How many applicants actually falsify information when applying to top colleges?

[silverturtle]

<p>

@iceui2

Your recommendations should for the most part summarize the things you’ve been doing in high school. If there’s a discrepancy, then it raises warning flags and the applicant won’t be admitted.

</p>

<p>Are you suggesting that, if a recommender doesn’t mention every activity that a student claims to be involved with, the school will presume that the applicant is lying and, in turn, not admit him or her? </p>

<p>

That being said, most Ivy-caliber students won’t make up stuff on their application because there’s really no need to.

</p>

<p>What do you mean? Given the ultra-competitive nature of admissions at these schools, there probably is a significant need for many of the applicants to falsify information if they want to have a decent shot.</p>

<p>

@2CHiLLaXiN

Sometimes, they’ll just think that something seems suspicious and take it to be a lie.

</p>

<p>I don’t think suspicions translate to the assumption of fraudulence; they merely prompt investigation. Having 200 hours per week of activities isn’t suspicious; it’s impossible.</p>

<p>

The person claims to be a member of all of these activities, but there is no consistency between the activities.

</p>

<p>This probably describes the majority of Ivy League applicants to a large extent.</p>

<p>

Or maybe these activities are never metioned again, whether in recommendations or in essays and such.

</p>

<p>It’s completely conceivable that the majority of many applicants’ activities could go unreferenced outside of the activities section. There is only one essay that explicitly prompts about EC’s and it asks for mention of only one, and many recommenders are exposed to only a slice of an applicant’s involvements. </p>

<p>

Or maybe the applicant is a really bad liar and says that they led all of these events put doesn’t have any solid, credible evidence to show for it.

</p>

<p>What exactly do you mean by “evidence”?</p>