erm, guys, 4.0s mean nothing at all so stop freaking out if someone gets in with a 3.4. anyone who applies to stanford won't be some dumb nonsense. obviously a 3.4 with a difficult courseload is wayyyy better than taking an easy courseload and getting a 4.
rofl stone you have one bad temper. Not everything is about studying... Essays should be very important because academics are just stats, there is no personality. I know so many people at my school who work their @ss off. They stay up studying until 2 like every single day, but they are not that smart they are just studious. College is not all about education. It's more about experiencing different ways of life and growing as an individual. Get over yourself. I admire Stanford for looking past people's grades and SAT scores.
Yeah, but why should a personality shown in an essay dictate whether you get in or not? I know it adds to diversity and ****, but does an essay really say whether you do or do not have that personality...? Doesn't it really just reveal whether you can orchestrate some 1000 character short answer well enough to gain applause?
Imo, if writing a "good" essay means writing one from the heart, then that's fine. But truly, what writing a "good" essay has become is writing one with a complex idea, complex metaphors, and other complexities that are really unnecessary... it doesn't always reveal personality. I know some smart kids with bubbly/intellectual/absolutely wonderful personalities that can't execute well-written or "good" essays - should that keep them out of Stanford?
Obviously they use interviews to sort out this type of problem out... yet interviews are not weighed the same as essays.
^ i agree with you. Interviews should be weighted more and that essays aren't the best way to show personality, I am just saying academic stats are not that efficient to show the person who you really are.
I know you think you got in by exhibiting some superhuman passion, but that's simply not true. Amongst good runners (good, not elite), 50 miles a week is standard. And I wouldn't elevate your running know-how above the average baseball stat enthusiast or dedicated football fan-player. Even if you had ran yourself into the ground and memorized the Nike Footlocker roster, this EC is decent but wouldn't have given you an edge unless you were state champ or the likes.
I would be real interested to read your essay. Otherwise, I'll have to attribute this one to pure luck.
stanford is a crapshoot, but thats what makes it cool. I hate the retardedness of "studying you ass off". Ie. the SAT is a study your ass off kind of deal. If you have the patience to study, then you can get a high score. Its apparent to me that Stanford doesn't care if you are able to "brute force" your scores. It appears they want unique, passionate individuals, not driven by the same things everyone else is.
jennyx, don't send ur essays as people will distort/copy them. Just write your own essays guys; if your asking, then you obviously don't have true passion for something and don't fit into Stanford.
To the OP who thinks 4.0 GPA is what gets you into college, you sir are wrong. Colleges, especially Stanford, don't want people who only study and get good grades, they want people who can not only maintain good grades but are also outgoing and will contribute to the campus.
To RayAllen333: lol I am assuming you are a guy.. your times are absolutely terrible.. 19:15 for 3 miles? lol that is a great time for a girl but still not the level of D1 colleges like Stanford etc (for a girl).. that time is absolutely terrible for a boy. And quit all your "if I ran 50 mpw I would get injured", anyone can run 50 mpw (especially a boy), you're just a pansy.
To ee33ee: Depends what you're talking about bud. I'd have to say that 50 mpw for a girl is pretty legit. Emily Lipari, 11th at Footlocker Nationals (All American) only runs like 30-35 mpw but is very consistent. Top elite girls like Hasay run around 50-55 mpw but she also cross trains with swimming etc.. maybe the OP does that as well. Girls like Claire Durkin, 5th at FLN 2007, who was considered "higher mileage" would run in the 50s and I believe Laurynne Chetelat, the girl who almost beat Hasay in the 3200 last spring also runs about that much in college now (coincidentally, she is at Stanford )
And state champ is all relative too. If you're a state champ in California, that is a much bigger deal than a state champ in.. Maine or something like that. Especially in track, I believe the times that don't make the California state meet could win state meets in other states (for example, a boy who runs a 9:14 2 mile or a girl who runs a 10:55 2 mile which are about equal might not be able to make the state meet in California but would win the state meet in many, many states..).
And by the way, what the heck is "Nike Footlocker"? Mixing up the two meets I see..
And with the amount of people asking for essays, it would be stupid to send the essay to all of these people... jus sayin.