Anonymous wrote:For unhooked applicants, Vandy or any t20 first require stellar academic performance, a very high test score, before you even wonder about the leadership part. Perhaps Vandy looks for a slightly different type, but maybe not that much different, don’t be a fool thinking you can get in with a B+ gpa or sub 1500 score. My impression is that the students attend Vandy are very studious, no matter what internet randos here are saying.

Many of our kids (including mine) got into Vanderbilt test optional. However, they generally have something special/extra.

For unhooked applicants, Vandy or any t20 first require stellar academic performance, a very high test score, before you even wonder about the leadership part. Perhaps Vandy looks for a slightly different type, but maybe not that much different, don’t be a fool thinking you can get in with a B+ gpa or sub 1500 score. My impression is that the students attend Vandy are very studious, no matter what internet randos here are saying.

Leadership is reflective of traits the school seems to deem desirable: ambition, communication skills, interpersonal skills, organizational skills, flexibility, etc. It's likely that "leadership" is used here simply as surrogate for a host of characteristics the school prefers over others possible attributes. If an applicant's profile lines up with what the school values and wants, all good, as is true for every school without open admissions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vandy looks for kids who are smart, social, service-minded, collaborative, polished, pre-professional.

Vandy is not looking for kids who are edgy (Columbia, Brown, Chicago).

Vandy looks for kids who are more leadership-forward (Penn, Duke, WashU, Georgetown). StuCo president, club founder, researcher, varsity captain.

Vandy is not looking for pure intellectualism (Chicago, Williams).

Vandy looks for well rounded kids.

Those ECs are so unimpressive.

That really depends. If you are attending a giant high performing public school with 2000-3000 students, things like class president, editor of the paper, president of a big student organization like DECA, captain of a varsity sport - those things are impressive given all the competition. Much less so at at a small private school where everyone gets a prize. Plus in the good school districts, these students will have good internships and so on. There's a big difference between having leadership positions and excelling at sports at big public schools like Whitman, Langley, and so on compared to the small private schools in the area - GDS, Sidwell and so forth. School leadership positions are unimpressive for private school parents because they are so easy to get in their school milieu. The private school families are relying on name and wealth and forgo real competition for anything. But for public school students, class president, editor of the paper, captain of the team are very significant because the competition is so fierce. And colleges recognize that. And so what's unimpressive for the small private school parent - because it's so easy - is very impressive for everyone else.

Anonymous wrote:Vandy looks for kids who are smart, social, service-minded, collaborative, polished, pre-professional.

Vandy is not looking for kids who are edgy (Columbia, Brown, Chicago).

Vandy looks for kids who are more leadership-forward (Penn, Duke, WashU, Georgetown). StuCo president, club founder, researcher, varsity captain.

Vandy is not looking for pure intellectualism (Chicago, Williams).

Vandy looks for well rounded kids.

+1. Smart, social and preprof is a good descriptor. There is definitely a 'type'. I'll add that vandy also attracts a lot of private school school wealthy kids in our area - and many apply test optional (50% of admitted kids don't submit scores). The school overlap mentioned is accurate- my kid liked vandy a lot and also applied to those other schools mentioned (duke, penn, georgetown, etc).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vandy looks for kids who are smart, social, service-minded, collaborative, polished, pre-professional.

Vandy is not looking for kids who are edgy (Columbia, Brown, Chicago).

Vandy looks for kids who are more leadership-forward (Penn, Duke, WashU, Georgetown). StuCo president, club founder, researcher, varsity captain.

Vandy is not looking for pure intellectualism (Chicago, Williams).

Vandy looks for well rounded kids.

Those ECs are so unimpressive.

Yes, they are not impressive.
The edgy antiestablishment kids go to Columbia or brown. The iconoclastic reader of Russian literature goes to Chicago or Williams.
The team-based, service-mindedness kids apply to Vanderbilt.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vandy looks for kids who are smart, social, service-minded, collaborative, polished, pre-professional.

Vandy is not looking for kids who are edgy (Columbia, Brown, Chicago).

Vandy looks for kids who are more leadership-forward (Penn, Duke, WashU, Georgetown). StuCo president, club founder, researcher, varsity captain.

Vandy is not looking for pure intellectualism (Chicago, Williams).

Vandy looks for well rounded kids.

Those ECs are so unimpressive.

To some schools, yes. To others, no. Different schools value different types of ECs. That’s the point of this post.

To Vandy, I do not think those will be impressive.

Anonymous wrote:I am an introverted college professor. I speak six languages and have written several books but so have no desire to be a leader. My kids are kind of the same way. Lots of very bright people don’t want to be leaders. Statistically it would be very strange for an entire population to be composed of leaders. Who are they going to lead if everyone is the leader? It’s unrealistic and stupid to give so much emphasis to leadership.

UChicago and SLACs might be good fits for your kids. "Leadership" in high school just means caring enough to go beyond the absolute bare minimum - many clubs at non-top highschools give leadership positions to pretty much anyone who volunteers to take on the extra work. You probably do a lot of service activities yourself, like mentoring grad students and maybe undergrads, serving on committees, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am an introverted college professor. I speak six languages and have written several books but so have no desire to be a leader. My kids are kind of the same way. Lots of very bright people don’t want to be leaders. Statistically it would be very strange for an entire population to be composed of leaders. Who are they going to lead if everyone is the leader? It’s unrealistic and stupid to give so much emphasis to leadership.

It isn’t stupid to give emphasis to leadership because those are students who are making school a better experience for everyone. You can be introverted and be a follower in many activities yet have one passion and you are a leader in that area.

+1

You’re thinking way too narrowly if you think leadership requires someone to have an extraverted personality, a formal office or title, or even a strong drive to influence others.

My guess is that, at a minimum, the professor who posted above is a thought leader (research/books), a leader in the classroom (educator), and a leader within their family (parent). Not all leadership is showy, formal, or even vertically structured (hierarchical).

What Vanderbilt does not seem to want is kids who are brilliant at “getting perfect grades in school” and checking the basic EC boxes but fail to have a meaningful impact on anyone or anything in one of their many communities.

Being highly accomplished academically is the first step to be considered. After that, Vanderbilt wants to know how you might contribute and make an impact at their school (including your peers in and out of the classroom) and the greater world.

If you have nothing to show in that area, it sounds like Vanderbilt is not the right school for you. Thankfully, there are tons of others to consider instead.

That’s weird because my neighbor’s kid is going to Vanderbilt and is basically a top student but no significant extracurricular activities and certainly no leadership roles. But excellent transcript with all As.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vandy looks for kids who are smart, social, service-minded, collaborative, polished, pre-professional.

Vandy is not looking for kids who are edgy (Columbia, Brown, Chicago).

Vandy looks for kids who are more leadership-forward (Penn, Duke, WashU, Georgetown). StuCo president, club founder, researcher, varsity captain.

Vandy is not looking for pure intellectualism (Chicago, Williams).

Vandy looks for well rounded kids.

Those ECs are so unimpressive.

To some schools, yes. To others, no. Different schools value different types of ECs. That’s the point of this post.

Anonymous wrote:Vandy looks for kids who are smart, social, service-minded, collaborative, polished, pre-professional.

Vandy is not looking for kids who are edgy (Columbia, Brown, Chicago).

Vandy looks for kids who are more leadership-forward (Penn, Duke, WashU, Georgetown). StuCo president, club founder, researcher, varsity captain.

Vandy is not looking for pure intellectualism (Chicago, Williams).

Vandy looks for well rounded kids.

My sense is Wake Forest seeks very similar students, though they have a lower GPA/test score threshold. True? Any others?

With Duke/Vandy as reaches, what schools would be good targets and safeties for kids who fit the personality/EC profile you described above (+ highest rigor at their school + top grades (3.9+ UW) + 1500+ scores)? Kid’s not into SLAC. No geographic restrictions.

Anonymous wrote:Vandy looks for kids who are smart, social, service-minded, collaborative, polished, pre-professional.

Vandy is not looking for kids who are edgy (Columbia, Brown, Chicago).

Vandy looks for kids who are more leadership-forward (Penn, Duke, WashU, Georgetown). StuCo president, club founder, researcher, varsity captain.

Vandy is not looking for pure intellectualism (Chicago, Williams).

Vandy looks for well rounded kids.

Those ECs are so unimpressive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am an introverted college professor. I speak six languages and have written several books but so have no desire to be a leader. My kids are kind of the same way. Lots of very bright people don’t want to be leaders. Statistically it would be very strange for an entire population to be composed of leaders. Who are they going to lead if everyone is the leader? It’s unrealistic and stupid to give so much emphasis to leadership.

It isn’t stupid to give emphasis to leadership because those are students who are making school a better experience for everyone. You can be introverted and be a follower in many activities yet have one passion and you are a leader in that area.

Being highly accomplished academically is the first step to be considered. After that, Vanderbilt wants to know how you might contribute and make an impact at their school (including your peers in and out of the classroom) and the greater world.

Any top 20 would want to know that, hardly a surprise, which begs the question: how does Vanderbilt differ from the rest, how they approach things differently (from admission perspective). No one seems to be able to pinpoint it so far.

I have a kid that just graduated from Vanderbilt. I think they are quite genuine about "leadership" - meaning they'll take the class president or editor of the school paper over the valedictorian. The Vandy students I met over the four years were all super nice, extroverted, and very driven. I have another kid at another top 20 school - one really known for the academics. Also a great school. But very different student populations. I don't know how Vanderbilt is able to identify its "type" coming out of high school, but there is certainly a "type."

Maybe via the letters of recommendation? Even at our public school with 250 kids per grade, it’s super clear which kids fit that description.

Then narrow that group further to include only those who take and excel at the most rigorous classes, and you have 5-10 kids per year, max.

These are the stars of their grade when you consider rigorous academics + engaging personality + school leadership. Of course their AP teachers and counselors go the extra mile when writing their LOR. And it shows when ED and RD results come out. These kids do phenomenally well year after year at our school.

Vandy looks for kids who are smart, social, service-minded, collaborative, polished, pre-professional.

Vandy is not looking for kids who are edgy (Columbia, Brown, Chicago).

Vandy looks for kids who are more leadership-forward (Penn, Duke, WashU, Georgetown). StuCo president, club founder, researcher, varsity captain.

Vandy is not looking for pure intellectualism (Chicago, Williams).

Vandy looks for well rounded kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am an introverted college professor. I speak six languages and have written several books but so have no desire to be a leader. My kids are kind of the same way. Lots of very bright people don’t want to be leaders. Statistically it would be very strange for an entire population to be composed of leaders. Who are they going to lead if everyone is the leader? It’s unrealistic and stupid to give so much emphasis to leadership.

It isn’t stupid to give emphasis to leadership because those are students who are making school a better experience for everyone. You can be introverted and be a follower in many activities yet have one passion and you are a leader in that area.

Being highly accomplished academically is the first step to be considered. After that, Vanderbilt wants to know how you might contribute and make an impact at their school (including your peers in and out of the classroom) and the greater world.

Any top 20 would want to know that, hardly a surprise, which begs the question: how does Vanderbilt differ from the rest, how they approach things differently (from admission perspective). No one seems to be able to pinpoint it so far.

They don’t. I think OP made way too much of this from the start.