<p>Does anyone know what the most important factors are for admissions into Williams? I know some school place especial emphasis on GPA, others extracurriculars and such... how about for Williams?</p>
<p>Also, is a superscore of 2240 high enough?</p>
<p>The Common Data Set identifies the factors used to assess applicants. Do a Google search on “Williams Common Data Set”.</p>
<p>Williams emphasizes all factors of an application, just as any elite college in the States would.</p>
<p>OP–re: your question–yes.</p>
<p>I got in with a 2110, so yeah a 2240 is enough.</p>
<p>The most important factor seems to be whether you apply ED. It’s not that the ED candidates are less qualified (they’re likely not). But candidates with the same etcs. do better in the ED round. More than 40% of ED candidates are admitted, and more than 40% of the class is admitted that way.</p>
<p>Another way to say it is that Williams heavily, heavily values having students who really want to be there (and not elsewhere).</p>
<p>mini-- true-- Williams wants those that show a strong interest–but that is the case with most ED programs. You have to understand that almost all recruited athletes area also ED so that will skew the data to some degree as well–</p>
<p>Williams is also becoming much more conscious of academic data than before-- in several news articles the dean of admissions referred to the best SAT scores in the incoming class etc. It is still too early in his tenure to see if this is the direction President Falk wants Williams to trend, but as the application numbers go up (and being number one for several years in USN&WR will do that) academic qualifications are increasing as well. (This is just my sense in speaking with people there- nothing official at all–that they want to have the same academic quality applicant that would be applying to HYP–and then to get those who want an LAC not a research university experience…I make no judgment if this is good or bad, but it is a sense I get…)</p>
<p>“mini-- true-- Williams wants those that show a strong interest–but that is the case with most ED programs.”</p>
<p>Actually, I don’t believe you will find any other selective LAC or prestige university where more than 40% of the class is selected ED, and with an almost 45% admissions rate. Williams is DIFFERENT that way. (I happen to think that is probably a good thing, but it is very different.)</p>
<p>The acceptance rate for Amherst ED in 2010 was around 37% and for Williams 40%. Again, I’m not sure how to factor that as Williams has nearly all of their “slotted” athletes go ED --I don’t know about Amherst. </p>
<p>As to your question–intellectual background is becoming more and more important . At admitted student day, Falk spoke about the fact that about 100 of the entering class had what seemed to be an “intellectuals’ slot” (not merely academics per se, but that their secondary school teachers spoke about the applicant as an intellectuals. Something which the Dean of Admissions also noted in interviews. </p>
<p>So having your teachers and your writing demonstrate intellectual curiosity will matter a great deal and more in the coming years it seems at Williams.</p>
<p>Be a good athlete. Williams prizes athletes more than most LACs.</p>
<p>The big difference is that Amherst is heavily encouraging students of lower socio-economic background to apply ED. (Not sure that makes any difference really - any college can accept students from whatever background in any round.)</p>
<p>But that’s almost irrelevant. Unless you are male, weigh 300 pounds and can play tackle (which is by far the biggest admissions advantage of all), by far the easiest way to gain admissions to Williams is to apply ED.</p>
<p>I’m am here to say that my S, an unhooked guy with ordinary stats for Willuams, got accepted RD. It happens.</p>
<p>None of us knows if a score is good enough because there is no line in the sand. From what I can piece together from different conversations with admissions officers and the experiences of students I met at Williams and those who wanted to go to Williams, the score is viewed in context. If an applicant comes from a challenging socio-economic situation, or first generation to college, with a super scored 2240 along with strong grades in high level classes with some focused ECs is viewed as strong. The same score from a student who has the resources to take SAT prep classes etc. and does’t have to work after school might not be. There will be many with higher scores who will not be offered admission. I do not mean to be negative but there are just so few spots to be granted and so many students with high SATs so it is best to not be over-confident and to be prepared for a competitive process. Also I was told directly by admissions that the writing section is not valued as highly as the other two - it is more on par with a subject test - so a 1500+/1600 would be a better benchmark than the 2200+/2400.</p>
<p>Some of the views about Williams and athletics are really outdated here. Now, of course, being a recruited athlete is still one of the best ways to get into Williams. But Williams does not emphasize athletics in admission more than most of its D-3 peers, including Amherst, Midd, Bowdoin, Trinity, Emory, Wash U., etc. and I know for a fact that in many sports, you can have far lower stats as an athlete and be accepted at most of those schools than at Williams. Ten years ago, Williams was dominating its peers in heavily recruited sports, but that has turned completely on its head due to changes in both Williams’ recruiting, and recruiting by other d-3 athletic powers (many of whom are in NESCAC). </p>
<p>The ED numbers are indeed skewed – the average SAT’s for the ED group (despite the fact that the vast majority of recruited athletes, the Questbridge scholars – a large group of socioeconomically disadvantaged admits with generally lower SAT’s, and many alumni kids apply via this route) are generally as high or higher than the overall class averages. Which means, if you are a non-disadvantaged minority, non-alumni, non-athletic recruit applicant applying ED, your other qualifications will usually need to be stellar. The ED group is more self-selecting … kids generally apply ED when they are either recruited to do so, or feel like they wouldn’t just be throwing the application away. Hence, the high statistical profile for ED admits, notwithstanding the much higher admissions rate. </p>
<p>The same is 100 percent true (to varying degrees) for all of Williams’ peers in NESCAC, by the way. They all operate the same when it comes to, for example, athletic recruiting (aka, majority of the top athletic recruits apply ED), except that Williams (along with Amherst) has slightly higher academic standards for recruits. And they all have significantly higher ED admissions rates than RD rates.</p>
<p>Oh, stats will have to be good in either case (ED or RD). But, as you note, the overall statistics are likely about the same for both groups, which means that applying ED is a huge, even overwhelming, advantage.</p>
<p>(And as far as I am aware, NO NESCAC school admits a larger percentage of its class, and few if any have a higher admit rate, than Williams in the ED round. I don’t think that’s a bad thing - on the contrary, Williams wants students who really want to be there. But it means that if you really want to be there, and can be sure of the finances, ED is a great advantage.)</p>
<p>Mini, you missed the point of what I’m saying. The stats are roughly even among accepted students in the ED and RD round – DESPITE THE FACT THAT an overwhelming percentage of the TIPS (highly recruited athletes, who have the lowest scores, typically, among the athletes) enter via the ED round (making up a substantial percentage of the ED admits, substantial enough to skew the overall stats downward), and also there is always a batch of Questbridge admits, who have the same effect. Which means that, in all likelihood, the average academic credentials for an ED admit who is neither a URM not a tipped athlete are HIGHER than a similarly-situated RD admit, or, at a minimum, not lower. Now, I am not saying that applying ED affords NO advantage … all things being even, it can certainly serve as a tie-breaker, as it should, since any school should want kids who really, really want to be there. But that is not unusual or unique to Williams. We are talking about a tie-breaker … two kids with identical credentials, an ED kid might have an edge, but if an RD kid has stronger credentials, I am confident that will still have the edge. IT is most certainly not a “huge” advantage, but at the same time, like ED virtually everywhere, it is a small advantage. If it was a huge advantage, the credentials for the ED group would necessarily be lower, and they are not.</p>
<p>There are recruited athletes/sports and there are recruited athletes/sports-- in such sports as tennis, golf, squash, swimming/diving the academic averages of the students are at least as high and frequently higher than the class mean. There may be some lower numbers in the so-called helmet sports, but they do not make up all recruited athletes. So one needs to paint with a narrow brush, if at all, rather than a broad brush in this context.</p>
<p>You are absolutely correct that A/W has much higher standards for recruits than many of its NESCAC rivals (inc Midd). It has made the NESCAC championships much less a given to be sure and it will also most certainly lead --if this is good or bad I’ll leave to the reader’s discretion–to the loss for the first time in 14 years of the NCAA DIII Director’s Cup (unless Spring sports pulls out a miracle–which is unlikely…)</p>