<p>So I looked over my son's common app/supplement before he submitted it for SCEA last night. Every thing is very good, maybe even excellent... transcript, scores, ECs, essays. But he isn't brilliant in any area. Does this mean a HYPS admission isn't in the cards?</p>
<p>It's never in the cards. Even for the best students, chances are extremely slim.</p>
<p>HYPS accept about 10% of students who apply. That means 90% do not get accepted. In that 90% are some very very remarkable students. </p>
<p>Don't fret. Your son has the same slim odds of being accepted as everyone else who applies to these schools.</p>
<p>Just make sure he has or will submit aps to other excellent colleges that are also reaches, matches, safeties.</p>
<p>What everyone says is true. HYSM isn't in the cards for anyone. (Well maybe a select few.) But there is room in every class for both the angled and the well-rounded. I think it's a little easier to sell yourself if you have one strong interest, but believe me, they accept plenty of kids who do lots of things well.</p>
<p>In the cards? You don't have to have blackjack to beat the dealer, to use your card reference. Many many other schools can be equal or better investment. Has someone convinced you only HYPS grads get jobs?</p>
<p>But blackjack pays 3 to 1, or 2 to 1, by your own analogy. Why berate someone for wanting HPYS? </p>
<p>Back to topic, every class at any school needs a X% of well rounded students, y% of brilliant in one area, z% super community servicey, etc etc. If the kid is clearly a winner in the category of well rounded students, he will be admitted, assuming great essays and recs. However, he probably will fall into the "sunk" because of the simple fact that the top 50% of applicants are anyways quite smart, well rounded kids.</p>
<p>Berate people all you want for being too narrow minded to look outside the HYPS box. There is life outside of the extremely top rated schools and students with excellent grades, test scores and EC's populate many other schools (those schools have to reject most of the well qualified students who apply simply because there are too many for the available spots). Think of the not so brilliant people who also populate HYPS- legacies like Bush...</p>
<p>I know of a number of kids in my son's class who have made the decision not to apply to Ivies, even though some may have had the numbers for realistic consideration, because they wanted the focus on undergraduate teaching that is offered by LAC's they are interested in.</p>
<p>Putting aside the part of the question that several picked up on...the "in the cards" remark (and yes, it is not in the cards for anyone given the very low admit rates)....I think the OP was asking if "well rounded" was not as desirable by selective colleges as those who have a major strength or achievement in one area of interest. And I understand that question. </p>
<p>When my oldest applied to college back in 2004 and I came to CC and I read a lot about selective college admissions, I came to learn that being "well rounded" was no longer in vogue. And I thought, oh well, so be it....my kid is the epitome of "well rounded" and in fact, one of her main essays addressed that very characteristic about herself. She never would have changed a thing even if she knew colleges wanted kids who were strong in one area. She was (is) who she was....a kid who liked several things and was devoted to these areas her entire life and had achieved in them. And yes, there has been a trend away from that and to having a special area or two and exceling in that area and then colleges building a class or different types....the strong performing artist, the athlete, the activist, the community service leader, the school journalist, etc. But ya know, my kid did just fine in admissions and got into the majority of the very selective schools she applied to. She even attended an Ivy (not that that matters but for the sake of the OP's post, she is talking about Ivies). And a LOT of the kids she met at her college, also exceled in MORE than one area. So, I don't think being well rounded is a kiss of death in elite college admissions. They don't want to see a jack of all trades who dabbles in this or that or is in umpteen clubs for an hour per week each. But if a kid is involved in several areas with a deep commitment and level of involvement over time, with achievments, that's fine.....it is OK to not specialize when young. My kid did not and she has fared very well with college. My younger child also was well rounded but by middle school chose to specialize. I don't think one way is better than the other. Both types are strong candidates for selective college admissions.</p>
<p>No. Well-rounded is not out of "vogue." It is just that schools apparently realized that adding some "angles" to the mix (I like that term, SVt!) was a good idea, too. My well-rounded student ended up just where he wanted to be: he wasn't interested in Ivy, but I guess he is in the "next tier"--in the top 10 by the rankings.</p>
<p>My take on it is that the well rounded, great stats kid will get into the other ivies, but HYPS students do seem to have a pronounced area of brilliance. </p>
<p>However, I have seen several with truly excellent stats--very close to 2400 and val at highly competitive schools-- get into HYPS without a Pulitzer.</p>
<p>I also think it depends on things like where you're from (Nebraska will require much less, NYC much more) as they still need representation from places where kids have not been given the opportunity to cure cancer.</p>
<p>It is not that well-rounded is bad, it is that there are so many applicants who are well-rounded, good grades, good test scores, good ECs, good leadership, AND also have some special amazing talent or acheivment so they are BWRK++</p>
<p>My two DDs had very nearly identical UC profiles- where there are limited items allowed into the app, no letters of rec etc- and D2 also had international sports experience and she did better in UC admissions, I am certain because she had that one extra item.</p>
<p>My well-rounded kid with no sports, no legacy, no geographical hook, no minority status, and no perfect scores was accepted to Harvard a few years ago. There's just no way to know what they are looking for at any given time. She did apply to a wide range of schools and had several safeties and matches.</p>
<p>Yes, kids like twinmom's D do get in - - but usually in lesseer numbers than those who are hooked (sports, geog, urm, legacy). A friend's un-hooked D was admitted to Williams - -of course she was at the top of her class at Stuy, lots of AP with no score less than 4, 1560/1600 SAT I, equally impressive less-than-perfect SAT II scores and great recs. Applying ED also helped. My point: even the un-hooked kids with less "no perfect scores" are pretty damn impressive and not really what anyone would define as "just" a well-rounded kid.</p>
<p>From Duke's admissions website:</p>
<p>"We want some students who are well-rounded, some with sharp edges."</p>
<p>One admissions director (can't remember which one), "We want a well-rounded student body composed of angled students" (or something like that). </p>
<p>I was just talking to a college president the other day who told me that an MIT prof said, in quintessentially MIT humor, "Well-rounded students are pointless."</p>
<p>If "well-rounded" means "does everything well" then go for it. If on the other hand it means "nothing stands out" then you might want put extra effort Plan B.</p>
<p>PS, A lot of dopes get into elites for reasons that have nothing to do with academics. Please keep this in mind when thinking about that 9% acceptance rate.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I was just talking to a college president the other day who told me that an MIT prof said, in quintessentially MIT humor, "Well-rounded students are pointless."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm smiling as I mentioned my well rounded kid in an earlier post and she did real well with selective college admissions but I'm mostly smiling because where is she now?? She is in grad school at.....MIT!! I hope they don't think she is "pointless." Admittedly, for grad school, she did have to finally specialize and she is in the School of Architecture. HOWEVER....architecture is rather interdisciplinary in nature and in fact, her application essay for undergrad school which centered on the issue of her well roundedness, also mentioned how architecture drew from the many sides of herself. So, there you go....MIT! LOL</p>
<p>I don't think you have to worry about your daughter at MIT. I think they have always valued people with varied interests and talents.</p>