OP, there is no formula or GPA that will be "necessary" for HYPSM.

Think of it as buying a lottery ticket. A lot of people will buy them, but only a certain percentage get the first 4 numbers...any of the rest could still win, but those with the first 4 numbers right are in the "pool"

From there, it will be things like "we need an oboe player and Larla from Sidwell plays the oboe" or "we need a mezzo soprano" and this applicant from Sidwell has been in the Chorus and fills that role.

There is no set formula, no "minimum" standards beyond having board scores and GPA "good enough" to at least be in the pool.

However, these schools all have low single digit admissions rates. What does your kid have on their application that will stand out? Are they first generation where they worked at a local market to help their family make ends meet? Or care for young siblings/grandparent when not in school so their parent could work the swing shift? Did they help their team win a regional or national robotics or debate title? Do they play in an out of school music band that earns money or makes recordings that sell on line?

Because there are plenty of "outstanding" average kids - play a sport or two, have a high GPA and good board schools - just the kids who have over a 3.9 and over 1500 SAT from across the country could fill the spots in all of the schools 20 times over.

Anonymous wrote:Gee. Parent of elementary kids at a Big 3 here. I went to a T10 coming in with a 3.4 GPA, decent but not perfect SAT, good extracurriculars and no hooks. Why has the landscape changed so drastically?

More people applying to colleges in general
More foriegn students
Grade inflation
standardized test score inflation
Colleges wanting more diversity
Colleges wanting more first generation college students

An unhooked child applying to t5/10/20 universities from local Big-3/5/7 will probably have a hard time getting accepted, regardless of the academic scores and test results, because they will be competing with other students in their class with solid hooks of some kind (alumni/donor legacy, sports, special EC, and such like).

It is NOT impossible for a good unhooked child, but for an unhooked child it really is a more difficult and lower probability of acceptance than anyone else in their graduating year at their school.

This is not a new thing. In my top-1 in a different city, the top academic students in my class did not get accepted to Harvard. Instead, someone else — who was probably 15th/100 in class rank went to Harvard — because his dad was an alumnus and had been a long-standing big donor to Harvard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we need some more information to answer your question:

- Is student going to be on highest math and LA tracks?
- How does student interview?
- What is their predicted SAT/ACT score?
- Any potential for athletic recruitment? If so, what sport?
- Are you going to be full pay in college?
- Are you a VIP? If so, please describe. Specifics matter.
- Is your child a URM?
- Is your child the first to attend college in your family?
- Will your child be nationally recognized in ANYTHING? If so, what?
- Are you a billionaire?
- Will your child be a legacy?

With this information, should be able to give you a very complete answer.

If LA means language arts, are you referring to foreign languages? Sidwell doesn’t differentiate in English classes. There are only three (3) academic areas where one can be on a higher or lower track at Sidwell: Math, Science, and Foreign Languages.

You Sidwell people are just the worst. My post was funny because OP’s question is idiotic on so many levels. Apparently OP belongs with you horrible grade grubbers. So glad we are at a different Big3.

I mean, ARE YOU A BILLIONAIRE? Come on.

Anonymous wrote:Gee. Parent of elementary kids at a Big 3 here. I went to a T10 coming in with a 3.4 GPA, decent but not perfect SAT, good extracurriculars and no hooks. Why has the landscape changed so drastically?

People have babies, and successful Asians migrate to the land and milk and honey and capitalism.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because the Op said unhooked.

Recruited athletes and URMs are hooked.

This question has been asked and answered already. This year, there were non legacy/non recruited athletes who were not URM who were admitted to Ivies/T10 with >3.75 GPAs. However, we don’t know what their ECs or LORs looked like.

Then why is the PP asking why are people excluding recruited athletes from their numbers? Because OP asked about unhooked applicants.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I agree with your assessment. I never said that someone deciding to take Calc I would exclude them from the Ivy League, simply that the majority of Ivy admits took EITHER Math IV or Calc II.

However, there does seem to be a boost in your odds if you take Calc II or Math IV as opposed to Calc I or Statistics. For example, 4/8 (50%) of students in Math IV are attending Ivys, while somewhere closer to ~6/30 (20%) of Calc II students are attending Ivys. There are far more than 30 students in Calc I, yet only 6 who are attending Ivys, making their odds percentage wise undoubtedly lower than those of Math IV and Calc II.

Why are you including statistics here. Do you have ADHD? Stay focused.

Btw, correlation doesn’t equal causation. The best way to boost your odds of being admitted to an Ivy+ is to get an A/A- in every class you take (whether it’s Calc 1/2/Math 4), and get >1500 or >34 on the SAT/ACT.

Why are you using ADHD as an insult?

Gee. Parent of elementary kids at a Big 3 here. I went to a T10 coming in with a 3.4 GPA, decent but not perfect SAT, good extracurriculars and no hooks. Why has the landscape changed so drastically?

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.

I agree with your assessment. I never said that someone deciding to take Calc I would exclude them from the Ivy League, simply that the majority of Ivy admits took EITHER Math IV or Calc II.

However, there does seem to be a boost in your odds if you take Calc II or Math IV as opposed to Calc I or Statistics. For example, 4/8 (50%) of students in Math IV are attending Ivys, while somewhere closer to ~6/30 (20%) of Calc II students are attending Ivys. There are far more than 30 students in Calc I, yet only 6 who are attending Ivys, making their odds percentage wise undoubtedly lower than those of Math IV and Calc II.

Btw, at least 8 Calculus 1 students are attending Ivies. Your numbers are off!

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.

I agree with your assessment. I never said that someone deciding to take Calc I would exclude them from the Ivy League, simply that the majority of Ivy admits took EITHER Math IV or Calc II.

However, there does seem to be a boost in your odds if you take Calc II or Math IV as opposed to Calc I or Statistics. For example, 4/8 (50%) of students in Math IV are attending Ivys, while somewhere closer to ~6/30 (20%) of Calc II students are attending Ivys. There are far more than 30 students in Calc I, yet only 6 who are attending Ivys, making their odds percentage wise undoubtedly lower than those of Math IV and Calc II.

Why are you including statistics here. Do you have ADHD? Stay focused.

Btw, correlation doesn’t equal causation. The best way to boost your odds of being admitted to an Ivy+ is to get an A/A- in every class you take (whether it’s Calc 1/2/Math 4), and get >1500 or >34 on the SAT/ACT.

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.

I agree with your assessment. I never said that someone deciding to take Calc I would exclude them from the Ivy League, simply that the majority of Ivy admits took EITHER Math IV or Calc II.

However, there does seem to be a boost in your odds if you take Calc II or Math IV as opposed to Calc I or Statistics. For example, 4/8 (50%) of students in Math IV are attending Ivys, while somewhere closer to ~6/30 (20%) of Calc II students are attending Ivys. There are far more than 30 students in Calc I, yet only 6 who are attending Ivys, making their odds percentage wise undoubtedly lower than those of Math IV and Calc II.

Anonymous wrote:Because the Op said unhooked.

Recruited athletes and URMs are hooked.

This question has been asked and answered already. This year, there were non legacy/non recruited athletes who were not URM who were admitted to Ivies/T10 with >3.75 GPAs. However, we don’t know what their ECs or LORs looked like.

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.

Because the Op said unhooked.

Recruited athletes and URMs are hooked.

Anonymous wrote:Also, how old is your child? The younger, the better so the molding can really take hold.

What does this mean?