Anonymous wrote:We’re hearing a lot of pressure lately (from counselor and the general admissions chatter online) about needing to do something significant outside of school, clubs, and leadership in order to be competitive. Our daughter has a 4.0 unweighted GPA, a 34 ACT, strong school leadership, and solid activities — including being a camp counselor and completing an internship. Right now, she’s interested in Economics and Policy.
Sometimes it starts to feel like unless a student is doing research with a Harvard professor (joking… but only slightly), they’re not considered competitive for top schools.
In your experience, do students with profiles like hers still get into strong schools without needing to pile on something highly specialized or over-the-top outside of what they’re already doing well?
I’d love your perspective on what’s truly necessary versus what’s simply “nice to have.” Do only hooked kids with passion projects or published research get into top 20 schools?
If you are talking about great schools that will do a great job of preparing your daughter for her adult life, then you don't need a spike.
If you are talking about a school that accepts 2000 students but gets 50,000 applications, half of whom are valedictorians or salutatorians from the nation's 30,000 high schools (many high schools have multiple valedictorians) and include the 20,000 students that get a 1520+ on their SATs 30,000 student body presidents, 30,000 school newspaper editors, you get the idea. 4.0 is now too common to distinguish your child in that applicant pool. So it's turned into a bit of a lottery unless you have a spike.