ericwchgo

All I can say is that when I applied to Stanford (class of 1979) it was only because someone gave me Stanford's application and said "I think you'ld like it there" (and she decided not to apply). I filled out the application for the heck of it because I really wanted to be a 6 year med at Northwestern or go to Brown. I didn't get into Northwestern's 6 year med but got wait listed at Brown. That same day a fat envelop from Stanford came and by the time I got accepted to Brown I decided to go to Stanford (sight unseen).

I think I got in because the essay I wrote was truly honest and from my heart -- I wasn't trying to impress anyone at Stanford since I literally didn't know anything about the place.

lextalionis

Pure speculation regarding why you got in.

How many of the 22000 rejectees were "truly honest" and wrote "from the heart"? Oodles and oodles, I'm sure.

Wow . . . there aren't many people who literally don't know anything about Stanford and apply there any way. I think you might have hit on something though . . . on your "Why Stanford?" essay question, you should write "I have no idea. Don't know a thing about the place."

Maybe that works more than acting like you really want to go there.

nngmm

Sorry, but that is just ridiculous. No one gets rejected from Stanford for having "too good of a score". They got rejected despite those scores.

There are way too many qualified applicants at schools like Stanford. The adcom is building a class by picking various individuals from that pool. They always say that they could easily admit at least two full classes of perfectly qualified students that would be equally great.

Some people get rejected just because there is no place for everyone. A student with 2400 on SAT is no more qualified than one with 2330. At that point other considerations are taking place, and there is no way to know what they are. But no one gets rejected because their scores are "too perfect".

lextalionis

nngmm,

That's your opinion. Based on my experience back in the 80's and my knowledge regarding this year's applicants, Stanford clearly rejects a disproportionately high number of top academic achievers. And they have every right to do so.

This thread was started by a Stanford alum who got in when (as he readily admits) he knew nothing about the school and he had already been rejected by Northwestern.

As I stated . . . random.

curious77

OP was rejected by Northwestern's 6 year medical program, which is way tougher to get in than any undergraduate school, even back then. I am including Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and MIT. So the fact that he was admitted at Standford and not Northwestern's HPME is not in any way random.
Being the parent of a current Stanford student, my observations lead me to conclude that there is a threshold SAT (and I do not mean the mean). Depending on the student's hook, this threshold must be surpassed for the app to be placed in the right pile for further consideration. Different thresholds for different hooks such as athletes etc. When the applicant is your typical A student from a suburban high school, the SAT scores had better be at the top of the range to get the app into the right pile. Then, I agree, it is the essays and the clear expression of the student's passion. What lextalionis calls top academic achievers may get into the right pile, but if they don't show a passion and appear just like every other over-achiever, they probably will not make the accepted list.
OP: Good luck whatever you and your son decide on the SATs. But please make sure he applies to several schools.

cgarrett101@aol.

When D2 scored 2280/1550 on her first SAT try, I recommended she spend her time on other things, rather than re-taking the SAT. She was accepted SCEA to Stanford, without legacy or other "hooks." However, she does love to learn, which was reflected in her rigorous course load as well as her amazing recommendations. I think that, as well as her leadership roles, were most important.

lextalionis

@curious77,

What is random is getting admitted to a top university that you know "nothing about."

Look, we can go back and forth all day about whether admissions at Stanford are random, but all you need is a cursory review of the "rejected" thread to see that is the case.

And, as I stated, my personal experience from the 80's along with the current batch of accepted/rejected applicants only bolsters my conviction that there is no guaranteed route to admission at Stanford. Indeed, I've had Stanford alums tell me that they were above average, but not stellar, students who were happy to get in when higher achieving students at their own high schools were not admitted.

The OP's son already will get a "boost" from being a legacy and if he lives in Minnesota, that will help too.

Best of luck to the OP's son on his quest to get into Stanford --- btw, is that where your son really wants to go?

lextalionis

Wisconsin.

curious77

Stanford Daily Online today: Dean of admissions reports 20% of matriculating freshmen for class of 2011 were legacies.
So prior poster's stat from "years ago", remains relevant.
http://daily.stanford.edu/article/20...orInAdmissions

ezak

I agree for the most part with the "random" idea.
I am currently a sophomore and a double legacy to Stanford, and I have done a lot of research on it in hopes of being accepted.
I think that while high scores on SATs and such are deffinetly a plus and highly recommended, they are in no way required. However I would suggest retaking it once if you did not score above 2300 the first time.
Take this example: I know these two students at my school who both applied to Stanford early. One of them has a 4.06, pretty high scores (but not perfect) on a few SATII's and APs, plays two instruments well, has been on the varsity basketball team for a couple years (but my school is not very good at basketball), helps lead a club, and has legacy. Pretty impressive but not perfect. He's also white.
Another student got a 2400 on his SAT's, perfects on twice as many SATII's and APs, plays two instruments as well, and is high on just about every prestigious club you could imagine (math team (my school's has one of the best in the nation), computer team (same), physics team (same), science bowl, biology olympiad, national honor society...).
Now which one would you expect to get accepted? The second one, right? Wrong! the first got accepted (many say because of legacy) and not the second.
This is why its pretty random, but I think that they place a big emphasis on accepting a person and not a bunch of test scores, which is why you need to really make yourself stand out, through essays and such. They want people who will change the world.
I currently lead a club and have started my own small internet business/company, so I hope this will help me. If anyone has any more suggestions on important things that help get you accepted please share.

numberfour

My husband graduated from Stanford, so when my son applied, we thought he had a decent shot. He is in top 2% of his class, National Merit Scholar, 2300 SAT, Eagle Scout, marching band 4 years, AP Scholar, etc. etc. He was waitlisted in April; found out this week that he will not be admitted. He has accepted a generous scholarship from USC and is very excited. He was initially disappointed by being waitlisted, but quickly "moved on" and didn't seem upset when notified of Stanford's rejection.

curious77

numberfour:
Did your S apply SCEA or regular decision? I have surmised from these boards that legacy, at least in the case of Stanford, is a plus only in the SCEA round.
USC is a great school and a big scholarship makes it even better. Congratulations.

2boysima

Legacy, from Wisconsin, and applying SCEA should give a slight boost....

Disagree with those who say SAT should be retaken. 20 to 30 points on those test will not make a difference, especially at Stanford --- look at the SAT scores of the CC population that were admitted this year. Agree with those who suggest concentration on SAT II's and essays.