GPA Necessary For HYPSM At Big 3

[Anonymous]

But is OP a billionaire?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be competitive without any hooks, shoot for a 3.9+ at Sidwell. This year, pretty much all non-athletic recruits, including legacy students, had above that threshold. In terms of taking the advanced math track, 3/4 attending Harvard were in Math IV, while those committed to Stanford and Yale took Calc II.

13/18 (72%) of c/o 2024 Sidwell graduates heading to Ivies didn’t take Math IV. The vast majority of that 72% graduated with Calculus 1. You do not need to take Calculus 2 or
Math IV to be admitted to an Ivy from Sidwell.

Sure, but OP asked about HYPSM. However, your information is still not completely right. Taking away the 2 athletic recruits, ~6/16 took Calc I. Given that 4 kids (not 5) took Math IV, that leaves ~6 taking Calc II, which is an even split between Calc I/II.

Note additionally that this means 12/16 (excluding athletic recruits) did not take Calc I, which is the majority.

Why are you excluding athletic recruits? Are they not Sidwell students attending Ivies? Are you going to exclude students based on race next?!? GTFOH!

The majority of the 18 students going to Ivies did NOT take Math IV or Calculus 2. Full stop.

Because those students did not get in based off their academic performance. However, if you choose to include them anyway, the percentage of students taking Calc I is 8/18 (44.44%)! Namely, a minority of the students attending the Ivy League!

To be even MORE explicit, you are wrong

More students going to Ivies took Calculus 1 (44%) than those that took Math IV (22%) or Calculus 2 (33%).

My point: You do not need to take Math IV or Calculus 2 to be admitted to an Ivy from Sidwell. The facts are the facts.

But it sounds like if you don’t take Calc I/II you need to be a recruited athlete which is a high bar to clear (especially while being a decent enough student and test taker).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be competitive without any hooks, shoot for a 3.9+ at Sidwell. This year, pretty much all non-athletic recruits, including legacy students, had above that threshold. In terms of taking the advanced math track, 3/4 attending Harvard were in Math IV, while those committed to Stanford and Yale took Calc II.

13/18 (72%) of c/o 2024 Sidwell graduates heading to Ivies didn’t take Math IV. The vast majority of that 72% graduated with Calculus 1. You do not need to take Calculus 2 or
Math IV to be admitted to an Ivy from Sidwell.

Sure, but OP asked about HYPSM. However, your information is still not completely right. Taking away the 2 athletic recruits, ~6/16 took Calc I. Given that 4 kids (not 5) took Math IV, that leaves ~6 taking Calc II, which is an even split between Calc I/II.

Note additionally that this means 12/16 (excluding athletic recruits) did not take Calc I, which is the majority.

Why are you excluding athletic recruits? Are they not Sidwell students attending Ivies? Are you going to exclude students based on race next?!? GTFOH!

The majority of the 18 students going to Ivies did NOT take Math IV or Calculus 2. Full stop.

Because those students did not get in based off their academic performance. However, if you choose to include them anyway, the percentage of students taking Calc I is 8/18 (44.44%)! Namely, a minority of the students attending the Ivy League!

To be even MORE explicit, you are wrong

More students going to Ivies took Calculus 1 (44%) than those that took Math IV (22%) or Calculus 2 (33%).

My point: You do not need to take Math IV or Calculus 2 to be admitted to an Ivy from Sidwell. The facts are the facts.

But it sounds like if you don’t take Calc I/II you need to be a recruited athlete which is a high bar to clear (especially while being a decent enough student and test taker).

If you don’t take at least Calculus 1 as a senior, and you’re not a recruited athlete, you shouldn’t expect to be admitted to an Ivy+. It means that you only completed statistics by the end of 12th grade.

[Anonymous]

Has no one thought this post to be from a troll? Is there that little questioning about focusing solely on top 10 schools? Is that the only place anyone wants to go in life? Plenty of great outcomes elsewhere; plenty of sad outcomes there alongside the great ones. And do you want your kid thinking you’re just programming them for a narrow set of results?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has no one thought this post to be from a troll? Is there that little questioning about focusing solely on top 10 schools? Is that the only place anyone wants to go in life? Plenty of great outcomes elsewhere; plenty of sad outcomes there alongside the great ones. And do you want your kid thinking you’re just programming them for a narrow set of results?

Have you ever considered that adults can respond to whatever post they choose to respond to? Let people live.

[Anonymous]

3.9 or as close to unweighted 4.0 as possible

[Anonymous]

Sounds like people think more like a 3.9 for HYPSM but a 3.8 for other ivies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has no one thought this post to be from a troll? Is there that little questioning about focusing solely on top 10 schools? Is that the only place anyone wants to go in life? Plenty of great outcomes elsewhere; plenty of sad outcomes there alongside the great ones. And do you want your kid thinking you’re just programming them for a narrow set of results?

Unlikely to be a troll. This is actually the way many, many parents at these schools think.

[Anonymous]

GPA is not the be all and end all. It is the total package, including whichever hooks might apply.

[Anonymous]

The athlete gets the first offer. They know end of junior year and the Early application is a formality. They usually only need to apply to one school, unless it's MIT where they made be deferred or rejected because grades matter. The legacy gets a bump in Early decisions. They are usually the one who gets in over an equally or slightly more qualified peer. The academic superstars (who did not get in EA,ED,REA) get in RD. They usually get into more than one top school as was the case this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:GPA is not the be all and end all. It is the total package, including whichever hooks might apply.

Sure, it doesn't trump being a recruited athlete but when you look at Scoir/Naviance, GPA is pretty darn definitive.
There is almost a line with every college. I was surprised. Extracurriculars, etc. really don't seem to mean much. GPA, GPA, GPA.

[Anonymous]

Why does first to attend college matter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does first to attend college matter?

First generation in family to attend college is now something sought out by colleges and a reported statistic that is part of the portfolio to represent diversity.

HYPSM is still a crapshoot for 3.8+ unhooked. 3.8 with a hook you at least may have a chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does first to attend college matter?

It is a legal proxy for economically disadvantaged. Also, if parents did not go to college, then the parents will not have experience navigating the college admissions process (lottery).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The athlete gets the first offer. They know end of junior year and the Early application is a formality. They usually only need to apply to one school, unless it's MIT where they made be deferred or rejected because grades matter. The legacy gets a bump in Early decisions. They are usually the one who gets in over an equally or slightly more qualified peer. The academic superstars (who did not get in EA,ED,REA) get in RD. They usually get into more than one top school as was the case this year.

This sounds right. What’s the difference in GPA between the ‘academic superstar’ and the legacy who gets in early