<p>Applying to six schools with sub-25% admission rate does not improve one’s chances significantly. The chances of admission are not additive. The schools do not admit by lottery. They are also so selective that being waitlisted or rejected by one school does not mean that the next school will WL or R for the same reason. There are a finite number of spots.</p>
<p>St. Paul’s, for example, has a 16% admission rate. For context, on the college side, one poster pointed out to another that any college which admits 50% of its applicants is looking for reasons not to accept a candidate. </p>
<p>The OP is not the only applicant in this position. Again, on the college side, you can hop over there right now and read threads about students who applied to the Ivies and (maybe) a state school they never took seriously. They didn’t get into the Ivies, and the kids who were not as highly ranked might have enviable acceptances in hand, because they created better college lists.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Many of the full-pay applicants hail from private K-8 schools. Their curricula do not aim to prep kids for the SSAT, but they do prepare them for the standard private high school curriculum. So, on the full pay side, the applicants are quite likely to be prepared to function in an appropriate school. They also have recommendations written by teachers who send generations of students to particular schools. If the teachers say Student X can handle the work, he can handle the work. I think the six schools he applied to could probably fill their schools with very able, full pay students. It is to their credit that they don’t.</p>
<p>As to the superstar issue… Last year we attended an open house day at Andover. I remember the Director of Admission made the point that the school was not looking for the sort of kid who was arrogant about his intelligence (my paraphrase of my memory of her statement.) The message was NOT, “send us your geniuses.” Thus, I think it’s particularly important for the kids at the top of the curve to demonstrate that they are part of their school community.</p>
<p>Taking college-level math and science courses in middle school is very impressive. The admissions committee might wonder how such an advanced student would fit into their current course offerings. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I can’t speculate, because I don’t know him. I think every candidate should be able to show involvement in his current school community.</p>
<p>While I agree that “the six schools he applied to could probably fill their schools with very able, full pay students”, I don’t believe they would be equally “able”. The schools could choose someone less able for legitimate reasons, but they also must have reasons to reject someone more able. And I was curious about those reasons in OP’s case. Now, the bottom line - if I were sitting in the admissions committee, I would vote to accept this applicant if I didn’t see any clear red flag, so I think all six schools <em>should</em> accept him. That’s why the fact that none of them accepted him seems just <em>strange</em> to me. Fundamentally, we see an applicant such as OP very differently. I guess we just have to agree to disagree.</p>
<p>wow what a debate! I definitely don’t behave like I am arrogant (Other people may think so, who knows?), most of my interviews went well, and deerfield told me my recs were good as well</p>
<p>Being an asian american, the deck is stacked against the OP to begin with. That may explain this unusual phenomenon you are so struggling to explain. :D</p>
<p>why don’t you stay in your current public school and make a run for COLLEGE next year? You’ve already got college credits and have got pretty good SAT scores.</p>
<p>As for the reason he was rejected from the top BS, could it be the asian stereotype thing? Harvard and Princeton were accused of discrimination against Asian-Americans. Saw it on the Harvard section on this board. Link to the thread:</p>
<p>It is possible that OP was rejected by BS for the same reasons people talked about in that thread. They wanted to maintain diversity and you stats do fit into the stereotype.</p>
<p>Sorry to dig up an old thread - I’m going through pages of CC threads after a couple months off this website - but I don’t believe boarding schools have a ‘quota’ on Asians. Only colleges do legitimate quotas (that they actually strictly keep to and report on), so while boarding schools might want to increase diversity, therefore giving Asian Americans (sadly, I am one too) a smaller chance, but no specific quota.</p>
<p>As for the OP’s question, I would say either option could work for you. There is no harm in reapplying next year - it’s actually great practice writing these BS apps for your upcoming college applications. That being said, if you are a top student at your current school, maybe that position would aid you more in college admissions. :)</p>
<p>does anyone have any knowledge of berkshire school for a foreign student. IS it good? I have been accepted and would love to know more about the place. if i work hard can I get to a TOP college?</p>
<p>Berkshire is a wonderful school and you’re lucky to have a place there . . . but whether or not it will get you into a “TOP college” depends on your definition of “top.” If your definition of “top” is limited to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc., then I’m sorry . . . no prep school can guarantee you that. If your definition of “top” is, instead, a really wonderful college or university where you will thrive, but which, perhaps, your grandparents or neighbors have never heard of, then I’m sure you will do just fine.</p>
<p>Here are the colleges that Berkshire students matriculated to in [url=<a href=“Page Not Found”>Page Not Found]2011[/url</a>] and the schools they will matriculate to in [url=<a href=“Page Not Found”>Page Not Found]2012[/url</a>].</p>
I definitely don’t behave like I am arrogant (Other people may think so, who knows?), most of my interviews went well, and deerfield told me my recs were good as well</p>