<p>No I don't think so. I think both American and Foreign students are competitive on the same level. Moreover, there are not "many many countries like America"....America is the richest country, and only a handful of countries has an education system like America..... and a lot of countries put more emphasis on grades and test scores, and rarely care about extracurricular activities.</p>
<p>I see your point. But, even if both the pools are equally competitive, they only take approx 180 out of the foreign pool, and a lot more from the American pool. This fact makes the foreign pool more competitive, even after taking into account that more Americans apply than foreigners. In other words, if we were to separate the foreign and American applicants, and see their respective admit rates, the American pool would definitely have a higher rate. I'm sure you'll agree with me on this point.</p>
<p>Does anyone have any answer to my other questions?</p>
<p>Um, No I don't agree, until I see the actual admissions percentage for foreign students.</p>
<p>Besides, I don't understand what you are saying. Are you saying that the competition among the foreign applicants is fierce, or are you saying that the foreign applicants who are admitted are more competitive than the American students who were admitted?</p>
<p>... isn't it pretty much accepted fact that it's harder to get in as an international?</p>
<p>ihavenolife---What I am trying to say is that the competition in the international pool is much FIERCER. But I am NOT saying the admitted internationals are better than the admitted Americans.</p>
<p>My allusion to the competition in both the pools resulted from the question I asked in the beginning, and I'll post that question here again:</p>
<p>1)This thread provides very nice insight into the actual admissions review process(as detailed in the 1st page of this thread). But is it the same for international applicants? Given the very large number of extremely talented internationals vying for very few spots , won't the process be a bit different?</p>
<p>I also asked something else; got an answer anyone?</p>
<p>2) When Harvard and the many other colleges that say they will definitely consider January SATs--do they HONESTLY mean that NO ONE"S file will be "rejected" BEFORE the arrival of January scores?(note-The January scores get to them in late February!)</p>
<p>3) Does anyone know how many international students actually apply to harvard? (maybe just make a logical guess, so that we can find out the admit rate for internationals)</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
1) When Harvard (and other colleges) say that they will definitely consider January SATs, do they wait until late-February(when the January scores come in) to start review of files? Does that mean that no one's file will be "rejected" BEFORE the arrival of January scores?
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>That's total speculation; why does that matter at all? Admissions officers are not out to get you. They will give your application full consideration. They know that their decisions may alter the path your life may take, and they take it very seriously.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
2)This thread provides very nice insight into the actual admissions review process(as detailed in the 1st page of this thread). But is it the same for international applicants? Given the very large number of extremely talented internationals vying for very few spots , won't the process be a bit different?
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>There are no quotas for internationals and the process itself is exactly the same. You still have to fulfill the same requirements (SAT I, SAT IIs, etc.) as everyone else. Remember, in order to get in, all 35 admissions officers debate your case; in order to even start out discussing your case you would have had to fulfill all the necessary admissions requirements.</p>
<p>However, again, Harvard is a U.S. institution catering to the U.S. first, then internationals. I think the international group is quite self-selective, as it takes a lot of know-how to be able to understand the American education system while remaining and adhering to the standardized education system of their home country. In that sense, it may be harder to get in because there may be a lack of information out there about the admissions process at highly selective colleges in America. </p>
<p>Again, your questions point to more speculative ones rather than concrete examples. Admissions officers, again, take their job seriously and will give your application full consideration. Out of all the admissions officers I have met here, which total to just about all of them, I have not met one that was not sincere and willing to consider every case carefully. They know that there is a person behind the papers. Do trust them on this!</p>
<p>As an applicant, all you can really do is to work hard on your application, make sure you're presenting yourself in the best light possible and as completely as possible and give it your best shot.</p>
<p>XJAYZ--The SAT question matters to me coz I'll be taking the January test, and I would love to know that they'll wait for my scores! According to you, they do, so yay!</p>
<p>"There are no quotas for internationals and the process itself is exactly the same."
I would love to believe this, but it certainly isn't true (i mean the quota part). I do understand that American colleges are for Americans. But this fact does NOT make the above true! Maybe there isn't a "quota" of any sort, but certainly a kind of "no more than 200 internationals" rule thing.</p>
<p>I know that most of my questions are speculative. But that's what cc is for, right? I mean the chances thread seems to be the busiest--more than 0.1 million posts there!</p>
<p>*xjayz---your'e really helpful since you've actually spoken to admissions officers, and not just guessing like some people-- your'e in the position to dispel many myths! Can you tell me how many internationals actually applied? I'm sure this question is on the minds of many internationals. This number won't change anything, but we'd like to know it anyway, just so that we can gauge the competition in our pool. Again, everyone appreciates your answers since they are the closest to truth with regard to Harvard admissions. So thanks a lot for your time!</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Can you tell me how many internationals actually applied?
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>I don't have that information as I'm not exactly an admissions officer - I'm just a student who happened to be through the process. Second, even if I did knew, there's a reason why the office does not release this information. Though one may say it may be fueling the "mystery" that surrounds admissions, it is also to protect the university from any possible lawsuits.</p>
<p>Oh I see. Thanks for your answers.</p>
<p>And my mind has brewed out yet another question that I must have answered!
Q) As far as I know, they divide applicants into regions, and have regional officers go over them. So assume that someone is from Australia, but goes to school in the MiddleEast. Will he be in the "Australasia" pool, or the "Mideast" pool?</p>
<p>"On the other hand, unless a student
comes from a particularly underprivileged background, readers wont be
blown away solely by valedictorian honors and stratospheric aptitude
scores:"</p>
<p>Anyone really believe that?</p>
<p>Harvard, like nearly all the other Ivy's, ends up with a class consisting of approximately 1 in 6 URMs, with generally two-thirds middle class, upper middle class, or wealthy blacks or hispanics, often arriving from private schools - in other words the majority are NOT from "underprivileged backgrounds" and their SAT scores are generally 200 to 300 points lower, if not more</p>
<p>Scoring at "stratospheric" or lets say close to 2400 and #1 in their class or near the top of the class and they are just (non-underprivileged) regular URMs and Harvard is suggesting they are not likely to be admitted?</p>
<p>THIS is not plausible at all</p>
<p>"Holistic admissions" (The X factor) is not an admission strategy - it's a legal strategy to continue as long as possible with race based admissions, and in effect is a disguised racial quota system</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
As far as I know, they divide applicants into regions, and have regional officers go over them. So assume that someone is from Australia, but goes to school in the MiddleEast. Will he be in the "Australasia" pool, or the "Mideast" pool?
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>This has been answered in this thread.</p>
<p>My understanding of the process from reading about the process is that there are regional reps who are assigned several states - usually about 4 or 5. Some of them have been regional reps for years and some of them are newer. A regional rep could have a midwestern state and a southern state for example - not just states from areas bording each other. The regional reps travel all year to become familiar with all the high schools in the states they are assigned to.
The applications come in and are assigned to the various regional reps. All the applciations are rated by the regional reps on a scale from 1-6 for different characteristics such as academics, extra curriculars, character, athletics. A second more senior person usually in that region reviews the application a second time. The regional reps usually present their strongest cases first at the committee. All other admission officers all representing their own regions listen to the presenvtation presented by the regional rep, ask leading questions and help review each applicant, although they do not see the application. All admission committee attendees vote on whether the applicant will be admitted. There are several rounds of th admission process. Only the most outstanding will be accepted in the first round. Most of the others who are accepted will be accepted in other rounds.
The best applications are usually ones in which not only does the applicant demonstrate passion, but all the pieces of the application fit together and support one another so that the applicant demonstrates a clear focus.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
All other admission officers all representing their own regions listen to the presenvtation presented by the regional rep, ask leading questions and help review each applicant, although they do not see the application.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>They definitely can see the application. In fact, most of the time spent in committee is actually reading applications initially assigned to their colleagues! This is why if one is accepted/deferred/rejected, one should at least know that one's application was given absolutely full consideration by the admissions officers.</p>
<p>Are you sure, because I heard that only the regional rep sees it and a second person over him or her. If all 35 admission officers got to look at it, the decisions would take forever. Of course it would be great if they all saw them in the even that the regional rep did not present the case as thoroughly as could be and the applciation was very well written, but I find this hard to imagine that they are actually going to pass around an application to 35 officers.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Are you sure, because I heard that only the regional rep sees it and a second person over him or her. If all 35 admission officers got to look at it, the decisions would take forever. Of course it would be great if they all saw them in the even that the regional rep did not present the case as thoroughly as could be and the applciation was very well written, but I find this hard to imagine that they are actually going to pass around an application to 35 officers.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Well, remember, there are regional committee meetings as well, with 3-4 admissions officers sitting on the regional committee before full committee meetings begin. Clearly, admissions officers would know, usually, at a regional level if a candidate would be able to "survive" the 35-person admission committee in the end or not. </p>
<p>Again, seniority is a factor; an officer veteran of 30 years will not be questioned about his/her decision for the most part (David Evans would be an example of a person who has been an admissions officer for a while). Whereas a first-year admissions officer may be questioned a lot.</p>
<p>Could you explain what you mean by a regional committee and who would be on that? I have heard that spoken of before, but don't know what that refers to. If a regional officer has four or five states that he or she is responsible for, who would make up the regional committee? ie. if a regional officer is not a senior officer as you indicated some are, but lets say has states of North Carolina, Nebraska, Illinois, Western N.Y. (this is just an example), then who would be in the regional committee? If they were more senior officers wouldn't they be regional reps instead?</p>
<p>I have a quick question that probably does not belong on this thread, but I did not find an answer to it anywhere else. Someone please help!</p>
<p>Q) If I designate Harvard as a recipient of my January 27th SAT scores, do I ALSO need to get a score report sent to them by January 1st?(I don't have so much $ to spend on 2 sets of score reports!)</p>
<p>Q) Isn't it also supposed to be the same for other colleges that accept the January SAT scores (i.e. I do NOT need to send a score report now, IF I'll be sending one in January?)</p>
<p>I'm not hijacking this thread;a quick YES or NO answer is all I'm looking for!</p>
<p>Well, here is my advice abouttime- Harvard will receive an electronic report of your scores as soon as they become available, before the electronic report is sent. The thing is that although they may be telling you that they will accept January scores, you don't want to for any reason have your application listed as being incomplete pending scores. If you are taking the January 27th exam, then the electronic scores will not be avaialbe for at least two weeks after that.
If your previous scoress are okay, even if they are not your best, I would list the highest sittings on your actual application. Then in the section below that I would list the date of the January exam on the lines provided with a caption indicating that you have taken the January exam and are awaiting results, and in the meantime I would send the scores you have.
I think the situation is different for those who took the October exam and had scores sent in November, because those scores came only about a week or ten days after the November 1st deadline. These scores would be coming in the official report probably six weeks after the deadline</p>
<p>Thanks for the advice. Because I'll be applying to around 5-6 colleges, the 4 free reports aren't enough. I'll definitely mention my previous scores on the application, and also have my counselor do the same on my transcript. I just did not want to send my score reports twice, given the fact that they definitely wait for our January score reports(that's what xjayz, someone who's in touch with the admissions officers, said previously in this thread).</p>