<p>What are my chances with a 1480 SAT, 3.9 GPA, with decent ec's?</p>
<p>unweighted gpa btw, and strongest curriculum possible</p>
<p>you dont need us to tell you they are good.</p>
<p>i'm sorry, you really don't have much of a chance, people with much better stats than you get rejected.</p>
<p>try a state school... or maybe a community college.. they can provide the support someone like you would need.</p>
<p>ok i pretty much just wanted to know if i could blow of the "why emory" essay</p>
<p>No, its VERY important.</p>
<p>Haha, yes I believe a community college would serve you best. Just kidding.</p>
<p>Never know. They might think you're using them as a safety school, which is a big no-no for Emory. My friend got WL'ed with the same stats. So yeah, put some effort into the essay.</p>
<p>Emory has been infected with Tufts syndrome?!?!</p>
<p>I'm part of student admissions representatives at Emory, and one of the admission deans told me they waitlist and reject enough people RD with 1500s SATs and high gpas to fill a freshman class.</p>
<p>i would believe that. like i said in my little thing i posted to all yall gloating about your high scores, scores are not the deciding factor.</p>
<p>^^^and GPAs don't matter either, doggra?</p>
<p>i never said that. but i dont think someone with straight A+ has a huge advantage over someone who has low As and Bs. No doubt it looks better, but no school wants their entire class to sit in the library and study. They want kids with personalities and who are social, which tend to be the kids who can write about an experience that has impacted them immensely. For example, someone who writes their "why i want to go to emory" essay about how great the faculty is and how beautiful the campus is will not attract as much attention as someone who does something creative with the topic and at the same time say something about themselves and show a piece of their personality in their writing. On top of that, I don't think there is much difference in intelligence between the 200th ranked person and the 50th ranked person in a class of 1000 (just an example). People change so much in college that what some kid makes in their 10th grade history class says nothing about how well they are going to do in college. If your Senior English teacher says what great ideas you present in class and describes your penchant for analytical writing, that is going to have a huge influence on the admissions people. Wouldn't that make sense? Sure you have to have good grades, but you certainly don't have to be in the top 10% of your class to have a good chance of being accepted.</p>
<p>I disagree with you on a few points.</p>
<p>First of all, I take issue with your assertion that a person with straight A+s "sits in the library and studies." I maintain a very high average but I am also involved in many activities outside of school on both an extracurricular and a social level.</p>
<p>Secondly, I do indeed see a difference between a rank of 50 and a rank of 200 in a class of 1000. That is the difference between top 5% and top 20%. I find it hard to believe that you think a student who has been more successful in high school than a peer would not, the overwhelming majority of the time, continue this superiority in college. </p>
<p>I do agree that the grade in a "10th grade history class," by itself, is not an adequate predictor of success in college, but overall GPA is undoubtedly indicative. I will not venture to say whether the relationship is due to causation or simply correlation, but, 90% of Emory's entering freshman class is made up of students in the top 10%. I think that this indicates that being in the top 10% plays some sort of role in admissions.</p>
<p>"I don't think there is much difference in intelligence between the 200th ranked person and the 50th ranked person in a class of 1000 (just an example). "</p>
<p>agreed. in my class of 89, the top 15 people or so all had like 4.2+ GPA's
just because i wasnt in the top 10% of my class didnt mean i wouldnt get in. </p>
<p>emory is big on interest and diversity (of ideas as well as race and culture). its a big plus if you can write something that will make the admissions committee remember you....</p>
<p>I never said anywhere that someone with A+s sits in the library and studies more than someone with Bs. In fact I know people who make Cs and still come to the library to study. I think its the kids who learn to balance their school with having fun and trying out new things that are most sucessful. And I can guarantee you that some of the most intelligent people in any school are not the ones at the top of their class. Real world skills can't be taught in any classroom. Real world skills are what makes someone sucessful, not in the workplace, but as a functional person in society. Most importantly, I think the statistic that 1 out of 10 people at Emory were not in the top 10% of their class. There was obviously something about them that captivated the admissions committee. Which takes me back to the point. Anyone can get in if they give the school a damn good reason to admit them. It's that simple. Of course, good grades are important, but I think they realize there is more to it. Besides, grades and school mean next to nothing anyway. There are a huge number of people with minimal education who have done pretty good for themselves. How well you can memorize facts and dates means nothing about your intelligence. But the terrible state of the US education system is a whole other thing I don't even want to get into... happy new year.</p>
<p>happy new year to you too</p>
<p>If you guys have watched the Apprentice (which i dont really only one episode). They pitted the people who didnt go to college against....well....college people and the people who didnt go to college won the competition thing.</p>
<p>^^^and the apprentice is just like the real world? (I hope Magna wins!!!)</p>
<p>no it was jist my example</p>