposite, at least in the case of an American applying from abroad (as I did): the same applicant is better off applying from abroad.</p>
<p>“Think about this: a pre-determined number of slots will go to athletes, development kids, legacy kids, URMs, super-star academicians, and the list goes on. Whatever Brown deems important at the moment.”</p>
<p>This simply isn’t an accurate description of the way that admissions is done at Brown. Your long post and high post count don’t make you any less wrong.</p>
<p>Thanks for your reply T26E4. I may now go to sleep with a de-stressed mind.</p>
<p>I posted the same time as mgcsinc, and didn’t see your post. But according to either of your predictions, things don’t bode any worse for me than for anyone else, so thanks for answering.</p>
<p>Like I said, I was an American abroad when I applied, and I did just fine. No need to worry :)</p>
<p>One reason why it’s tougher for internationals to be accepted is because of the financial aid issue. Brown is need aware for international applicants, so many students are denied acceptance because they need too much money. That will not be a problem for dude.</p>
<p>However, dude, in some respects you will be considered international, because you live in Canada. Just like someone from Montana is considered from Montana and gets a geographic boost for that, and someone from New York is competing against a lot of other New Yorkers and may be hurt by his/her location. </p>
<p>You are sort of this hybrid applicant. You are a US citizen and considered as such, but since you live in Canada you are considered an international. </p>
<p>But again, I don’t see why this matters. Will it change your decision to apply? Change how you do your application?</p>
<p>All it changes is how much hope I have for getting into my dream school.</p>