Accepted to Ivy stats

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The high stats just buy you the lottery ticket...

+1

People keep saying this but I got a PhD at an ivy league school and both sat in a couple classes with undergrads and taught a couple classes to undergrads. There is a sizable minority of absolute buffoons in ivy league undergrad programs. And it's not the athletes

And you should listen to some of these ivy students carry on about the doctoral candidate TAs tasked with doing some of the instructional work. They are less than impressed.

It a college full of young adults folks. Bright folks but there are definitely a bunch of idiots there as well.

Well, most doctoral candidates don't even want to teach and 80% of them are nonnative speakers in technical fields (and even some non-technical fields)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Princeton early

1580
4.8 weighted
Many ECs with leadership
12 APs
Asian
Large public hs, competitive state

Very charismatic person with probably excellent letters

Similar stats, rejected. LOR matters, pick someone who knows you well AND has time and ability to write heartfelt and convincing letters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The high stats just buy you the lottery ticket...

+1

People keep saying this but I got a PhD at an ivy league school and both sat in a couple classes with undergrads and taught a couple classes to undergrads. There is a sizable minority of absolute buffoons in ivy league undergrad programs. And it's not the athletes

And you should listen to some of these ivy students carry on about the doctoral candidate TAs tasked with doing some of the instructional work. They are less than impressed.

It a college full of young adults folks. Bright folks but there are definitely a bunch of idiots there as well.

Well, most doctoral candidates don't even want to teach and 80% of them are nonnative speakers in technical fields (and even some non-technical fields)

Lol. Well then I don't see that they have the standing to be hypercritical if the undergrads.

They applied to a program that includes teaching responsibilities. No one made them do that, but if they take it on, rise to the occasion or don't be slamming undergrads for not doing the same.

And there are some very high quality TAs. But some are poor quality. These are large institutions and some weakness gets in.

[Anonymous]

Being stellar puts you in lottery but luck and hooks get you selected.

[Anonymous]

We haven't heard yet, but applied to just one Ivy for the hell of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Being stellar puts you in lottery but luck and hooks get you selected.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep, admissions is luck of the draw currently. If the AO reviewing the app does not resonate with it, then it will be a rejection. I am not saying the accepted kids are not capable - they are. There are just so many of them all competing for the same limited number of spots.

They don't think it be like it is, but it do.

Agree, remember AO only has 5 minutes to review your application, you have to set you apart

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The high stats just buy you the lottery ticket...

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, admissions is luck of the draw currently. If the AO reviewing the app does not resonate with it, then it will be a rejection. I am not saying the accepted kids are not capable - they are. There are just so many of them all competing for the same limited number of spots.

They don't think it be like it is, but it do.

Agree, remember AO only has 5 minutes to review your application, you have to set you apart

More than you setting you apart, its college's need that sets you apart, may be math department is low on math majors, music school short on tuba players, quadruplet story can make news, not many applicants from Nebraska, alumni donations running low, college wants poweful connection in Ghana for research funding and permits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, admissions is luck of the draw currently. If the AO reviewing the app does not resonate with it, then it will be a rejection. I am not saying the accepted kids are not capable - they are. There are just so many of them all competing for the same limited number of spots.

They don't think it be like it is, but it do.

Agree, remember AO only has 5 minutes to review your application, you have to set you apart

More than you setting you apart, its college's need that sets you apart, may be math department is low on math majors, music school short on tuba players, quadruplet story can make news, not many applicants from Nebraska, alumni donations running low, college wants poweful connection in Ghana for research funding and permits.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep, admissions is luck of the draw currently. If the AO reviewing the app does not resonate with it, then it will be a rejection. I am not saying the accepted kids are not capable - they are. There are just so many of them all competing for the same limited number of spots.

They don't think it be like it is, but it do.

Well, sort of; you have to work really, really hard to be in the drawing in the first place, so it is not all luck. It's just luck in the very end.

[Anonymous]

People KNOW it's a crapshoot, but they still want to know the stats!

It helps when managing expectations even when you and kid KNOW exceeding stats/EC for any given school by no means guarantees admission. I had some crazy waitlists while getting into much more competitive schools--and saw the same kid with much lower stats get in somewhere I didn't and vice versa. The sooner the kid learns so much is out of their control: they can DO everything right and still not get in, all the better.

BUT---people posting STATs here is somewhat helpful to us who haven't had kids start applying yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People KNOW it's a crapshoot, but they still want to know the stats!

It helps when managing expectations even when you and kid KNOW exceeding stats/EC for any given school by no means guarantees admission. I had some crazy waitlists while getting into much more competitive schools--and saw the same kid with much lower stats get in somewhere I didn't and vice versa. The sooner the kid learns so much is out of their control: they can DO everything right and still not get in, all the better.

BUT---people posting STATs here is somewhat helpful to us who haven't had kids start applying yet.

The stats are available in the CDS. Far more useful than random DCUM posters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We haven't heard yet, but applied to just one Ivy for the hell of it.

Which one? Did you have your interview ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Princeton early

1580
4.8 weighted
Many ECs with leadership
12 APs
Asian
Large public hs, competitive state

Very charismatic person with probably excellent letters

Similar stats, rejected. LOR matters, pick someone who knows you well AND has time and ability to write heartfelt and convincing letters.

Same here. Since Princeton is not posting stats, no idea who got in.