aisgzdavinci

I'm interested where that "regulation allows massive corruption" came from. Of course there is a lot corruption and bad standards, but that's because there's no regulation. There are regulations by Hu Jintao to limit the Politboro's power and regulations to try to get rid of lead-poisoned toys. And what about America's "bad situations"? Every country has its problems.

Sorry, I really need sth to talk about.

FellowCCViewer

there are a lot more other factors.

Narcissa

who thinks we're all going to go into a depression.
time to sell our houses and buy hoards of gold bars?

beefs

enough with bumping this thread.

Narcissa

lol fine

joecollegedad

I still think that colleges, at least private colleges that do not have garish endowments, want a goodly number of applicants who can PAY tuition first; interesting is a side thing. Sort of like private hospitals, they cannot have all 'no pays'.

Keshira

I couldn't disagree with more. I spend less than an hour a day on homework and am carrying a 4.0, will probably get 2350+ on the SATs without too much prep. And I still think that ECs or other intangible factors such as race, gender, and location should count for half as much as they do. The capacity for hard work and dedication, I think, is a great talent in itself, and I admire all those who possess it.

beefs

rofl, love people like this.

anotherNJmom

They do exist. Quite.

Narcissa

I still think that intelligence is more important, tho. people who work hard for their 4.0 and 2400 are usually boring. =P no offense

Firebird44

people always wonder why they get rejected from SCEA Stanford... colleges dont want nerds... the last 4 years at my high school each valedectorian has applied to stanford early and has been rejected with a 2250+ SAT score... they just sit at home and study.

Colleges don't want 4.0 uw 2250+ SAT score nerds...I see a lot of people on this site that are in clubs and EC's JUST to show colleges...

If I was an admissions officer at a top school...I would accept a 3.7 uw GPA 2000 SAT score kid that plays intramural soccer ( not varsity) and volunteers 3 hours weekly than a kid with NO ec's that has a 4.0 uw gpa and 2300+ SAT

nerds rarely get anywhere in life... they mostly major in science/math and make 60K a year out of grad/ugrad school.

Narcissa

nerds =/= study freaks, btw

I think that if Harvard had to chose they would choose the 4.0 guy because the 3.7/2000 is pretty low and his ECs aren't that impressive anyways. but if it was closer, say 3.9 and 2250, then they would choose the 3.7 guy. if you're talking about hyp neither would get in--they would rather have 4.0 uw gpa and 2300+ SAT AND with lots of ECs. there seem to be an infinite supply of them nowadays anyways.

I hope you're not assuming that 4.0 uw 2250+ SAT score make people nerds?

Firebird44

obviously your not getting my drift here... people WITH just 4.0 gpa's and 2250+ SATS wont get into ivies... with 10 percent acceptance rates, it takes more than just numbers. And I was saying if the 3.7 guy wanted to pursue those EC's at the college, then they SHOULD choose the 3.7 guy. the 4.0 gpa nerd won't contribute much to the schools atmosphere

not saying they make people nerds, but they are more likely to use their free time studying than sports, clubs..etc this is just what I've seen at my school so I could be off. The past 4 vals at my school all applied to top schools and had 4.0 uw gpa's, most rigorous couseload, 2250+ SATS, academic awards and all 4 have ended up at UC berkeley and UCLA ( number schools) and have been rejected at numerous top schools.. they were straight up nerds as many of their friends told me.

Our last val( according to my school and him):
2320 SAT
4.0 uw gpa with 10 AP classes

his only EC's were:
member of NHS
president of CSF
robotics club
JV tennis

accepted:
all the UC's (he's attending UCSD)
Tufts

rejected:
all ivies, JHU, Duke, Georgetown, Northwestern


and I don't believe someone that gets 2350+ SAT and a 4.0 uw gpa studies for less than 2 hours a day... it doesn't happen... the person that posted earlier on this thread is lying and is a straight up nerd.

high GPA kids always say they never study cause they dont want to come across as nerds... no matter how intelligent you are you can never get a 4.0 uw gpa with a very rigorous course load by studying less than 2 hours a day. Unless you have photographic memory. People say asians are genetically smarter than other races ( I'm South Asian)...it's not true... they just study 5 times more.

Narcissa

("nerd" just means the guy likes math/science, not that he studies alot btw)
lol no? it's definitely possible. and the val's you described would have definitely gotten into every school possible if they were from my school, it's impossibel to get a 4.0 at my school. the vals who haven't basically cheated their way into being val all ended up at harvard or princeton for the past couple years. it really depends on your school. if your school offers lots of APs, but the classes itself aren't very hard, then it may seem like you have a rigorous courseload but you really don't.

hmm they are, but not by much lol.

okay i see. well duh if people studied a lot and didn't do anything else i wouldn't want them at my college anyways.

thesmiths

" hmm they are, but not by much lol. "

really? you're delusional. just because asians may have a tendency to work/study harder (which can be attributed to culture, anyway), that bears little to no correlation to being "genetically smarter"