<p>A friend’s son was accepted at and attended Stanford. He was Val, perfect ACT/not sure of SAT, in the band, played several sports but not a star, lots of volunteer stuff and lots of leadership positions in clubs. He is truly a nice guy. Was also accepted at Harvard but chose Stanford. Parents didn’t think he would get in there because the woman at his interview said he was the sterotypical privileged male child from a family where both parents were physicians. They were surprised when he did get accepted.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I suspect probably 90% of high schools in the US have never had a single Stanford admit.</p>
<p>Don’t forget (easy to do) that more than half kids at Stanford are from California. I was really stunned when I heard that at the tour. Even the most elite schools are more regional than one might at first assume.</p>
<p>^That is because the entire state of California applies to Stanford every year, not because Stanford has any preference for CA kids.</p>
<p>Over the past 4 years, about 100 students from our large suburban MD hs have applied to Stanford - 7 have been accepted and 3 have matriculated. (I wonder where the 4 who turned down Stanford ended up?) Of those who were accepted - according to Naviance - 3 were off the chart upper right hand corner of the scattergram - basically a 1600 SAT and the highest gpa possible at our hs. The other 4 were A students with decent test scores - but not as stellar as the first group. I know one of those students is a URM - have no idea about the other 3 - but I’m guessing they have a hook or some sort. So, it seems to me you need either perfection or a hook to get into Stanford.</p>
<p>I think stats only take you so far. From the kids I’ve seen at our school, I think fit is really important. They have accepted some lower stats kids who have gotten extremely involved in a campus activity and thrived there. Kids who get rejected SCEA seem to often get into Penn RD.</p>
<p>From our HS (one of the top publics in CA), what it seems to take is either (1) simply oustanding and unbeatable credentials or (2) a hook. </p>
<p>Applying for the class of 2009: One of D1’s best friends was accepted; a truly outstanding student, NMS, amazing musician, and pretty competent artist/writer, too. No one was surprised.</p>
<p>Class of 2013: In D2’s year, the top student in the class (we don’t rank, but this student won academic awards in virtually every single category and was widely regarded as one of the top, if not the top student) got in early. No one was surprised.</p>
<p>But two other students – neither of whom was in the top 10% or won any significant academic award or recognition – were also in. Yeah, there was some surprise. Both students had “hooks” (recruited athlete; URM).</p>
<p>A ton of students were rejected – all of whom could probably have done the work; some of whom had outstanding leadership, ECs, talent, etc. It’s that way every year. And, for that reason, neither of my Ds applied, although I think D2 was a strong candidate. </p>
<p>C’est la vie.</p>
<p>…and let the bitter, petty, small-minded, racist stereotyping begin!</p>
<p>BTW, I should note, that of those students rejected, many also had “hooks.” It’s that way every year too. It’s just a very competitive school and, as someone noted earlier, an awful lot of CA students apply. I’d wager 10-20% of our graduating class applies?</p>
<p>I think if you were a faculty’s kid then you are a shoo-in. Palo Alto High has disproportional number of students who are admitted to Stanford, and most of them are faculty kids. My kids school used to regularly get 3 to 5 kids admitted to HPY each year would be lucky to get one into Stanford. It is usually a recruited athlete.</p>
<p>HYPSM often reject applicants like this, if she applied to upenn she should get in,upenn is just as good as stanford these days.</p>
<p>I personally only know three students who were ever admitted to Stanford. One was a highly recruited female athlete with shockingly low SAT scores. Apparently they have a very supportive program for student athletes, and she is doing just fine there. The other two were nice kids from very, very wealthy families.</p>
<p>What is their family income?</p>
<p>For those who are curious, here is the link for the article; [College</a> Crazy - Diablo Magazine - September 2010 - East Bay - California](<a href=“http://www.diablomag.com/Diablo-Magazine/September-2010/Section-i-bull-Feature-essay-bull-Multiple-Choice/]College”>http://www.diablomag.com/Diablo-Magazine/September-2010/Section-i-bull-Feature-essay-bull-Multiple-Choice/)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Luck! </p>
<p>The top scores, gpa, ecs and so on earn a student a lottery ticket. After that, it’s just luck.</p>
<p>My naturopath went to Stanford- her sister went to Pomona & to this day she says her sister got a better education.</p>
<p>Stanford parent here. D loves it and me workships it. </p>
<p>I believe it was writen into the charter that Stanford must take 40% of its students from CA.</p>
<p>Yes, and I think the actual percentage of students from CA is right around 40%–not more than 50% as asserted above.</p>
<p>pugmadkate’s post #35 is exactly right for Stanford and all of the top “lottery schools”. I could not have said it any better. </p>
<p>It’s ok for students to apply top schools despite the low odds. It’s just important for them to have a lot of other options too.</p>
<p>Not sure about the 40% students from CA in Stanford’s charter. It is the approx % of undergrads from CA, but I don’t think it’s currently in effect in any official format. Not sure it ever was…but I’m not betting on it. Let’s find an official statement…</p>
<p>Many posts on this thread give the impression that a student must be a recruited athlete, URM or extremely rich to be admitted. While all of those type of students attend Stanford, the majority of admitted undergrads (over 50%) do not meet those criteria.</p>