<p>I'm not trying to be a pessimist but I don't understand the chance me threads on the Stanford and Harvard sections.</p>
<p>Stanford has a 5-6% acceptance rate. </p>
<p>So even if you had a 2400 SAT with a 4.8 GPA and have been taking AP classes since you were 10 years old while playing for the US national soccer team when you weren't feeding starving children in Uzbekistan, you would still have a 94% chance of being rejected.</p>
<p>Stanford is a lottery ticket. Everyone's chances are slim to nil. It's a great reach but that's what it is.</p>
<p>Find a good match school and ask your parents to pay for an "$80 lottery ticket". This year there will be 2000 winners selected who will get to pay $60k a year to live in Palo Alto.</p>
<p>and yes, our D will be applying to Stanford also. But we know lottery tickets rarely payoff.</p>
<p>Yes, while it is a lottery ticket for some, and the chance threads are pretty insignificant (no one can chance unless they have insights on essays and recommendations), I have seen acceptances that are predictable. Usually very strong academics, with some huge talent or a significant “meaningful” contribution (think state or national/international impact) …a huge number of those do get in. And yes, if someone has a shout out in the local tv/newspaper combine that with stellar academics…they are almost always in…that is what I have seen in our areas. And some recruited athletes get prior commitment. Yes, to some it is a lottery but to others, it is fairly obvious. </p>
<p>About the 60K/year, personally I’d see it as a HUGE commitment since undergrad in a generic major and spending that kind of money…is something a family needs to really consider…and yes, start buying those real lottery tickets weekly ;)</p>
<p>Oh…and if you make the US national soccer team and have a 2400/4.8 gpa, and fed hungry children , I think that person would be in :)</p>
The near-ideal student you described would only have a 94% chance of being rejected if Stanford admission selections were done by pure random selection, which is obviously not true. For example, according to the admissions profile at [Applicant</a> Profile : Stanford University](<a href=“http://www.stanford.edu/dept/uga/basics/selection/profile.html]Applicant”>http://www.stanford.edu/dept/uga/basics/selection/profile.html) , last year Stanford apps who had a 800 on verbal SAT had a 14% admit rate, which is 2-3x the admit rate of the overall class. In contrast apps who scored below 600 only had a 1% admit rate. As you add in more information, you can get more accurate estimations. With the few paragraphs of info in the 2017 RD thread posts (no LORs, essays, …), I was able to predict ~90% of the listed admission decisions correctly.</p>
<p>To some degree i agree wiht everyone even the OP. Sometimes, us as parents as especially, start to feel thats its a lottery because there is no “formula” or set way of gettin in. But that doesnt mean thts its a lottery. Stanford is the most competitive and the hardest undergrad school to get into. there is a REASON why stanford is 5% acceptance. but we have to look at tht acceptance rate not as a PERCENTAGE but more of a percentile. stanford doesnt accept 5% of its applicant, I look at as if stanford accepts the top 5% of the applications. thts more accurate and removes the lottery aspect. its hard to tell for normal applicants (my son isnt anything special for stanford, has wat every applicant seems to have and he realizes that he probably won’t get in, but to be honest u just gotta take it as one step at a time and see what happens.</p>
<p>Every decision is made very carefully by a committee of admission officers. At times, it may seem random because for each person whom Stanford admits, it turns down 2 or 3 who are just as good. Therefore, a lot of great people won’t make it. It’s a “many are worthy, few are chosen” scenario. But there is solid rationale underlying each acceptance. </p>
<p>Second, Stanford’s financial aid is among the best in the nation. A majority of undergrads (approx. 60%) receive need-based financial aid. It’s free if your family makes less than $60,000/year. </p>
<p>“stanford accepts the top 5% of the applications”</p>
<p>Perhaps…but “top” is more arbitrary than an outsider might think. They don’t throw everything into a spreadsheet and make decisions from there. It’s a very human process centering on human characteristics which take humans to evaluate. See this video:</p>
<p>It’s best to say that Stanford takes the 2,210 applicants it likes the most. It’s difficult to predict precisely who those admits will be without seeing the entire pool, reading everything in an applicant’s pile, and understanding the composition and needs of the committee.</p>
<p>Mentioning that less than 1% of applicants who score below a 600 on their SAT Verbal begs to ask the question, why did you apply? Lets take star quarterbacks or scholarship athletes out of the discussion on this one please. </p>
<p>Yes, I’m sure there is the outlier who scored below 2000 on their SAT and was accepted. But the stats show that is the exception not the rule. </p>
<p>And the flip side of that stat is that even if you scored a perfect 2400, you still have an 86% chance that you will be denied.</p>
<p>If I sat down at a blackjack table and the odds were 86% certain I would lose my money, I would call the 14% chance of winning, wait for it, a gamble. I know the admissions counselor doesn’t want to use that term and I respect him for it. In no way do I think that it is a group of people in Palo Alto pulling applications out of a hat.</p>
<p>If the word “gamble” or “lottery” are disconcerting to some, let me amend my statement to the following:</p>
<p>“Stanford admissions decisions do not appear to have a predictable pattern due to non quantifiable variables and the large volume of applicants.”</p>
<p>Reason it’s ridiculous, imo, is the responses generally come from other hs kids- who’ve never even submitted an app, much less reviewed them or gotten past superficial myths. Sometimes, same kids who can’t look up a due date on their own or figure how many recs they need, etc. </p>
<p>Stanford, as is true of most elites, has things it likes to see come through in app packages. The challenge is figuring that out. It is not all stats, hs titles or updating a blog, once in a while. It’s not “passion” or being some outlier or even claiming to have cured cancer.</p>
I was accepted several years ago with a 500 on verbal (and 800 on math) without being an athlete, URM, or other hook. The only way to ensure you have absolutely no chance of acceptance is not to try.</p>
<p>
The 14% rate was only for 800 on verbal. It includes students who have scores swapped with mine and got an 800 on verbal + 500 on math, as well as those who scored 2400. I’m sure the apps who scored 2400 have an acceptance rate of far more than the 14% rate for 800V. In a news article from several years ago, the Dean of Admissions at Stanford said 35% of apps “fitting the profile” of perfect grades/scores were admitted.</p>
<p>As several other posts have stated, while SAT scores are correlated with acceptance rate, test scores are only one of many items that are considered. Among posters in the RD thread (a very biased sample), apps with near perfect SATs/grades/class rank and little else besides classroom activities were almost always rejected. In contrast the vast majority of posters that had excellent stats + achievements outside of the classroom that were impressive on a state/national level scale were accepted.</p>
<p>Also to add to this, the “intangibles” the counselor describes in the video, keeps fueling the dream of many many seniors. Yes, it may work just like any other outlier case, but in most cases, the top ranked in most schools fits that profile with the outstanding EC. Most others applying from the same school (ranked lower) do not get in as the admin office can’t offer admission to too many from the same school. Whenever I attend admission events, the officer giving the presentation is always encouraging people to apply (as long as they fit the SAT /GPA range)…and in some ways, this fuels just more applications. When the truth is more like…if the top 5 kids from your school are applying and you are #25, you really wont get in even if you have the SAT (unless you have a really amazing thing going for you).</p>
<p>And as for the generous aid package, I think most of the aid only helps either the very poor ,and not the middle class. Most middle class folks (with regular jobs) have had to take out parent loans.</p>
Stanford admissions has said they don’t have limits on the number of spots per high school or region, and I’ve heard of >25 acceptances from the same high school before. Also how do you know if you are in the top 5 kids from your HS by Stanford’s admission criteria? If you mean class rank or other stats, lots of kids are admitted who don’t have stats in the top 5 applying. I was ~70th in my HS class by GPA/rank. I’d probably be ~100th if you included a combination of all stats. Nevertheless, I was the only one from my HS admitted to Stanford in my year.</p>
<p>
I’ll compare some specific scenarios using Stanford’s net price calc. In each case I calculated as if married with 2 kids, one of whom is in college; savings of half a year’s income; a 15% income tax rate; my CA zip code; and owning a home with value of 3x annual salary of which 20% is home equity.</p>
<p>Yes, the lower income group that has $0 cost to parents has the greatest benefits. However, the group I’d call middle class appears to have large FA benefits. There is rapid decrease in FA once you get above an income of $150,000, which is what I’d consider out of middle class. Nevertheless, there is some FA even at incomes of above $200,000.</p>
<p>25 students from one school ! Havent seen that honestly. Maybe some feeder private school …Again the common data set speaks for itself [Stanford</a> University: Common Data Set 2012-2013](<a href=“http://ucomm.stanford.edu/cds/2012]Stanford”>Stanford Common Data Set | University Communications), 94% of the incoming class are in the top 10%
Again there are outliers probably like Data10 here…and I am not denying that.</p>
<p>^^Dont forget, Stanford does take home equity and other investments (non liquid) cash into consideration. I know a lot of parents have taken loans since they may be making 150K+ but in regular jobs (not business earnings)…and when you combine (an uncertain job market) that with home equity and some bank savings, they do not want to drain that to pay the 50K (EFC) every year. So yes, parental loans is very common. You can see that in last years acceptances…(students got a shock once they realize the ‘full need and students graduating with no loans’ essentially means parental loans…)</p>
Not just private schools. Gunn, which is a public HS in Palo Alto, averages ~20 per year and reaches >25 some years.</p>
<p>
My earlier numbers included more than 1x salary in assets/equity. Some numbers with larger assets are below:</p>
<p>Parental Contribution for 100k Income with Varied Assets
No Assets – $13,000
$300,000 in savings – $21,000
$600,000 in savings – $31,000
$1 million in savings --$50,000</p>
<p>In the united states, ~75% of families have a net worth of under $200k (figure based on older data) implying that few I’d call middle class have this much assets. Nevertheless, the financial aid was quite significant with as much as $600,000 in assets. In this example, even millionaires received financial aid.</p>
<p>ron4sc wrote: “Stanford admissions decisions do not appear to have a predictable pattern due to non quantifiable variables and the large volume of applicants.”</p>
<p>No, I think that statement is incorrect.</p>
<p>Of course there are predictable patterns, just like there are predictable weather patterns. But like weather, it is not a deterministic result.</p>
<p>You can predict pretty well, but of course there are outliers, so it is not a deterministic result.</p>
<p>If we had discovered College Confidential before our daughter applied to Stanford, she never would have, and chances are, we probably would have told her not to waste her time (and our money on the app fee). But, thank goodness we didn’t!! She applied to Stanford as her “reach” school and got accepted with a 1890 SAT and one AP class. What Stanford did was look at her in the context of what was available to her and how she took advantage of that. She was #1 in a small school, took the only AP class that was offered, had as rigorous a class schedule as she possibly could have with what was available to her, as well as being in a few activities both inside and outside of school. Yes, there comes a point when looking at a student’s application that there probably isn’t a chance they would get accepted to Stanford, but you just never know. Stanford admissions saw something in my daughter that they liked and felt she would be a good fit for the school. She graduated this past June and obviously Stanford knew what they were doing.</p>
<p>In regards to home equity, here’s what Stanford says:</p>
<p>How does home equity affect the calculation of the parent contribution?</p>
<p>The family that has equity in a home is typically in a stronger financial position than one that does not. For that reason, we believe that it is important to include home equity in the consideration of a family’s ability to pay for educational costs. However, a large amount of equity is not particularly helpful if the family income does not support use of that equity. In Stanford’s calculation of the expected parent contribution, we cap the amount of home equity considered at 1.2 times the total family income.</p>
<hr>
<p>Although Stanford does “include” home equity in the calculation, it may not affect the calculation. And Data10’s point is correct, even though lower income families (<$60,000) see the highest benefit from Stanford’s generous FA, families making upward of $200,000 can receive some FA.</p>
<p>I think we always said there are outliers. But if someone has a below threshold GPA or SAT score, the chances that they will get in are very less, without a so called “hook” (athlete, talent, background…etc…etc) We haven’t seen ballerinamoms student profile (maybe she is a ballerina and she was her class valedectorian after all…:))…but I am sure her background was interesting and there is always someone like her who is more interesting to the adcom rather than the cookie cutter profiles they are used to seeing.</p>