<p>So i've heard/know through people who have been accepted that columbia has a "weird" acceptance history. i've talked to some reps from the university and he himself said that they generally look down on perfect students/scores/etc. what do you guys think? i'm really crazy about columbia but their acceptance history is making me extra anxious.</p>
<p>Well, since there are so many qualified applicants out there now I'm assuming those things happen at almost every top-tier schools. But if you're good enough, you have a good enough chance. That's how it goes...
Don't compare yourself to others! You are YOU and others are OTHERS.</p>
<p>Just make it obvious in the essay "Why Columbia is important to you". Not the cliche stuff, but tell the truth (yes even it means mentioning New York city, among other atributes). This is can make or break an application. Most people who apply to Columbia will get accepted to many others schools, many will get accepted to all schools they apply to. Schools accept more students than will actually register, but they love knowing that an accepted student wants to attend their school (This is why they developed the ED process). Show them that you are not only Columbia material but that it is important to you to be a lion. It will improve your chances significantly. </p>
<p>At the end of the day, sometimes adcoms are just f'd in the head and you need to tell yourself whatever happens is for the best. You can transfer too if there is a serious reason. Good Luck!</p>
<p>come on now, it doesn't make any sense that they would look down on perfect scores/students.</p>
<p>"i've talked to some reps from the university and he himself said that they generally look down on perfect students/scores/etc"</p>
<p>i don't know who these 'reps' are, but no admissions officer would ever say something that ridiculous. What they mean is perfect scores aren't all that get you in, and beyond a certain point, say 2250-2300, you've crossed the 75% percentile, and they don't make much of a difference anymore. But better scores ALWAYS increase chances ceterus paribus, i doubt columbia would engage in yeild protection at the sacrifice of student quality. They don't look down on perfect scores, but more than most schools they're willing to reject a one-dimensional 2400 in favor of a 2100 who's accomplished truly amazing things.</p>
<p>Agree with everything said by confidentialcoll, with one caveat:</p>
<p>
[quote]
i doubt columbia would engage in yeild protection at the sacrifice of student quality.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No way Columbia does yield protection. There are very few students who Columbia can be absolutely sure will be able to get an allegedly "better" school. And Columbia is perfectly happy to accept those students and compete for them.</p>
<p>If someone with a 2400/4.0 is a terrible fit for Columbia and shows no interest in Columbia, then he'll probably be rejected for the same reason that a 2200/3.9 who is also a terrible fit would be rejected. But that's not yield protection in the traditional sense.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Most people who apply to Columbia will get accepted to many others schools, many will get accepted to all schools they apply to.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The latter half of this sentence is complete hyperbole.</p>
<p>You could say that every school has a weird admissions process. Each school has their own criteria for admission, and they're all looking for unique things among applicants that they believe will enrich the overall class. </p>
<p>I personally know of one student who was denied from 5 Ivies and WL's at 3 others, only to get into.... Harvard. </p>
<p>Other students may get into Columbia and Princeton, but not Brown or Yale. Thus, to claim that Columbia practices yield protection is absurd, because quite frankly, they really don't need to.</p>
<p>"If someone with a 2400/4.0 is a terrible fit for Columbia and shows no interest in Columbia, then he'll probably be rejected for the same reason that a 2200/3.9 who is also a terrible fit would be rejected. But that's not yield protection in the traditional sense."</p>
<p>who would apply but have no interest. application is a long process i doubt anyone who applies has no interest.</p>
<p>that is completely besides the point.</p>
<p>To the extent that Columbia is known for being quirky in its admissions standards, it is because it is less like its peers than most of those peers. To be specific, it is more likely (as general public perception has it) to accept students with lesser stats on the basis of extraordinary personal histories. In other words, it is more likely to take a "high risk high reward" candidate than some of its peers. Thus, if you accept that, there will be less of a cross-correlation of its admits with the admits of its peer schools than between those peer schools and each other.</p>
<p>Incidentally, I am thankful for this, as I was one such candidate, and I think objectively I can be said to have paid off their bet on me.</p>
<p>
[quote]
who would apply but have no interest. application is a long process i doubt anyone who applies has no interest.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>They're interested in going to Columbia because they know it's a prestigious Ivy league school, but know little beyond that; it's not that they hate Columbia.</p>
<p>The app isn't a long process. You could BS it and do it pretty quickly.</p>
<p>"The app isn't a long process. You could BS it and do it pretty quickly."</p>
<p>I did all mine in a matter of days: december 28th-31st, and i was quite concerned about college admissions.</p>
<p>"it is more likely to take a "high risk high reward" candidate than some of its peers"</p>
<p>never thought of it this way, always thought it was some sort of diversity mechanism, but it makes perfect sense.</p>