<p>I'm trying to understand how admission officers really determine who is a strong candidate to be admitted to a school (in this case Columbia). Does anyone know the MOST IMPORTANT factors in admitting a student to Columbia (i.e. SAT I, SAT IIs, GPA, ECs, essays, recommondations, athletics if applicable, etc.).
Sorry if this sounds like a stupid question :(</p>
<p>You need to have it all.</p>
<p>Simply put, top universities want people that have both the talent and the hard work to be successful at whatever they choose to pursue in life. They want you to show them that you have been successful, and that when you attend their institution and have access to their world-class resources, you will flourish. This eventually ties back to increasing their endowment etc., you get the picture. </p>
<p>I don't understand why chance threads and threads like this are posted this often; a deficiency in any field will certainly not help your cause.</p>
<p>Sorry, I haven't seen any other threads on the matter. I'm entering my senior year, so it really looks like i'll have to work my *** off. I just wanted to clarify, because I've been told by people that the essays are what really gets you in. Of course the SATs and GPA is initially what gets you considered (pretty much everyone who applies to top tier school has the acadmemic profile), but it is really the essay that puts you over the top. Does this sound about right to anyone, or is it just a myth?</p>
<p>it a mix of everything, the reason people say essay! essay! is because that's where people differentiate themselves the most, in good and bad ways. a gpa of 3.8 vs. a gpa of 4.0 really doesn't tell you much about difference in chances of success at college. Denzera had a gpa of 3.3 uw?, at a competitive school&hard courses good test taker, but it's still shocking that he got in with a B+ average in high school. Yet it's clear that he outperformed most of his peers academically at columbia. how did it happen? columbia took a risk and saw something in his essays (and elsewhere - recs, ECs, initiatives) that other colleges might have missed.</p>
<p>It is a myth that you can have an average profile, write a stunning essay and get in. it isn't myth that the essay lifts many people from nearly getting in to actually making it. an admissions officer will never go "hmm his profile is good allround let's take him because he has a 3.9 as opposed to a 3.8". But gpa and sats are a bigger factor up to the fringes. they'll take many pedigreed candidates with simple, not neccessarily brilliant essays. they'll reject stunning essays attached to mediocre grades, ecs.</p>
<p>Being able to live in New York City on your own: independence.</p>
<p>What confidentialcoll said is correct.</p>
<p><a href="pretty%20much%20everyone%20who%20applies%20to%20top%20tier%20school%20has%20the%20acadmemic%20profile">quote</a>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Totally not true. Lots of people apply to Columbia for the heck of it just to see if they'll get in, or they have a mistaken perception of how good their stats are. But it is absolutely true that way more than the 1500 people they accept have the requisite academic profile.</p>
<p>Yeah. Columbia College gets a particularly large amount of applications from the NY metro area from slightly-underqualified kids who go to competitive publics (which are everywhere in NY/NJ/CT), etc. and have pushy, well-educated parents who urge for a couple high reaches.</p>
<p>^Hence Columbia's 9% acceptance rate</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yeah. Columbia College gets a particularly large amount of applications from the NY metro area from slightly-underqualified kids who go to competitive publics (which are everywhere in NY/NJ/CT), etc. and have pushy, well-educated parents who urge for a couple high reaches.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And there are lots of apps from NYC kids from weaker high schools I've never heard (public schools that aren't Stuy et al. and private schools that aren't Trinity et al.).</p>
<p>ditto on the points about the essay...</p>
<p>I was a 3.8uw student at a competitive school and got in over alot of the 3.95 kids.</p>
<p>If you're "in the range" the essay is where they look.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yeah. Columbia College gets a particularly large amount of applications from the NY metro area from slightly-underqualified kids who go to competitive publics (which are everywhere in NY/NJ/CT), etc. and have pushy, well-educated parents who urge for a couple high reaches.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This makes it more difficult for the admissions committee to discern which of it's 20,000+ applicants are genuinely interested in attending, and are qualified to attend, Columbia.</p>
<p>There's not much that distinguishes the applicants to the top schools. Just have a high GPA and SAT scores.</p>
<p>for the "why Columbia" part, geek out (at least partly) about the Core.</p>
<p>I'm pretty sure kwu is right, but I still like how Columbia hasn't succumbed to the Common Ap yet.</p>
<p>If anybody knew what was "the most important factor" for getting in to college... we would all know.</p>
<p>As it stands, nope.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If anybody knew what was "the most important factor" for getting in to college... we would all know.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is one of the dumber sentences I've encountered on here. I hope you can figure out why.</p>
<p>Perhaps I phrased it wrong?</p>
<p>What I'm saying is that if there really was a single factor that would make or break a person's admission to college, hundreds of years of applying to college would have "discovered" it. And if discovered. people would have told. Everybody would know. </p>
<p>I just don't know why people ask others how to get in because nobody who's actually been accepted to Columbia is told afterwards, "Hey! This is the reason why we accepted you!" Not that I blame the OP for trying, or anything; I'm just as worried about college prospects, god knows.</p>
<p>Anyway, I'm with the general consensus that you have to have it all.</p>
<p>Sorry for the dumb sentence, Columbia2002. With all due respect, I generally just stalk these forums instead of posting. Now I know why :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Perhaps I phrased it wrong?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, you're wrong substantively.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What I'm saying is that if there really was a single factor that would make or break a person's admission to college, hundreds of years of applying to college would have "discovered" it. And if discovered. people would have told. Everybody would know.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There are many single factors that can probably make your application. Being an Olympic athlete probably will do it. As will doing ground-breaking research that will win you the Intel/Westinghouse/whateverit'scalled competition. As will being a musician who has played in some renowned orchestra.</p>
<p>Everyone knows these things will pretty much get you into any college of your choosing, but few have the dedication/drive/skill/talent/motivation/luck to make these things happen.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I just don't know why people ask others how to get in because nobody who's actually been accepted to Columbia is told afterwards, "Hey! This is the reason why we accepted you!"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Um, my regional adcom told me freshman year (when I happened to be handing around the admissions office to pick up a form) what they saw in my application, why I stood out among the pack, and why I was accepted. These things aren't not secrets.</p>
<p>"these things aren't secrets."</p>
<p>alright, they aren't secrets--- but they're not universal to everyone, as i think daphnechen93 was referring to... if there was a one reason that applied to everyone, everyone would know about it.</p>
<p>i think the original poster was asking about that one reason not the "why did each and every applicant to columbia's profile stick out?" because there are thousands of answers to that question, rather than the one answer the original poster was looking for. </p>
<p>i think you missed when daphnechen93 said "SINGLE FACTOR" meaning if there was one factor that every single columbia admit got admitted because of, everyone would know about it--- which is true.</p>
<p>
[quote]
alright, they aren't secrets--- but they're not universal to everyone, as i think daphnechen93 was referring to... if there was a one reason that applied to everyone, everyone would know about it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
i think you missed when daphnechen93 said "SINGLE FACTOR" meaning if there was one factor that every single columbia admit got admitted because of, everyone would know about it--- which is true.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This poster's statement was premised on some truth that there <em>IS</em> a factor that can be deemed the "most important factor." Based on that asserted truth, this poster argues that nobody knows what that "most important factor" is.</p>
<p>I'm not sure why you're defending this poster. I think you get the point and I largely agree with you; this poster doesn't get it.</p>
<p>I suspect that superstarpie was suggesting that daphnechen93 did in fact agree with you regarding the existence of isolated factors that can determine an individual's admissions decision but disagreed with your reading of "the most important factor," assuming based on context that the possibilities for the "factor" were limited to those broad categories generally assumed to be part of the college admissions process: GPA, SAT, essay, extracurricular activities, etc.</p>
<p>As for the most important factor, I don't remember exactly what my information session lady (who was the best information session lady in the history of information session ladies, btw) said, but I'm pretty sure that Columbia follows the secondary school report first formula, so considered in isolation, secondary school report is most important, but a 3.9 will only beat out a 3.8 if all factors are essentially equal (and all other factors being equal, they'd probably both get the same decision). </p>
<p>On the other hand, I don't know of Columbia being known for emphasizing anything to an unusual degree, as in UChicago and the essay, UCs and objective stats, Emory and interest. So I'm guessing they're pretty balanced on all factors.</p>