Chances for Princeton ED

rattle1
Sun, 07 Nov 2004 08:39:22 +0000

Mahajan,

You stated that you do not know rattle1. Well, I am quite familar with the admissions process in the Ivies. I am an observer of this process for several decades. I personaly know the admissions director of an Ivy and several members of the adcom. I also know many alumni interviewers, all of whom were my former schoolmates. My wife and I, collectively hold 4 degrees from 2 Ivy schools. Many other members of our family (neices, nephews and cousins, and grandparents) are graduates of the Ivies and the elite colleges such as MIT and Stanford. In addition to being a life-long friend of two of the Trustees of an Ivy, since they were my former schoolmates, I follow the admission process at these schools from an insider’s perspective. I have knowledge of the stats of admitted applicants compared to the rejected applicants, disaagregated by racial and etnic groups, from reliable sources. These stats are never released to the public.

Again, the answer to your question, “What are my chances for Princeton ED?” The probability or “chance” of your admission to Princeton is greater than 50%. Your odds for acceptance is MUCH BETTER than the rest of the ED applicant pool. The only factor that may lower these odds is that you are Asian American, subjected to diversity goals or defacto racial quotas of Princeton, limiting the Asian American percentage to about 12%, simply because they are overrepresented for their 4% of the population. The percentage of Asian American applicants in the total ED applicant pool is MORE THAN 12%. That’s why Asian Americans are admitted at lower rates than any other racial and ethnic group, despite being more stellar in every sense than the average admitted applicants. Asian American are required to meet a higher standard of achievement than whites, blacks and latinos, in order to be admitted. This may be the overriding factor, if you were to be rejected, because there are too many stellar Asian American applicants, at a much higher proportion than the other applicant groups. Asian Americans, on average are a more stellar applicant group than the other applicant groups. Asian American applicants are accepted at a much lower rate than the white applicants despite having the same stellar records, characteristics, moral character, interview ratings, work ethic, community service, and special talents. That is to say, the rejected Asian American applicant has even more stellar characteristics than the admitted whites, because of BIASES AND STEREOTYPICAL IMAGES of the adcoms against the Asian American applicants. Studies at Brown and Stanford have proven this.

Just considering the SAT I score ALONE, the 1600 scorer had a 50% of admission to Harvard, which is 5 times the admission rate for the whole applicant group at 10%, which had an average SAT I score of 1430. You can obviously see that, the applicant who scored 1600 had a TREMENDOUS ADVANTAGE in admissions to Harvard over the average applicant to Harvard, who scored 1430. Harvard’s SAT I average is approaching 1500. The top 25 percentile of Harvard’s freshman class (400 out of 1600) scored from 1590 to 1600 last year. This year, out of 1.5 million SAT I test takers, only about 950 in the nation scored 1600. Assuming that over 500 of these 1600 SAT I scorers applied to Harvard this year, and that over 50% of them are admitted, there are probably about 300 SAT I scorers of 1600 in Harvard’s incoming class of 1600 freshman. Your chances are Princeton are even higher at Princeton and Brown, because they are a little less selective than Harvard in the pecking order of selectivity.

Your may also ask, “Why does Harvard (or Princeton) admit over 50% of 1600 SAT I scorers?” Well, because 1600 scorers, on the average as a group, also possess the other characteristics that Harvard is looking for, such as higher GPAs with more difficult courses, special talents, character, creativity, hard work ethic, etc. than the the 1400 scorers, on the average. That is to say, the 1600 scorers meet and exceed the holistic standards for admission more than the 1400 scorers, at a much higher rate. The 1600 scorer is simply MORE STELLAR in every sense, both statistically and holistically, with more talent, creativity and even communication and personal skills, on the average. That is why the 1600 score is admitted at over a 50% rate at Harvard and Princeton and even at higher rates at the lesser competitive Ivies and elite colleges. Some elite colleges admit 1600 scorers at an 80% to over a 90% rate and even at a 100% rate.

As far as the the importance of the interview in the admissions process, it is less important than you may think. Alumni interviews serve to complement the application, not as the determining factor for admission. In many cases, it simply serves as just another piece of info. In many instances, the applicant did not have an interview, because the interview is OPTIONAL. Also, the alumni interviewer, is not privy to the applicant’s file or the adcoms ratings of the applicant and is not involved in the direct decisions of the adcom.

Stanford’s adcom does not even recommend an alumni interview and places little importance with it. The vast majority of Stanford’s applicants don’t have an interview. Some students may be interviewed by members of the adcoms themselves or with special on-campus interviews, and the relative importance of the adcom interview varies with the different schools and even the desirability of the applicant, i.e. an athlete, a URM, a legacy or a rich and famous VIP applicant. These special categories of applicants, may warrant special considerations and preferential treatment, and that is why they are granted special interviews.