What differentiates those non-prodigies who make it to HYPS?

[Anonymous]

Apart from the obvious prodigies (science/math/chess olympiad champions, kids with major research awards like Jack Andraka etc etc), what moves the needle for the really qualified but non-prodigious students who make it to HYPS as opposed to those who make it to the lower ivies and ivy-equivalents like UChicago, Duke, NU? Is it just luck or is it something else? Is the average student at HYPS meaningfully stronger than the average student at the other elites?

[Anonymous]

The answer to your last question is “no.”

If it were “yes,” I would weep for our country.

-Harvard graduate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Apart from the obvious prodigies (science/math/chess olympiad champions, kids with major research awards like Jack Andraka etc etc), what moves the needle for the really qualified but non-prodigious students who make it to HYPS as opposed to those who make it to the lower ivies and ivy-equivalents like UChicago, Duke, NU? Is it just luck or is it something else? Is the average student at HYPS meaningfully stronger than the average student at the other elites?

First generation

Recruited athlete

URM

Other unique non-academic talent

Geographic diversity

Legacy

Large Donation

[Anonymous]

Northwestern isn't an Ivy-equivalent. Carry on

[Anonymous]

As an unhooked kid who went to Harvard, what struck me most was the self-confidence (often way out of proportion to skills/talent/knowledge) and ambition of my classmates.

[Anonymous]

i was a graduate student at harvard and what struck me about undregrads was that they were quite attractive. many grad students commented on it. i am just throwing this theory out there, i know you will all take it very well

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apart from the obvious prodigies (science/math/chess olympiad champions, kids with major research awards like Jack Andraka etc etc), what moves the needle for the really qualified but non-prodigious students who make it to HYPS as opposed to those who make it to the lower ivies and ivy-equivalents like UChicago, Duke, NU? Is it just luck or is it something else? Is the average student at HYPS meaningfully stronger than the average student at the other elites?

First generation

Recruited athlete

URM

Other unique non-academic talent

Geographic diversity

Legacy

Large Donation

I'm a nonprodigy who does not fall in ANY of these categories. Boring suburban public school kid in major metro area with no national-level talents. Parents were white, went to big state university.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The answer to your last question is “no.”

If it were “yes,” I would weep for our country.

-Harvard graduate

Agree.

-"lower ivy" graduate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:i was a graduate student at harvard and what struck me about undregrads was that they were quite attractive. many grad students commented on it. i am just throwing this theory out there, i know you will all take it very well

Youth has its own attractiveness. You see it when you are older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:i was a graduate student at harvard and what struck me about undregrads was that they were quite attractive. many grad students commented on it. i am just throwing this theory out there, i know you will all take it very well

Wow, times must have changed! My class was pretty plain. HS cohort (in SoCal) was much better looking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apart from the obvious prodigies (science/math/chess olympiad champions, kids with major research awards like Jack Andraka etc etc), what moves the needle for the really qualified but non-prodigious students who make it to HYPS as opposed to those who make it to the lower ivies and ivy-equivalents like UChicago, Duke, NU? Is it just luck or is it something else? Is the average student at HYPS meaningfully stronger than the average student at the other elites?

First generation

Recruited athlete

URM

Other unique non-academic talent

Geographic diversity

Legacy

Large Donation

I'm a nonprodigy who does not fall in ANY of these categories. Boring suburban public school kid in major metro area with no national-level talents. Parents were white, went to big state university.

Likewise, but suburban private school. My only real outstanding characteristic was that I was first in my class so top grades and scores, but everyone has those. No idea how I got in, and I'm guessing I wouldn't if it were today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:self-confidence (often way out of proportion to skills/talent/knowledge)

I didn't apply to Harvard, but this was the common element among friends and acquaintances who went there.

[Anonymous]

No offense to the "average" folks who got into Harvard, but your experience might not be applicable today.

In 2001, 19,014 applied to Harvard and 2,110 (11.1 percent) were admitted. 16,904 were rejected.

Last year, 39,506 applied and 2,037 were admitted (5.2 percent). 37,469 were rejected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No offense to the "average" folks who got into Harvard, but your experience might not be applicable today.

In 2001, 19,014 applied to Harvard and 2,110 (11.1 percent) were admitted. 16,904 were rejected.

Last year, 39,506 applied and 2,037 were admitted (5.2 percent). 37,469 were rejected.

sure but it also seems that many more people with not chance of getting in (now - or 30 years ago) are applying.

[Anonymous]

I went to Harvard and I had to google what HYPS stands for!