<p>Would the Harvard University rather see consistency (high grades, good amount extracurricular activities and athletics, and excellent standardized tests) or large improvement throughout high school (low grades, low amount of extracurricular activities and athletics, and low standardized test scores in the beginning of high school, but was inspired by the school and improved to have high grades, good amount extracurricular activities and athletics, and excellent standardized tests during the middle and end of high school)?</p>
<p>Definitely consistency, but don’t confuse that with what many students assume “well-rounded” by joining as many clubs as possible and overloading on APs.
Get good grades, decent test scores, and some ECs to specialize in/really commit to.</p>
<p>Uhh what do you think? Bad then good obviously isn’t superior to always good.</p>
<p>Consistently good is what they seek and generally get. But an exception would be a hardship student who pulls self up and brings self to very high standards under adverse situations.</p>
<p>chuck: the student you describe seems to be ready for a fulfilling college experience. The issue with asking if he/she is a viable Harvard candidate where literally thousands of 4.0 and near 4.0 students are routinely rejected. If a person such as you describe has some amazing attribute, then maybe his less than stellar academic performance might be overlooked. But you’re speaking of the most extreme outlier scenario here.</p>