<p>Like so many people on this site, I long to get into Stanford. You have probably read a billion of these for Stanford so if you are reading and responding you are awesome. I'm going into my sophomore year and here are my currents classes, ECs, etc.... </p>
<p>Freshman Year: Really Lousy!
Spanish I (A/A)
Foods (A) / Art (A)
Honors World History (A/A+)
Honors Biology (B/A)
English 9 (A/A)
Geometry (B/A)
Physical Science (B/A), only freshman in an all sophomore class. </p>
<p>Sophomore Year: TIME TO STEP IT UP!
Spanish II (Zero Hour)
Health/Finance
Intro to Computer Science / AP Computer Science A
Chemistry
Honors English 10
Algebra 2
Physics
**Self-Study AP Euro, APES, and AP Psych. </p>
<p>I REALLY LOVE LEARNING!!!!!! (Not Sarcastic) </p>
<p>ECs:
Freshman Ambassadors
Key Club
National Honors Society
DECA and FBLA
FCCLA (VP, hopefully P Junior Year)
Mu Alpha Theta
Science Olympiad (Won 3rd in state last year)
World Language Honors Society
Energy Saving Club
I volunteer at the local hospital about 5 hours a week.
Applied for a job at the movies, really hope I get it! </p>
<p>So fellow members, what else can I do! If I don't get into Stanford I definitely won't be disappointed but it's nice to try :)</p>
<p>First and foremost, you need to be competitive academically. By the beginning of your senior year, you should:
Rank in the top 10% of your high school class
Score above 700 on each SAT section (and on each SAT Subject Test) and/or above 31 on the ACT</p>
<p>80% of the people who apply to Stanford meet the above criteria, so you need to further distinguish yourself through ECs, essays, and recommendations. At this point, you can’t do very much as far as essays and recs are concerned, so you should focus on ECs. You need to do what you love and do it really well. If you do your ECs well enough (i.e., become a national/international champion), then that will virtually guarantee your acceptance. But that likely won’t be the case. So instead of obsessing over becoming a national/international champion, simply focus on developing a “passion” for what you’re doing. Stanford (as well as other top-tier universities) really seems to like passion. The passion could be for anything: debate, theater, politics, math, biking, running, comedy, etc. The admission office seems to think that passion is a “transferable” personal quality; in other words, people who are passionate about something are the type of people who can be passionate about (and thus excel in) other things. This is what Richard Shaw, Stanford’s Dean of Admission, has to say about passion:</p>
<p>“I care about kids who have passion and who I think enjoy their life and dig deep or delve into things that they love. It’s not just going through the movements, but rather, hopefully, developing a passion for what they’re doing–whether it’s a love of physics or a love of fencing.”</p>
<p>I guess maybe you can help me then. I am really passionate about learning, which is why I’m take 5 APs and lots of ECs. How can I show my love of learning (besides my essay)</p>
<p>Become a recruited athlete
Win a national math or science olympiad, or at least get decently far
Win a national research or project based contest (Intel, Siemens)
Get published or do research at a prestigious university
Take the most rigorous course load and have test scores in Stanford’s top quartile
Gain lots of leadership positions in the clubs you have at school
Be awesome</p>
<p>But even with all of these, you are still not guaranteed admission. Some people may be able to get in with maybe just one, or none of these.</p>
<p>If you really want to show your love for learning, I would suggest cutting back your ECs to 2-3, and then, put all your effort in those extracurriculars. When college interviewer asks, “What did you do during your free time.” You respond, “I did my extracurriculars.” LOL. Anyways, academics seems excellent to me, but I would narrow down ECs to show passion and commitment. Just my two cents.</p>
Far fewer than 80% of applicants meet that criteria. The Stanford admissions profile stats page mentions that the majority of applicants score below 700 on the SAT CR. The distribution suggests about half of the freshman class (admits, not applicants) score below 700 on 1 of the 3 sections. Perhaps you meant that 80% of the applicants who submitted class rank were in the top 10%. This is a misleading stat since only 37% of the freshman class submitted class rank according to the 2012 CDS. I’d expect the average class rank is worse for the 63% of admits that did not submit class rank than the minority that did submit it.</p>
<p>Stanford is looking for a group of great people who are likely to do amazing things in college and beyond. They are looking for people who will be successful both in and out of the classroom at Stanford. Having excellent stats helps show that you can succeed at Stanford, but it is by no means a requirement. I was admitted without being in the top 10% of my class. And I certainly didn’t get 700 on each section. Instead I got a 500 on one of the sections. I’m far from the only one. A few years ago, a guy posted on CC asking for school suggestions who had a 24 science and 25 math on his ACTs. He not only was accepted to Stanford, he was an honors coterm grad, won the highest award given to Stanford students, became the youngest ever elected official of his home town after graduating, and continues to make major strides towards saving his community today. A recent honors coterm grad of Stanford who was admitted to Stanford with a 1750 superscored SAT describes this more eloquently in the YouTube video at [Stanford</a> University and SAT Scores - YouTube](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8fHUSgpMBg]Stanford”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8fHUSgpMBg) . While in Stanford and beyond she made amazing strides towards improving her community. In both cases, Stanford looked beyond their stats and saw their potential to change the world. Those examples were obviously extremes that are not common, and people on the lower end of stats usually have other outstanding characteristics on their app. Nevertheless, the point remains that you don’t need to have near perfect stats, particularly if you excel in other areas of your application.</p>
<p>I wish everyone would read that post ^ and stop being so critical. I am a stanford admittee who did not receive above 700 on any of the SAT sections. The only advice I can give is try hard for what truly matters to you, and concentrate on the word truly. Your dedication and potential will show.</p>
<p>Apologies for erroneously tying the 80% to the “competitive” thresholds I mentioned. I have been told by several Stanford admission officers that 80% of the applicants are academically qualified to do the work at Stanford and pass the first “cut” in the admission process. My point was to emphasize just how many applicants they consider viable. </p>
<p>But since this is such a competitive process, you should have everything possible on your side. Therefore, you should shoot to be above the “competitive” thresholds of top 10%, above 700 on each SAT section and/or above 31.</p>
<p>In alea’s defense, I can understand where Data and mongrel is coming from…but, I would have to say they are exceptions to the rule…you see the same “types” of students being admitted to all the other top schools…and they always seem to come out of the woodwork to spread the “good news” that it is “possible” to get into Stanford or Harvard with such scores, etc…that is correct…miracles do happen…infrequent and seldom seen…</p>
<p>…if students actually think they are “competitive”…applying with below average scores for Stanford or Harvard they are strongly mistaken and delusional…</p>
<p>…but, if you guys want to spread the misinformation…I can guarantee you that Stanford will get thousands more applications than this past year and their acceptance rate will drop even further to less than 5%…pushing the envelope further…to continue being the most exclusive and toughest school to get into…</p>
<p>…enough of the top brilliant students are applying to Stanford…one need not make it even tougher by misleading student applicants who don’t qualify to apply…it’s just not right!</p>
<p>Most posters on this site (not just this thread) seem to focus on their stats – GPA, SAT, class rank, number of AP classes, etc. They’ve got to have near perfect stats to get into selective schools. And when top stat people from their HS get rejected, while other lower stat people from their HS get accepted, then admissions to that college gets a reputation for being “random” or a “crap shoot.” </p>
<p>As an example, one can look through the RD sticky of this forum. This is not a good representation of the overall Stanford applicant pool, but it is a decent representation of the types of Stanford applicants that are common posters on CC. The accepted posters have worse median stats than the accepted posters – the accepted posters have a lower median GPA, a lower median SAT, a much lower median class rank, a lower median number of AP classes and general course rigor, etc. There is a rejected applicant on the first page with literally perfect stats – valedictorian with 4.0, 2400 SAT, and perfect SAT II scores. Instead the accepted posters are more often the ones who did something amazing outside of the classroom. They are certainly academically qualified and capable of succeeding in the Stanford coursework, but many did not get 700s on each SAT test, and many had well below a 3.9/4.0 GPA. Stanford, is particularly big on the rest of the app beyond the stats – your personality and values as reflected in your essays and the rest of the stats; what people say about you in your LORs; doing amazing things as part of the ECs, awards, or other passion; overcoming difficult and unique circumstances; etc. </p>
<p>There is a difference from saying one needs to be “academically qualified” from one needs to be a top stat candidate with 700+ on each SAT section. aleaiactaest mentioned Stanford Admissions considers 80% of the applicants to be “academically qualified.” If you are judging academic qualification only on stats (Stanford obviously does not do this), then one could estimate thresholds based on the data Stanford publishes about their applicant pool. The published data suggests 80% of apps have a GPA above 3.75. And 80% of the apps have an ACT of 28+, which corresponds to a combined SAT of ~1900. These thresholds fit much better with the RD thread of this forum. There are accepted posters with GPAs in the ~3.8 range and accepted posters with SATs in the ~2000 range, but there are very few below (very few posters in this range – either accepted or rejected). This also fits with the freshman class stats, with a sharp dropoff below these ranges – only 7.7% of freshman class had below a 3.75 GPA and approximately the same were below 28 ACT. It’s not to say it’s impossible below these thresholds (There is an accepted with 3.4 GPA thread in this forum, which was in the ballpark of my HS GPA.), it’s just highly unlikely.</p>
<p>Calm down and live your life. As a slacker for the past four years of high school, I can honestly tell you that everything about your app looks overwhelming and your life sounds strenous. That being said, I would encourage you to expound on your “hook” or passion that sets you apart from others. Do this while in school, in your ecs, and especially in your essays. For example, if your hook happens to be your love of learning in general, try to convey that with difficult coursework/test scores, philosophical and reflective essays, and maybe even something so banal as Applebee’s trivia contests. That’s when you really shine through.</p>
<p>Being admitted to Stanford this year, and a host of other very reputed institutions, I must say that being academically qualified is only a small part of the application. There are many different high schools with varying levels of difficulty in their programs - meaning that GPA is not a very good statistic to determine one’s probability of admission or even academic qualification. Moreover, most applicants to Stanford, regardless of academic statistics - ECs, GPA, SAT scores, awards - are qualified to do the work. My point is for the OP, you shouldn’t just do 100 ECs and do stuff to impress Stanford because that’s setting yourself up to failure a lot of times. Do it for yourself. Do what you love. And if you’re worthy of Stanford that will come out in other ways. Obviously you are proving to be smart enough. But if you do even more ECs, do you think you’re the only applicant who has those stats and ECs? A lesson I learned going to Stanford is that there’s always someone more impressive than you or better than you at something. I know people who had better SAT scores, more APs, but still didn’t get in because they did what they did, not because they loved it, but because they wanted to get into impressive colleges. The admission office will see through you application that you lack passion.</p>
<p>On the issue of meeting academic thresholds, I would like to say that making people worry because of the alleged necessity for some super high level of academic perfection in terms of SAT scores and GPAs just makes the process more stressful to people. I have friends who cried because of getting an A-, just because they thought they lost their chance at getting into MIT. Some ended up getting in. Doing that is just cruel. If you want to go to Stanford, the only way you could get in is if you apply. This is why I don’t like these chancing threads. They are just stupid and a waste of time. No one can tell you, and I know it’s hard to deal with the unknown, but those are the struggles of the college application process.</p>
<p>Finally, Stanford is not the only great school and many people who have achieved worldly success have studied at their state school. My point is that not getting into Stanford, or any other elite college for undergrad doesn’t necessarily mean that you won’t succeed. This whole thing of who goes to a higher ranked school has just become ridiculous in America. Can you believe that we have college application counselors? I mean, ***? </p>
<p>that is all. (sorry for the lack of cohesiveness, bad organization and any grammar mistakes, but I really don’t want to waste time on this)</p>
<p>Edit: Dude, you’re only beginning you sophomore year. Enjoy high school and your teen years. You are worrying about this way to early. Just chill and do what you want to do.</p>
![http://cronkitehhh.personal.asu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/obama-not-bad.jpeg[/url]](http://cronkitehhh.personal.asu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/obama-not-bad.jpeg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
