<p>Cal is really bureaucratic when it comes to their requirements. It’s not any harder to get into in any program, but if you miss any of their requirements you’ll be rejected even if you’re an “elite student”.</p>
<p>
NO. For the record, I am not in anyway connected to Berkeley or any school for that matter. The person who posted that has a very dubious character, or has a personal motive. </p>
<p>On topic: This pains me to say this, but based on my personal observation and the outcomes of admissions of many elite schools, I tend to agree with Pizzagirl. It seemed like stats aren’t the basis for a student to become elite, but the admissions that the student received and where those admissions come from.</p>
<p>
But there are a few students with so-so stats who get into top, extremely elite schools. They do exist at Stanford and even Harvard. If they’re not elite students despite being in Harvard or Stanford, what would that make Harvard and Stanford? </p>
<p>Again, I’m just curious.</p>
<p>I really don’t know why I am posting here,I’m sure I will regret it, but anyway:</p>
<p>“One is an elite student when one gets into an elite school.” is not what “elite student” means to me. When I think of “elite student” I think of someone who achieves outstanding grades, preferably in a challenging curriculum.</p>
<p>Many or most “elite colleges” practice holistic admissions, to various degrees. They have a relatively high proportion of “elite students” by my measure, but also people who are “elite people” but not necessarily highly “elite students”- people who make things happen outside the classroom, but are only very good, not great, inside it. Most legacy admits are fully qualified, but perhaps some benefit from more relaxed standards. And some admits are the best students available out of a pool limited to those who can swim, dive, wrestle, bounce a ball, etc, really really well. </p>
<p>When I worked at an investment bank all these people would be coming in to interview. For the person who was a nationally ranked [tennis player, wrestler, soccer player, etc] graduating from (HYPS) the task was to figure out whether this person was actually really smart or was mostly was there by virtue of being a great athlete. We didn’t always get that right.</p>
<p>There is almost always something out of the norm about these people but it is not always that they are “elite students”. By my image of that term.</p>
<p>And, by my definition, which students are “elite”?
Whoever you want. It is not a defined standard, therefore up to interpretation. Like beauty, it is up to the beholder.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, if in your opinion it’s all stats-driven …
If a student with 1900 who is accepted to Chicago (or HYPSM, or some other university that most reasonable people would consider elite) actually isn’t elite because he’s only a 1900 …</p>
<p>Does that mean that the student who is a 2350 who “merely” goes to his average-state-school or average-directional-state-school is an elite student? Does it matter if he was actively rejected at elite schools, or simply chose not to apply because he wasn’t interested, had financial constraints, etc.?</p>
<p>I love how we define an “elite” student as someone who happened to score well on a multiple choice test before they set foot on a college campus as an actual student… :rolleyes:</p>
<p>I think an elite student is one who actually attends an elite school. Thus, for example, the kid who got into Brown, Cornell, Penn and Duke, but attended Berkeley, could have been an elite student but chose not to be. It’s like when I bought a Subaru instead of a Lexus.</p>
<p>Are people still feeding this extremely gay thread?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Its usually better to hedge your bets on a students prospects now, than in the future. Good students- all things being equal remain- good students. Yes, some students improve significantly in the future. However, there is no such thing as an “elite” student. The name sounds just utterly preposterous to me.</p>
<p>sefago, how old are you? Grown-ups don’t say things like “extremely gay thread,” but middle school students do.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>usually I dont use the expression, except the thread really really deserves it. It kind of gets boring when you see “elite” this, “elite” that. 4 pages debating an issue that really has no meaning. Its general knowledge that College Applications is a crapshoot, and always has been a crapshoot. U culd get into princeton and get rejected at a school in the 50s (I have seen this happen).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because I’m sure they put the same amount of effort into both applications…
The fact is that each college has their own reasons for accepting or rejecting a student and they are probably different from other schools, even schools that are similarly competitive</p>
<p>
You said you came from Stanford! Anyways, this is the internet so no one believes you. You act like you’re a Berkeley alumnus.</p>
<p>
GPA was considered as well, albeit to a lesser degree because grading in the United States is so lax. I agree more emphasis can be placed on students post-graduation. This information is usually difficult to attain, though. By most measures, we only have vague knowledge that Caltech is on the top followed by maybe Harvey Mudd. -.-</p>
<p>
Hmmmm… that doesn’t happen too often. If the student actually had a 2350 and the corresponding SAT, he would probably have gotten some merit scholarship somewhere. </p>
<p>It also depends on the state school the student is attending. Berkeley, of course, has some elite students. Whether the entire population is elite is up for debate. I’m not ready to defend a person from say the University of Wyoming or CSU Long Beach. </p>
<p>Generally, I’m willing to accept there are at least some elite students at all of top 50 universities. I am hesitant to call a student “elite” if his university is really, really horrible.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If I remember correctly- RML went to Cambridge and then did a Graduate degree/Diploma at Stanford. </p>
<p>If he did an undergraduate at Stanford he would be pretty aware that Stanford has tons of athletes with low scores which might not be “elite (caanot believe I am using the word)” but decently intelligent. Stanford also has lots of brilliant students. The brilliant students are a larger percentage. Consequently, the school is elite because these athletes anyways would make the school famous in pop culture, while the brains in the school would make the school famous in Academia+pop culture/layman. Its a win-win situation for such universities. </p>
<p>@jgraider,
I agree with this. I remember when applying my effort depended on how difficult the school was. And my results reflected the effort. The schools I got rejected at- I did not send recommendations in and wrote my essays on a sheet of paper.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are “good” students at lower ranked universities who went there because of certain circumstances. I believe its not a good thing to judge someone based on how good their school is but their academic achievements.</p>
<p>
I thought somebody else close to him went to Berkeley.</p>
<p>^ If I’m correct, it’s his wife.</p>
<p>Hate to bump this thread, oh well, it’s already on top.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uhhh… I never said I “came” from Stanford, if that means I graduated from Stanford. I attended college in the UK, as well as, postgrad. I was on an exchange program at Stanford, and the only consolation I got from it was a certificate or a non-degree diploma. That’s different from saying - “I came from Stanford”. My degree did not come from there.</p>
<p>Hunt, </p>
<p>I’d say Berkeley is elite, and HYPSMC are super elite. </p>
<p>In general, those universities ranked just below HYPSMC down to #30 and top 20 LACs based on USNews are elite schools and colleges.</p>
<p>I’d say a Lexus isn’t exactly “elite”.<br>
Good students, like Lexuses, are a dime a dozen.</p>
<p>
“Super elite” is kind of an oxymoron…</p>
<p>
That’s like saying “the best of the best” but you can’t really get better than the “best” so it really makes no sense at all.</p>