<p>I go to a public high school in southern California. My school's API is good (almost 800), but I don't think we are "competitive" (I actually have no idea what that means). We have a high percentage of URM, but I happen to be an Asian female. In my freshman year, two seniors (including our valedictorian) were accepted to Stanford, and in my junior year, our valedictorian was accepted to Dartmouth, but otherwise the majority of students end up in UCs or CSUs.</p>
<p>I am applying to some UCs and quite a few reach schools (Stanford, Caltech, MIT, H and P), and am in the top of my class.</p>
<p>They will look at you relative to your school, but your stats should be just as, if not more, competitive than others in your geographical region. For example, for Harvard, if you live in the South Bay region of SoCal like I do where an average of 10 to 20 spots are allocated per year for matriculation, you should have comparable stats in some way, shape or form to godly students from badass schools like Palos Verdes Peninsula (ultimate HYPSM/Ivy feeder school) and Long Beach Poly, whether or not your school may be crappy or well-off.</p>
<p>I am going up against schools like Torrey Pines and La Costa Canyon, which are full of 2400 SAT and 4.0+ GPA students (mostly Asians, to be honest). Do they really have quotas for high schools/regions/states?</p>
<p>Yes they have quotas for regions, but it varies per year depending on the quality of kids in said region relative to local ones.</p>
<p>PM me your facebook, and I’ll share you the newsletters with the list of people who were accepted to Harvard '14 and '13 in SoCal and you’ll see what I am talking about (and it would also be interesting knowing someone down in SD).</p>
<p>BTW Torrey Pines is freaking beast lol…</p>
<p>I sort of wished I lived in some place like Inglewood or Downtown/East LA. Would increase my chances of being accepted to Harvard due to the lack of stellar schools. But noooo, I just <em>have</em> to live in the South Bay area and go against Palos Verdes Peninsula and Poly kids.</p>
<p>And H admissions officers do assign you ratings for certain factors.</p>
<p>My grade level does not detract from my ability to analyze statistical data. I have put a substantial amount of effort and time in looking into this matter. I think I have a pretty good idea on working out a “plan” to get into H which includes having impeccable stats and ECs relative to other competing applicants your area. However, this won’t get you in alone. I know an IChO Gold Medalist with perfect test scores and a 4.0 GPA (+ valedictorian) who was rejected to Harvard this year in my area, and I attribute this to possibly lacking volunteer and liberal arts/humanities ECs as well as possibly not having great essays and these “personal ratings” that H adcoms utilize. These latter factors are <em>very</em> crucial in making or breaking you. Do not fall into that pithole where you write about generic crap that every other teenager writes about and do not come off as a self-serving arrogant jerk, but a humble individual who aspires to do well him/herself but also to help others do so.</p>
<p>“After all the numerical parameters are available, a computer examines the evidence and announces an approximate quota for each docket, based on how many were admitted from this docket last year and how the numerical evaluations of this year’s students in the docket compare with this year’s applicants overall. Thus, if California’s applicants suddenly become twice as good as last year (by the numbers) relative to the whole group, the computer will allot more places to California-but not twice as many.”</p>
<p>And if you were wondering why something written in 1969 would still apply to today’s selection process:</p>
<p>“Other members of the staff echo his faith in the selection process, which has remained essentially the same since World War II.”</p>
<p>I just hope the Class of 2013 isn’t freaking beast in my area.
Class of 2010 was hella beast (lmao @ my norcal slang even though im from socal; “freaking,” ok ok) with those 3 science whizzes down at Palos Verdes Peninsula who swept national and international science fairs (Tang-Quan, Sinow, and some Korean girl…Sinow and Tang-Quan went to Stanford tho, and the Korean girl went to Harvard) like ISEF and STS and shiz. PVP is like the freaking Harvard-Westlake (sends an average of 15 to 20 H applicants alone) of my area, except lesser in scale in terms of H acceptees. The newsletter that lists HS '11/Harvard '15 Socal matriculation has yet to be released tho, so I await that one to see how the competition that year differed from 2010’s. Class of 2010 in my area across all schools including my own was pretty competitive because there seemed to have been a lot of kids born in 92/93 who also seemed to have high standards instilled in them. I don’t know how to explain this phenomenon seeing as I am not a sociologist.</p>
<p>Lol CheesePuffPoppin, there’s a school in my area that regularly sends out students to very prestigious schools like the ones frequently mentioned in this forum. I know just this last year, they had a guy go to Stanford, a few USC’s, maybe a few Ivies (?), and a lot going to the University of Washington (our state school).</p>
<p>They also had two 2400s this past year, first attempts :o</p>
<p>Back to your original question: “Will my school’s stats hurt me?”</p>
<p>As testimony against that, the two Stanford and one Dartmouth admit, right? Whatever condition of your school YOU will be evaluated in that context – whether or not you aggressively pursued your opportunities. Selective colleges rightly know that where people live or attend does not preclude successful applicants.</p>
<p>Focus on yourself. Are you clearly among the top scholars in your school? Yes? No?</p>
<p>The relative “quality” of the HS is neglibile.</p>
<p>Thanks for your comments, T26E4. That’s what I was hoping. I always see people saying they come from a “competitive” high school, and I didn’t know whether that was a good thing or whether my high school fell into that category.</p>
<p>In 1969 Harvard was an all-male school. Their admissions process might not have changed greatly from WWII to 1969, but I daresay it’s changed significantly since then.</p>
<p>OP, are others at your school applying to tippy-top privates? Or are they applying primarily to UCs and CSUs? Lots of California students just apply to in-state privates, either because that’s all they know, or because they feel that they can’t afford anything else. </p>
<p>Looking at your other thread, I’d suggest that you really consider other private schools, both in and out of California. As I’m sure you know, prices are going up at the UCs. Some of my D1’s friends who are matriculating to Cal this fall are receiving late notice of cuts in their aid packages. You may well do better (financially speaking) at a school with generous need-based aid. Do check out the Claremont consortium! Any female applicant to Caltech and MIT should be definitely looking at Harvey Mudd, if not Pomona and Scripps.</p>
<p>It’s also worth noting that applicants from the West Coast to Harvard were rare back in the WWII to 1969 years. Just getting across the country was time consuming and expensive - a cross country flight was probably around $1,000 in today’s dollars.
Don’t fret too much about what your high school is like - it’s not something you can change, after all.
Schools do not have quotas. They will use information about a school to evaluate candidates.</p>
<p>Cheese, all I can say is that I work for the competition and that 1969 article is so far from the process used here. We don’t have quotas, we have targets and when needed there is flexibility. Decisions are made by humans- many topp colleges still use paper and pencil to rate kids. her very first question in reviewing source material like that has to be: how relevant is it to today’s processes and procedures, tools, new trends, revised goals and philosophies.</p>
<p>SlitheyTove, most apply to UCs and CSUs, but last year I knew a lot of seniors (the “AP crowd”) who applied to Stanford and all got rejected. Those who didn’t get into UCs and CSUs (which made up over half) got into LACs, small private universities like USD or SDSU, or state universities in other states.</p>
<p>Well, it’s like buying a lottery ticket to apply to Stanford and other schools with low admissions rates. That’s true for pretty much all high schools.</p>