<p>I have read a number of different sources about this, including the one article about the process at penn. From what I've gathered, your regional admissions officer reads through applications from your area and accepts the exceptional applicants, rejects the non-hopefuls, and waits to discuss the other applications in a big meeting. At the meeting, the officers representing all the different areas push for applicants from their area and they vote whether the various applicants deserve to be accepted or not. Is this what goes on? And if so, is it how Harvard reviews the applications?</p>
<p>What are the regional areas?</p>
<p>This story, which has been posted here before, provides a little insight:</p>
<p>An excerpt:</p>
<p>
[quote]
In both the early and regular action rounds, Byerly Hall evaluates applications with the same exacting system. Under the leadership of dean of admissions Bill Fitzsimmons and his deputy, Marlyn McGrath Lewisor Fitz and Marlyn, as the famously down-to-earth pair are often calledadmissions officers start by assessing each applicant in four areas (academics, extracurriculars, personal qualities, and athletics) on a scale of one (best) to six (worst). Those who pass this initial threshold move forward to a second and sometimes third reader for further appraisal; the rest form the first batch of rejects, their folders marked with dismissive notes such as below the edge or case falls flat. Small teams of admissions officers, each responsible for one of the 25 or so geographic regions into which Harvard divides its applicants, then scrutinize the survivors for as long as five days. Between 5,000 and 7,000 applicants proceed to the last and most contentious stage, the full committee meeting, in which all 35 admissions officers debate and vote on who will make the final cut. </p>
<p>Those discussions can get heated. Emotions run high as you get down to last couple of days, says former Harvard admissions officer Chuck Hughes. We get so attached to cases that we are rooting for these kids. But the committees decisions are ultimately rendered by simple majority ballot. Typically, more students are voted in than space will permit. So the final portion of the process is spent in reruns, in which candidates who had won approval have their acceptances cruelly yanked away.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Great article! Thank you very much.</p>
<p>For a while, it was a so-called "featured thread". It still should be.</p>
<p>I guess for the benefit for everyone, I'll go through the admissions process as detailed by my admissions officer.</p>
<p>First, you submit your application. Then, an officer, who is specifically in charge of your high school, reads the application. Of course, the interviewer's report will also be included as well. This is the first "portal," so to speak, and students they know will stand no chance at committee are eliminated. Approximately 5,000 to 6,000 students out of the 23,000 applicants do not get across this first "portal." It is pretty obvious who is eliminated at this point - students who have sub par (below 600) test scores (unless there is something else going for them), not taking advantage of their high school curriculum, no extracurricular activities, etc.</p>
<p>The remaining 17,000 will get ratings. Harvard uses 1-6 with 1 being the highest and 6 being the lowest in academics, extracurricular activities, personal qualities and athletics. Obviously, the athletics rating only comes into play if the student actually wants to be recruited or has spent a lot of time on varsity athletics. For most students, athletics isn't really a concern. A "1" or "2" rating in academics or extracurriculars mean extremely high achievement in those respective fields. What is high achievement? For most students, this means a clear passion as detailed by recommendations, essays, etc. </p>
<p>In most cases, the regional officer passes the case onto a second admissions officer in the same regional subcommittee. It can even go onto a third reader! At this point, they are comparing students to the overall strength of the applicant pool. Approximately 5,000 to 7,000 students get past the second "portal."</p>
<p>Now, the final, or third, "portal" is much different than many other colleges. Each case is debated by all 35 admissions officers. </p>
<p>The regional officer will debate on the student's behalf, and the other admissions officers sitting there all want students from their region to be accepted. It does get down to the nitty-gritty, mostly on their personal characteristics rather than academics, as if your academics were sub-par, then you probably would not have made it through the second "portal." 12 out of the 35 admissions officers have to say "yes" to your application.</p>
<p>Are these accepted applicants safe yet? Not really. It always happens that the number accepted is always greater than the approximately 2,100 students that they shoot for every year. Therefore, all accepted applicants are reviewed YET AGAIN in order to deny or waitlist the student. Most students will be waitlisted at this point.</p>
<hr>
<p>There were other questions posed:</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
"An excellent and detailed book about Harvard and the admissions process was written two years ago by Dov Fox, '04.</p>
<p>It is called "The Truth About Harvard: A Behind the Scenes Look at Admissions and Life on Campus" (2004, The Princeton Review, 235 pp., list price $13.95)"</p>
<p>"The highest academic rating of one is reserved for students who rank first or second their high school class, score over 700 on at least five SAT tests, score 4 or 5 on at least three AP tests or 6 or 7 on three IB tests, and show academic initiative outside the classroom.... Roughly 10 percent of applicants to Harvard are given academic ratings of one.... Academic ones are virtual locks for admission."
--Dov Fox, "The Truth About Harvard"</p>
<p>xjayz, Byerly:
Obviously the above quote is somewhat outdated (i doubt all 10% that were accepted were 1s), but does it still hold some merit? I'm a "one" by this definition, and, although I doubt that I'm a "virtual lock for admission," are ones still somewhat rare in the applicant pool? I don't know if any of you guys would have an answer, but I'm just curious to see what you think.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>My Response:</p>
<p>I don't believe that comment. Plenty of students fit that academic profile in terms of test scores. The first week of my first-year, I was sort of scared because I was one of the students who weren't #1 or #2 or had 700+ on everything and had APs up the wazoo (in fact, our school didn't offer many APs and limited us to 1 per year starting junior year).</p>
<p>The main catch in Dov Fox's description is that the 1s have to "show academic initiative outside the classroom." It's not going to be joining the Academic Decathlon or the Science Bowl. It's more like winning a major science award like Intel or ISEF, qualifying and competing in the USAMO, etc., publishing a book, etc.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
So if roughly 10% of applicants are admitted, and an academic 1 is given to roughly 10% of applicants and is a 'virtual lock' (does anyone have his source for this?), then ECs/personality play more of a tiebreaker role than any substantial part in admissions? Or are the people who are driven enough to get an academic 1 also generally driven enough to do about a million ECs at regional/nationwide level?
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>My Response:</p>
<p>No. I absolutely no idea what he meant by that. Academic 1s are rarely given out in the Harvard applicant pool. To quote Alexandra Robbins in her book, "The Overachievers" where she had an interview with Fitz (as the Dean of Admissions is called by everyone):</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Harvard's Dean of Admissions and Financial aid, Bill Fitzsimmons told me that applicants have to do some unusual things to distinguish themselves is a "misconception". "In broad terms, there are three ways to get into Harvard," he said. Each year out of 23,000 applicants and 2,100 admits, about 200 to 300 students get in because "they are among the most exciting potential scholars of the coming generation." The second category consists of "people who do something extraordinarily well," 200 to 300 excelling in, say, dance, drama, or athletics, whose achievements "are almost surrogates for energy, drive and commitment." The third way to get into Harvard is the most common: students who have "plain old accomplishments on a day-to day basis. It is not about gimmicks, but about substance."
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Interpret as you will.</p>
<p>Wow, interesting thread guys. Keep up the great insight. And excellent post xjayz. </p>
<p>I wonder though, how does URM's equate here? Particularly in the first portal. You said that in the first portal, applicants seem to be stacked up against other's in the same school, so right from the start according to what you say, I am competing against the other students in my same class that apply to Harvard. However, is this considered before URM's? Like are you divided on a racial basis before you are compared in your school? Or does in-school comparison come before anything?</p>
<p>A-san: No. Applicants are not stacked up against others in the same school. Admissions officers are trained, regardless of where an applicant lives, to look for the positives and negative in each applicant. The applications are not separated by race, school, etc. Each admissions officer is in charge of several geographic areas. For example, one may be in charge of New York City, Los Angeles and England. Admissions officers will receive applications from ALL these areas in a mixed order. So this hypothetical admissions officer may read an application from Eton College in England and then read an application from Stuyvesant in NYC, then an application from North High School in Los Angeles, etc.</p>
<p>If someone has sent a supplemental material, do they bring it to committee or pretty much spokesperson talk on behalf of candidate? What happens if a third recommendation is written by a professor with whom a student has worked as a research student, do they discuss the three recommendation or just focus on application alone. And how about do they discuss what extracurricular activities student has done and the interviews input about the applicants achievements.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
If someone has sent a supplemental material, do they bring it to committee or pretty much spokesperson talk on behalf of candidate?
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>They send it along to the relevant department and a professor will evaluate the material. He/she will send back with a rating (again, 1-6) and comments.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
What happens if a third recommendation is written by a professor with whom a student has worked as a research student, do they discuss the three recommendation or just focus on application alone.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>All materials are considered! Of course, the recommendation is there to help shed light on the student.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
And how about do they discuss what extracurricular activities student has done and the interviews input about the applicants achievements.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Obviously that is taken into consideration as well.</p>
<p>This is where I am unclear - I am not certain if someone in the admissions office ie the Director of Admissions reads the applications first as in the case of that article, or as another poster indicated he or she was told, the regional rep reads it first. In some areas the Regional Rep is younger and not as experienced as some of the other regional reps that come from areas where the majority of students are accepted. I would hope that they are read first in the admissions office before passed onto various regional reps.
Here is what I believed happened based on what I heard. I was under the impression that the applications come into the office. Perhaps there is a rating system as indicated, but someone also looks over the application and flags them for being either a legacy, recruited athlete, development case, or having some type of special talent. All applications are read and those who are not competitive in terms of grades, rigour of curriculum, SAT scores ect who dont pass muster are eliminated. Then the applications are divided up and given to regional reps. There are some applications, (not too many) that are so superior that they get only one read and are accepted. All others get read by the regional rep and perhaps two other reads. The regional rep is supposed to present all applicants in his or her area at the committee table.
I am wondering which process takes place. Does the regional rep see the application first and decide who goes forward, or does the admissions office diirector ect?</p>
<p>What happens if the two research work submitted is done as follows one work is under a supervision of a Stanford law school professor for law and policy and second research work is done under a Harvard medical professor for medical genome research? Do they send the research material to respective Harvard law school and Harvard medical school for evaluations and rating?</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Does the regional rep see the application first and decide who goes forward, or does the admissions office diirector ect?
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>The former. However, the more inexperienced ones would probably send the application along to a second and more experienced reader before a decision is reached.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
What happens if the two research work submitted is done as follows one work is under a supervision of a Stanford law school professor for law and policy and second research work is done under a Harvard medical professor for medical genome research? Do they send the research material to respective Harvard law school and Harvard medical school for evaluations and rating?
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Wow, you have a lot of hypothetical situations. There are professors who volunteer their time to serve as evaluators of these works. Professors do not have to evaluate work submitted by prospective candidates.</p>
<p>These are not hypothetical situations, these are real work done by my kid. One is thorugh RSI research program and one is under a humanities program where they selected few kids based on their public policy potential. She was lucky to be one and did a work where professors said her work was of high caliber. And kid attned a prep school on full financial aid, so it is based on merit as we are immigrant and have no connections or fiscal power whatsoever to help her out. It all comes out of sheer hard work and god's grace and opportunity to be in USA as land of opportunity provides her uplift without having any money or connections.</p>
<p>Edited- never mind.</p>
<p>One more question she just selected as a quest bridge finalist, but decided not to follow on college match. She submitted her application to H well before she was selected, so does she need to tell H about her two new achievements since then. She has told her GC about these new developments and GC is aware about it.</p>
<p>I am sorry as I am nervous that is why asking maybe stupid questions. I am sure each H applicant is so much more qualifies that we have no idea whether despite all these accomplishments her resume is nothing. To make matter worse she needs financial aid in order to attend school and her political views are to the right as she is very active in politics and probably again busy campaigning for a senator and having no sleep.</p>
<p>Does a need for financial aid have any effect on admissions? Also, does getting the waiver on the application effect admissions?</p>
<p>It definitely won't wort as Harvard has a ginormous endowment, and will likely help, as they are looking to diversify in terms of economic background.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
I am sorry as I am nervous that is why asking maybe stupid questions. I am sure each H applicant is so much more qualifies that we have no idea whether despite all these accomplishments her resume is nothing. To make matter worse she needs financial aid in order to attend school and her political views are to the right as she is very active in politics and probably again busy campaigning for a senator and having no sleep.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Sorry, newparent, I just presumed that you were giving hypothetical situations because of the way you phrased the questions "what if..." If she wants to update Harvard on her recent accomplishments, she can do so in the form of a letter.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Does a need for financial aid have any effect on admissions? Also, does getting the waiver on the application effect admissions?
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>No. Harvard has a need-blind admissions policy meaning that the fact you applied for financial aid has no bearing on the admissions decision. Of course, an admissions decision is highly contextualized. Admissions officers take into many factors that are present in an applicant's life, which makes it hard to provide the "magic formula" that leads to a surefire acceptance.</p>
<p>xjayz:</p>
<p>Being an immigrant, english langauge is not my forte. Thanks for the wonderful information you provide, god bless you.</p>