Regarding college admissions, I’m interested to get opinions on which T20 Universities and Liberal Arts Colleges are rumored or known to care more about applicant grades and standardized test scores with less focus on extracurricular activities?
I’m just guessing MIT? Cal Tech? Johns Hopkins? Any others? I also think I recall hearing Vanderbilt was particularly gpa/score focused?
You’d be wrong. They want excellence in both.
Based on admission sessions /campus tours at three of those schools(Mit, JHU, vandy), extracurriculars are a very important component of what they are looking for. Over the past 3 years, we have toured almost all of the top20ish as well as 4 top-15 LACs, and every single one has emphasized that they are looking for far more than grades and scores.
For MIT in particular, since they use their own app, it seems quite obvious to us that the app reflects the info session: they ask for up to 5 academic awards as well as 5 non-academic recognitions, and their supplemental essays are more in number and details than most T20s. Plus they also have very specific score reporting expectations (such as all subscores of the SAT reported). The two recs have to be from Stem and humanities. It seems they want the whole package. The structure of the app makes sense given our recent visit, and also for anyone who has read their “Applying Sideways “ tips.
First, it depends on which “T20” we’re talking about.
Compared to the top 20 universities in USNWR’s “Best National Universities”, T20 universities in other lists like “best computer science programs”, “best engineering programs”, etc. are more likely to
And from the colleges you’ve mentioned I would say Caltech places greater emphasis on academic rigor and achievements vs ECs, relative to its peers.
I think having a great GPA (with challenging coursework) and test scores (maybe in the higher end of the 25-75 range they state) increases chances dramatically at most T20s. After this the essays matter. The colleges do want to see that the student has been active in the summers – esplly after 10th and 11th of high school – but I dont think they are necessarily looking for these to be at some super high level esplly for applicants with good grades and test scores.
I think the top colleges really want to be sure that the students they admit can withstand the pressure of academics at their college – that the student won’t fall behind. And so they are looking at students who have excelled in all these areas including ECs. But ECs/summer activities don’t necessarily have to be strong for students with good grades and scores is my feeling.
It doesnt mean students with perfect grades and scores will be accepted at every top college but this does increase their chances dramatically at every one of them I think – the acceptance rate changes from something like 5% to say 25%.
Amongst top 20, the less selective among those will in general be easier to get into than more selective ones.
MIT’s common data set is similar to most other schools - ECs are listed in the same category as academics. Interestingly the only thing more important to MIT is character/personal qualities. Common Data Set 2020-21 — MIT Institutional Research
High School GPA and normal (SAT, ACT) testing isn’t really designed to differentiate within the very top end of the academic spectrum.
I would just go through the Common Data Sets for each of the universities to see the level of importance they place on ECs. I think that would be better than anecdotal statements from various posters.
SAT scores are designed to differentiate within the very top end. Only some 2000 out of 2 million people who take them for example score 1590 or more. See for example these percentiles SAT Score Percentiles (High-Precision Version)
The scoring is very unstable at the top end. I saw one SAT test where the difference between a 1600 and a 1550 was one question on the EBWR section. Just because you can calculate percentiles at the top end don’t imply that the test was designed to segment the top 2% into stable subgroups.
Yep, my son missed one question on math, ironically one in the easiest category, and that pushed him down to a 760.
From what I read on CC it appears that ECs are not important to Canadian colleges so schools like McGill and UToronto may be worth considering.
Yes it maybe unstable and those who scored lesser can improve by retaking or else they may have other things in their applications by which they can get accepted at a T20.
However what I am saying is something different – someone who scores 1570-1600 in SAT does stand out and with a commensurate GPA, coursework and recommendation letters, and good essays, has a very good chance at T20s.
Let get back to the OPs question please. (The OP did not ask about SAT scores.)
The OP mentioned standardized test scores. All I am saying is that all T20 colleges (not just MIT/Cal Tech) will have a higher acceptance rate for applicants with high test scores and GPAs, even if their ECs are not that great. Less selective schools among the T20s is definitely something to apply to in addition to MIT/CalTech.
OP asked about recommendations for colleges that care less about ECs and more about grades/SATs. A detailed discussion on SATs is not requested.
At these schools there are far too many applicants with perfect/near-perfect GPAs and test scores, and it has been my observation that amongst these applicants those with “not great ECs” have not done as well in admissions.
Top Canadian universities don’t care about ECs. Otherwise I think all most selective US schools just have too many applicants with top scores and grades and need to differentiate between them. I would agree that Vandy, WashU and Northwestern used to have a reputation of focusing more on the academic credentials relative to peer schools but I don’t think that is true any more. Made me laugh as most kids from
our school who get into MIT are all athletic hooks.
Thats what I am contesting. I think we put too much pressure on our kids if we expect them to do well in everything. I also think it doesnt reflect the reality of admissions.
Standardized scores are an objective filter. Other things are more subjective and add to the randomness. When I say that chances improve from 5% to 25% with high test scores it still means that 3 out of 4 applicants with high test scores are rejected at any given college. But then many top colleges have high yields (they aren’t accepting the same people) and this is due to the subjective parts of the application that include essays, ECs, and recommendation letters, and what choices applicants made of which colleges to apply to.
When T20 colleges put up the 25%-75% range of SAT scores, they are basically saying that 25% of their seats were taken by those with higher end SAT scores – or by 0.5% of the applicants. These small number of applicants are filling large number of seats in the colleges regardless of their ECs.
Maybe I am being pessimistic, but I think an unhooked kid with a 4.0 UW GPA, a 1600 SAT or 36 ACT, and good but not amazing extra-currics has a much lower than 25% chance at an individual top 10 school. Maybe closer to 10%.
This is based on what I have read on this site and others, Naviance data from my kids’ school, and anecdotal information about my kids’ classmates.