| People, read thru this whole thread. When OP says her child has near perfect stats but little ec, there's a lot of encouragement. OK, maybe not HYPSM but other top 20 like Hopkins, Chicago, Rice are likely. But then when another pp mentions her child with similar stats didn't get into any top 20 and indicates that they're asian, all of a sudden the posts turn very nasty with comments like, his essay was probably bad or no one wants a kid who does nothing but study all the time... Am I the only one seeing this bias? I wonder what the thread would have been like if OP said they were asian. In fact, maybe they are. They could be you know. |
THIS. There's so much more to life to the usual school ECs. |
Same at our private. It's no wonder some kids spent more time with sports practice than on academics. Ironic really when the point is to get into a high academic school. |
Yes, I noticed that too. Condescending... |
| What's discouraging is using your narrative to dissuade others from applying. Just because your child didn't get in doesn't mean it'll be the case for others. Stating that it was simply because they were Asian is demeaning to the many Asian students who do attend these schools. Some posters need to know the hard truth that their child wasn't infallible for whatever reason- and no, it wasn't because of race. It's fine to state a cautionary tale but it really shouldn't be generalized to a subjective, complex process. |
| Chill out people. No one is bashing Asians here. Also, a kid who is very academic but does not have ECs is probably very smart and hardworking but maybe a tad one dimensional. His essay may well have lacked a certain spark. Colleges want high stats but also interesting people who will contribute to college life. This kid may come across as someone who may stay shut in the library all the time, not very inspiring for college non-academic life. |
Code word for Asians. 30 years ago it was coded for Jews. Just ignore the miserable people that use this language. |
I'm so tired about hearing this triteness that an interesting non-academic life is so important at an instituton that's suppose to be about education. People these are kids. They can have fun in a paper bag. And if you're watching your friend in a play or in a game, you really don't care how good they are. And frankly better if you can join in yourself. I know this...if I were selecting a surgeon, I would rather have that kid who was one dimensionally interested enough in his studies to dig deep. And may be that really exceptional EC kid should be going pro or to Juilliard. The OP said her kid had some ECs but didn't force himself to pretend to have passion. May be he's more interesting because he's had room to explore "stuff" rather than be stuffed down a mold. I know this from personal experence with a kid that was nationally ranked in a sport. Gave it up and now says all of that was just distracting. Having an interesting life came naturally after the college admittance crazy was over. |
Hopkins or bust, baby! |
|
Not having ECs doesn't lock you out completely. If your essays/personality/impressions from recommendation/interviews are glowing, you CAN get into HYPS and any other top academic school despite not having any impressive extracurricular activities. A baseline academic expectation is in place- and OP's child is easily there- but from then on it comes down to other factors.
A few posters here have stated that their high stats child got rejected most everywhere. While we will never know their individual circumstance, the reality is that those students did not leave as good an impression as others in the pool (not to be taken as a personal reflection of potential/aptitude/ability when a whopping 95% of highly qualified students get rejected at some of them). Could lack of involvement in ECs be a factor? Sure. But it would only stand out if they had nothing else to go off from. Say a student was a gifted intellectual who wrote superb, nuanced, thought-provoking essays. One teacher stated that they would be a field-changer for their discipline and among the best students they had taught in their career. It wouldn't matter if said student had lackluster ECs/outside involvements- the admissions office would want them. Most essays are merely okay-good. They tackle the question raised and give some depth regarding the student's background/interests, but they don't have a wow factor. Most recommendations are positive, with teachers highlighting said student is among the top 5-10% of their career. Only a few are dazzling, deeply personal accounts highlighting just how extraordinary said student is (as backed by concrete narratives and examples, not empty words). Those are impressions that remain with admission officers as they go through hundreds of applications in a week. |
| In actuality the humanities kid who writes well is advantaged in the process not only for their own essays but the favaroite teachers who will write their recommendations. It's cold out here for the STEM boys who love math but not contests. |
Someone definitely is. Maybe it was you. |
Why is that ignorant and racist? A black with a 2350 SAT in the past few years would be in the 99.9 percentile of all blacks - but its a middling score for Asian. Haven't you noticed that the "accepted to all 8 Ivy league schools" each year are black? That's because there out of the world SAT score and GPA puts them in rarified air - at least among other blacks. You can't do that with other races. |
|
I know 2 Black children, brothers, who scored between 1300 and 1550 on SAT before the age of 13. They are also terrific athletes likely to play at least one sport each in college.
The SAT bar is so very low. Empty barrels here make a lot of noise. |
Do you realize how inane it is to cite a random data point to support a thesis? |