What are “top notch ECs”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:National finalist of major STEM competitions (think USAMO, USAPHO, USABO, etc)
ISEF, STS finalist
First author pub in peer-reviewed journals
National finalist of major art/writing competitions
Accepted to prestigious summer programs (RSI, SSP, TASP, etc)

+1

USAMO qualification is not that great! Over 500 qualify each year, at least 150-200 seniors. Need to qualify for Math Olympiad Summer Program (MOP) to really distinguish yourself and be on the same level as the STS finalist or RSI participant.

First, there are around 200 USAMO qualifiers , not 500. And the student pool for the usamo track is much larger than other Olympiad competitions. So it’s hard.
Second, the PP did say national finalist of ISAMO, which is MOP.

Technically, the US IMO (and respective Olympiad) team are finalists. But there can only be 6! And there were about 250 USAMO qualifiers (and another 250 from JMO).

Okay. I don’t think you’re familiar with these at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:National finalist of major STEM competitions (think USAMO, USAPHO, USABO, etc)
ISEF, STS finalist
First author pub in peer-reviewed journals
National finalist of major art/writing competitions
Accepted to prestigious summer programs (RSI, SSP, TASP, etc)

+1

It also depends on the overall package. My DD was a non-Asian girl USAMO qualifier whose other ECs were impressive/not STEM focused (debate & theater). The USAMO qualification was unique in that context and solidified that she really was *very* good at math and not just another A student.
USAMO qualification is not that great! Over 500 qualify each year, at least 150-200 seniors. Need to qualify for Math Olympiad Summer Program (MOP) to really distinguish yourself and be on the same level as the STS finalist or RSI participant.

First, there are around 200 USAMO qualifiers , not 500. And the student pool for the usamo track is much larger than other Olympiad competitions. So it’s hard.
Second, the PP did say national finalist of ISAMO, which is MOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:National finalist of major STEM competitions (think USAMO, USAPHO, USABO, etc)
ISEF, STS finalist
First author pub in peer-reviewed journals
National finalist of major art/writing competitions
Accepted to prestigious summer programs (RSI, SSP, TASP, etc)

+1

USAMO qualification is not that great! Over 500 qualify each year, at least 150-200 seniors. Need to qualify for Math Olympiad Summer Program (MOP) to really distinguish yourself and be on the same level as the STS finalist or RSI participant.

It also depends on the overall package. My DD was a non-Asian girl USAMO qualifier whose other ECs were impressive/not STEM focused (debate & theater). The USAMO qualification was unique in that context and solidified that she really was *very* good at math and not just another A student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:National finalist of major STEM competitions (think USAMO, USAPHO, USABO, etc)
ISEF, STS finalist
First author pub in peer-reviewed journals
National finalist of major art/writing competitions
Accepted to prestigious summer programs (RSI, SSP, TASP, etc)

+1

USAMO qualification is not that great! Over 500 qualify each year, at least 150-200 seniors. Need to qualify for Math Olympiad Summer Program (MOP) to really distinguish yourself and be on the same level as the STS finalist or RSI participant.

First, there are around 200 USAMO qualifiers , not 500. And the student pool for the usamo track is much larger than other Olympiad competitions. So it’s hard.
Second, the PP did say national finalist of ISAMO, which is MOP.

Technically, the US IMO (and respective Olympiad) team are finalists. But there can only be 6! And there were about 250 USAMO qualifiers (and another 250 from JMO).

Okay. I don’t think you’re familiar with these at all.

My kid is a MOPper. So I am familiar enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:National finalist of major STEM competitions (think USAMO, USAPHO, USABO, etc)
ISEF, STS finalist
First author pub in peer-reviewed journals
National finalist of major art/writing competitions
Accepted to prestigious summer programs (RSI, SSP, TASP, etc)

+1

USAMO qualification is not that great! Over 500 qualify each year, at least 150-200 seniors. Need to qualify for Math Olympiad Summer Program (MOP) to really distinguish yourself and be on the same level as the STS finalist or RSI participant.

First, there are around 200 USAMO qualifiers , not 500. And the student pool for the usamo track is much larger than other Olympiad competitions. So it’s hard.
Second, the PP did say national finalist of ISAMO, which is MOP.

Technically, the US IMO (and respective Olympiad) team are finalists. But there can only be 6! And there were about 250 USAMO qualifiers (and another 250 from JMO).

Okay. I don’t think you’re familiar with these at all.

My kid is a MOPper. So I am familiar enough.

I doubt it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:National finalist of major STEM competitions (think USAMO, USAPHO, USABO, etc)
ISEF, STS finalist
First author pub in peer-reviewed journals
National finalist of major art/writing competitions
Accepted to prestigious summer programs (RSI, SSP, TASP, etc)

+1

USAMO qualification is not that great! Over 500 qualify each year, at least 150-200 seniors. Need to qualify for Math Olympiad Summer Program (MOP) to really distinguish yourself and be on the same level as the STS finalist or RSI participant.

Sure, for or MIT or Harvard, USAMO qualification wouldn't be sufficient (I agree that they're looking for MOPpers), but it could support an otherwise strong package. For schools with less distinguished math programs, USAMO qualification would be a "top notch" achievement.

[Anonymous]

Does stand out ECs cure mediocre or average GPAs with so-so rigor at T10? Planning to go TO.

[Anonymous]

Your DC had better be a recruited athlete if the GPA is mediocre.

[Anonymous]

How about legacy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Music and art in national recognition.

NP. Stop with the "national recognition" crap.

National recognition/competitions etc. in any field, music, art, sports, etc. is rare.

Any college worth attending is going to know that, too.

OP, your kid needs to do ECs he or she wants to do, activities which engage your kid enough that they're taking a real interest and showing commitment with their time and effort. And then, crucially, your kid needs to be able to write essays where they articulately talk about why those ECs are meaningful personally; what those ECs have taught them about themselves and other people; how those ECs have prepared them for college and/or helped determine their chosen major/career; how those ECs have made your kid into a person who would be a contributing member of that college's student body.

Sure, it's great to have a resume with national awards etc. Some colleges will indeed see those and toss an application onto the pile for further consideration, or a firm "yes." But it is utterly foolish to push any kid (who doesn't want to do it on their own) to compete like crazy in order to maybe win awards for the sake of college apps. Instead, students should do things that matter to them as people and should be able to talk and write about how those activities affect them.

Please do not stress a kid about "You need to WIN STUFF to ensure admission to college X." If that's the feeling, then maybe college X isn't really the right place for that particular kid.

DP. Which is why they were indicated as "top notch." Of course they're rare. That's the point.

Right. But they are just one type of top-notch credential. The point isn’t that winning these types of awards (or doing significant research or being national poet laureate) isn’t a great credential; it’s that they are one type of credential and—most importantly—not one that is required/necessary for admission to the most selective schools. The faulty premise many seem to buy into is that these sorts of national/international awards are table stakes for admissions consideration to a Harvard or a Yale. That just isn’t so.

[Anonymous]

If you live in a highly overrepresented area, and your kid is a member of an overrepresented background in terms of ethnicity and is privileged (but not so privileged as to be from the donor class), then national recognition in an area important to the school is very helpful in securing admission to a super-selective college. I state this not to encourage parents to push their kids in unfortunate ways but rather to have realistic expectations of what kinds of colleges are most likely going to be within reach. I saw so many families touring Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Columbia and knew there was no what that was going to happen. Especially these cycles it’s a lot better to choose the early school wisely.

[Anonymous]

No *way* that was going to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does stand out ECs cure mediocre or average GPAs with so-so rigor at T10? Planning to go TO.

How stand out? If kid is a celebrity or isef winner, maybe? But, I think dings in both GPA and rigor would be a big deal. Plenty of other kids with both and stand out ECs!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Music and art in national recognition.

NP. Stop with the "national recognition" crap.

National recognition/competitions etc. in any field, music, art, sports, etc. is rare.

Any college worth attending is going to know that, too.

OP, your kid needs to do ECs he or she wants to do, activities which engage your kid enough that they're taking a real interest and showing commitment with their time and effort. And then, crucially, your kid needs to be able to write essays where they articulately talk about why those ECs are meaningful personally; what those ECs have taught them about themselves and other people; how those ECs have prepared them for college and/or helped determine their chosen major/career; how those ECs have made your kid into a person who would be a contributing member of that college's student body.

Sure, it's great to have a resume with national awards etc. Some colleges will indeed see those and toss an application onto the pile for further consideration, or a firm "yes." But it is utterly foolish to push any kid (who doesn't want to do it on their own) to compete like crazy in order to maybe win awards for the sake of college apps. Instead, students should do things that matter to them as people and should be able to talk and write about how those activities affect them.

Please do not stress a kid about "You need to WIN STUFF to ensure admission to college X." If that's the feeling, then maybe college X isn't really the right place for that particular kid.

DP. Which is why they were indicated as "top notch." Of course they're rare. That's the point.

Right. But they are just one type of top-notch credential. The point isn’t that winning these types of awards (or doing significant research or being national poet laureate) isn’t a great credential; it’s that they are one type of credential and—most importantly—not one that is required/necessary for admission to the most selective schools. The faulty premise many seem to buy into is that these sorts of national/international awards are table stakes for admissions consideration to a Harvard or a Yale. That just isn’t so.

PP here. True that you don't need one of these for admission, but to have one (one of the truly exclusive ones) along with great grades, rigor, essays, recs, it's not such a lottery anymore.