Article after article, it seems as if most people are claiming that “well-rounded” students aren’t what selective colleges really look for and they emphasize that students should try to steer clear from the “cookie cutter” mold.
I am currently a high school student and I consider myself to generally be a well rounded person-- I am on three varsity sports teams, an officer for student government, have volunteer hours, play in school orchestra and my grades are pretty stellar whilst taking advanced classes etc…
I didn’t do any of this to try and appear to be well rounded or try to impress colleges, but I did it because I truly enjoy it and find value from all the things I do. That being said, my concern is that selective colleges view this in a negative light because it may come across like I’m doing all of this to impress admissions.
Is it really true that being well-rounded is bad? Should I find one single passion and just stick to that? How do I stand out from all the other well rounded applicants?
I’ve never heard of it being a bad thing before, is this a thing??? Maybe the articles are just warning against be cookiecutter and doing a bunch of ECs without committing to any of them which is not what well rounded is.
“I did it because I truly enjoy it and find value from all the things I do.”
That is precisely what you should do and why you should do it.
You are doing GREAT. Do what feels right to you, and then when the time comes find a university or college that appreciates what you have done. There are a LOT to choose from.
Yes, Stanford and MIT just want “pointy” applicants. That’s the narrative they give these days. Tiresome. At this point, there’s nothing you can do to become pointier. It’s too late. The good news is, many other schools are delighted to accept a well rounded student such as yourself! Columbia in particular seeks out well rounded students.
However, some of the most selective colleges are so selective that having a decent chance of admission is greatly helped by having some sort of outstanding achievement (the “pointy” aspect sometimes mentioned) on top of the well rounded academic base.
Studious99, sorry, but the 2 schools u mentioned don’t just look for pointy students. Any data? Leadership,position NS, editor of newspaper, band/orchestra all seem to,help. Stanfo d for sure doesn’t want just one ne dimensional kids, and MIT doesn’t just go by SAT scores.
Be who you are. If you are well rounded, then embrace it.
I’ve heard many college admissions officers say that they seek to create a well-rounded class. That class will include some well-rounded students and some students who have different areas of specialty. If being well rounded is not the best way to get into one or two schools, those probably aren’t the right colleges for you anyway.
Well roundedness is only a bad thing in selective college admissions. In the 70s if you were applying to selective colleges, well roundedness would be a good thing. Now times have changed and colleges are putting together well rounded classes/communities where students are pointy and angular and have aptitudes and achievements that are already well defined.
Selective college admissions rewards early bloomers who have proven achievement in at least one area. But well roundedness I would think is important to be happy in life, and in jobs where the more you can do, the more opportunities you create for yourself.
Selective colleges need both “well-rounded” and “pointed” students to make a diverse class. All of them must be high achievers, regardless (ignoring development cases).
I know this is anecdotal, but my D was a well-rounded, not pointy kid with great grades and test scores. She was admitted to more than one school in the top 20.
Do what you want, what you enjoy, and you’ll land in the right spot.
Another anecdotal datapoint, my son was admitted to Princeton as a well-rounded student. Great grades, great scores, but other than NMF, was not nationally ranked at anything. Not even a varsity athlete. Wrote some great essays and did some interesting, self-driven ECs. Well-rounded can work, just be good at it.
BTW - Northwestern’s recruiting campaign for the last couple of years is “AND is in our DNA” , and drilling down, NU is looking for students that can and want to do MORE that just one thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SCj9oQQ4Sw
Adding to @psywar’s anecdotal datapoint, three local girls I know well currently attend Princeton (one of them is a legacy case). A family friend’s daughter graduated from Harvard last year, and she was a first-generation case. I can only characterize them as well-rounded.They all had excellent academic and test scores, dabbled in jr. or varsity sports, did some local and state level math and art competitions without really standing out, played an instrument in local youth symphony (one made to lower level all-state), etc. Nothing pointy about them. I also know two girls well who were admitted to Harvard this year and another two into Yale. Nothing pointy about them, either, except they were all legacy cases. My son (Princeton) and his prom date (Harvard) were the only ones with a “pointedly well-rounded” characteristic about them through high-level musical achievements. Neither of them legacy.
The idea that you have to be pointy in order to get into highly selective schools is a myth. Being pointy can certainly help and could be an advantage depending on what kind of pointy qualification the particular school wants to round the class, but the class seems to be largely made up of well-rounded students based on anecdotal evidences.
You are looking at this from the point of view of a lowly student kneeling low before the great gods of selective college admissions. This is not a healthy way to view things.
You are the master of your life. If being well rounded fulfills you then it’s right by definition. Stand your ground, defend it and don’t worry about how it looks. Only colleges that are potentially worthy of your graces will admit you, and from among those only one will be lucky enough to have you attend.
@TiggerDad - out of the 5 or 6 examples you mentioned, one was first gen and three were legacy, all hooks and wold disprove the point of well roundedness being the thing that got them in. And if you add recruitable athletes to the mix who wouldn’t be at the school with the sport, the class of a selective college does look more and more spiky (or angular I guess in today’s vernacular).
I have to agree with @theloniusmonk conclusion. Based on all the anecdotal data presented its clear that in many cases “outliers” or pointy students are wanted by adcoms. My takeaway is that well roundedness may work, but it typically is acceptable in legacy cases. If you don’t have hooks of any kind, it may be better to demonstrate some pointy qualifications.
However, “pointy” aspects (i.e. exceptional achievement in something) are best done on top of a well rounded academic base in which one does the expected high level of academic achievement.
@theloniusmonk@preppedparent - As I’ve stated several times elsewhere, if the former Cal-Berkeley chancellor Birgeneau’s statement that approximately 60% of the elite school admits consists of hooks of one kind or another is credible, that leaves about 40% unhooked applicants and whether being well-rounded or pointy has any advantage for that pool. Even from my anecdotal evidences I provided, of the unhooked admits, two were well-rounded and two, pointedly well-rounded. Not that anecdotal evidences pull any weight, but it’s hard to imagine that the remaining 40% of unhooked class at all elite schools being made up of majority pointy admits. How many pointy candidates with all the base range of academic and test scores covered are out there? Is that even statistically possible, not that there’s any evidence that that’s what these elite schools want to fill their class with nothing but pointy admits each year to begin with? Perhaps we need to first define what “pointy” admits are, but to me, those aren’t around in abundance to fill all the unhooked class each year at elite schools.
