<p>I'm a sophomore that's currently ranked 4/410, and I have an advantage that no one else in my class has - being able to take all the AP classes my school offers(15). So with that advantage I think I can be #1. But in order to take all of those classes I have to sacrifice my extra-curricular's class(debate)- though not the EC itself, just the conglomeration. So really the college won't be able to see how much I love and am amazing at Debate. This is my main EC. Being Founder of my school's mock-trial team, as well as President and Policy Debate Captain. My real question is - what should I do to balance rank and EC. Should I give up my EC's classes and probably advance in rank, or keep my EC classes and maybe lose a few spots. I'll probably end up around #7.</p>
<p>You should definitely not sacrifice your involvement in an EC you love just for a few differences in rank. Colleges want you to challenge yourself but they don’t expect you to only focus in academics. You don’t need to take every class that has the AP label. If your challenging yourself, you don’t need to take every AP your school offers. My high school offers over 20 APs and people have gotten into the ivies with 10 APs total.</p>
<p>Don’t just take all of the APs for the hell of it, take the ones that you’re actually interested in (a good number would be around 8-10, so long as they don’t interfere with debate).
My school offered one AP, and it was only the exam, not even the course. I think that my application was stronger because of my scholarship to china, not the fact that I took that AP exam. The same should apply to you, especially if you love and are good at debate.
I’m sure that winning a debate competition will be more rewarding than those exams. So follow your heart!</p>
<p>ECs definitely matter a ton more. A kid in my class who was barely even in the top 10% of our class GPA-wise (in my rather average public HS) made it into MIT over our class valedictorian. The kicker? He’s been to ISEF for multiple years and built a freaking nuclear reactor on his own in his basement. Also, a kid in my class made it into Hunstman ED even though I think he was only in like the top 6ish % because he was involved in an insane number of leadership roles around the school. These two kids didn’t necessarily get bad grades, but they started out kind of poorly and then had a sharp upward trend in GPA over the years, which prevented them from getting a high ranking. I think adcoms care more about upward trend than ranking alone.</p>
<p>Recently I’ve read a post on here from an MIT admissions official. He specifically mentioned the nuclear reactor kid as someone who had NOT been admitted. It’s hard to believe there have been two of them!</p>
<p>Not only have people gotten into the Ivies from my high school, which offers about 20 APs, with fewer than 10; I only know two people who have even taken ten. I know someone who got into Brown with, like, six.</p>
<p>Philo:If I may offer another viewpoint. Another poster once made the analogy that getting accepted to one of the so-called “elites” is akin to going up to a door with five padlocks. They represent 1) transcript/grades, 2) SAT/ACT other tests 3) ECs and other achievements & talents 4) recs and 5) personal intangibles (essay & other relevant personal facts).</p>
<p>You really need to have the right keys to open all five to pass through. While many have high grades and fewer have the unique and remarkable achievements, solely having achievements without superior academic ability/potential leaves you with some unlocked padlocks at the end of the day.</p>