<p>Out of curiosity who knows or heard of a person with low stats that got into Harvard?
low meaning g.p.a less than 3.5
and SAT's less than 1600</p>
<p>Do you mean 1600?
Well, a fairly small number of URM applicants, probably.</p>
<p>1600 math and verbal…or 1600 out of 2400?</p>
<p>
NO URM or athlete or musician or legacy would EVER be admitted to Harvard with a 1600/2400 (if that’s what the OP means). Harvard only accepts kids who they think can graduate and the likelihood of a kid with these stats succeeding there would be slim to none.</p>
<p>as for minimum stats i would say that there is no way for anyone on here to know. people who answer the question with specific stats etc. are just bs’ing you.</p>
<p>in and admissions book i was reading at borders, there was a stat of a girl with 500/section SAT scores who wanted to go to Harvard and the counselor guy was like, “nope, sorry.” but then he noticed that she could be a good rower on the rowing team and asked her to try it out, and she did really well and got in even with her 500 SAT scores.</p>
<p>wonder if it was an exagerration</p>
<p>im pretty sure if you were some superstar high-profile athlete or legacy, you could get in with those scores. its just not likely that a normal person can do that.</p>
<p>A guy on the Stanford forum got into Stanford SCEA with a 1700. No joke.</p>
<p>he was a hispanic…</p>
<p>Alohasam89, that remark sounded remotely racist to me… Just because someone is a minority, is their acceptance less-valued? That means that they had much more to offer–not that they got in just because of their race.</p>
<p>uh affirmative action IS racist?</p>
<p>^blah. It’s suppose to be trying to prevent racism, but somehow people always screw good concepts.</p>
<p>The purpose of Affirmative Action is to give minorities an equal chance for admission. It is by no means “racist.”</p>
<p>I agree with eternitygoddess and friedrice. But, I felt like the response by the poster was a bit derogatory in the wording. Though, it’s true. I don’t get why people can’t just say he was a great applicant who just happened to have a low SAT score and put a period at the end of the sentence.</p>
<p>well, it WAS because of his race that he was accepted. I honestly doubt there was a non-developmental non-quadruple-legacy asian with a 1700 that got accepted. sorry.</p>
<p>He was accepted because he was Latino. Latinos are considered a minority in elite schools and has been historically discriminated again (same goes with African Americans). Asians, on the other hand, are over-represented and are more well off (in a very general matter) socially and financially.</p>
<p>That’s very true,
But some minorities might just take the whole AA thing as offensive. That they need a helping hand or a step up, and can’t get there on their own. This probaby has been mentioned, and I know, I confess, that I have sometimes let that feeling creep into my mind that if a brilliant student did get in, and they happen to be a URM, people credit his/her success to the URM status and all their work sort of… meant nothing.</p>
<p>wow…some really negative posts.</p>
<p>we will never know for sure, so please stop making mean assumptions.</p>
<p>Maybe this is the reason why ‘superior’ students don’t get accepted - their attitude.</p>
<p>^
Also, if you look at his stats, he might have low SAT scores, but the rest is suburb.</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/5070161-post7.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/5070161-post7.html</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Despite of his average SAT score, he deserves to be accepted to Stanford.</p>
<p>^ He was accepted to Stanford because he has done incredible leadership work within his community. Stanford rightly saw his potential, drive and passion.</p>
<p>Wait, just to be clear
My previous post was against the fact that people think that way ..
I hope I didn’t sound mean … :(</p>