<p>While all top adcoms deny having feeder high schools there are certain schools that have multiple students accepted every year while other high schools have not had a student accepted in 20 years. Students from about 20-30 percent of US high schools have next to zero chance of meeting the profile needed to gain admission. These tend to be in low income urban and rural areas. When you look at the high schools with annual success in placing students in top universities they tend to be elite privates, magnets and top publics in affluent suburbs of large metro areas. Where you live and attend high school does matter.</p>
<p>
You need to consider the difference in both selectivity of the high school and number of applicants to Stanford. For example, I mentioned TJ earlier in this thread. TJ is a magnet HS in Virginia with an acceptance rate of ~15%. Acceptance to TJ is based on GPA, test scores, LOR, essays, similar to the criteria colleges use. Students attending TJ are among the best in the region, based on a criteria similar to what colleges use, so it’s not surprising that they have a large number of acceptances at selective colleges compared to other HSs in the region. However, this larger number of acceptances does not indicate that a particular applicant who attended TJ has a better chance of acceptance than a similar applicant who attended a different public HS. </p>
<p>It’s similar for number of applications. Top students who attend elite private HSs are far more likely to apply to elite private colleges than students who attend basic public HSs. So one would expect elite private HSs to have a larger number acceptances to elite private colleges that one would expect based on the academic quality of the student body. However, this does indicate that a particular applicant who attended the elite private HS has a better chance of acceptance than a similar applicant who attended a different HS.</p>
<p>Stanford makes a strong effort to admit students from a variety of backgrounds, including those who do not fit the typical elite private/magnet HS background. ~15% of this year’s entering class were first generation college students. ~17% received Pell Grants (Pell Grant recipients have a median income of $30k/yr). Both groups are unlikely to have an elite HS background. </p>
<p>Students from backgrounds with less opportunities sometimes are accepted with weaker stats than many on this site would expect, suggesting than Stanford considers their more difficult background. For example, a few years ago, a poster on CC who attended a basic HS in an area of Stockton that had noteworthy crime was a member of this forum. He overcame a difficult background including a teenage mother, incarcerated father, and relative being murdered while he was in college. His test scores were towards the top of his HS, but were not great, including a 24/25 math/science ACT. He was accepted to Stanford as a first generation college student, graduated with top honors, and became a city council member in Stockton in an effort to improve his home town. More about his background is at [About</a> Michael](<a href=“http://mdtubbs.com/about/]About”>About Michael – Michael Tubbs) .</p>
<p>I was accepted to Stanford from a basic, public HS that only had 1-2 HYPSM acceptances per year, and had no prior students matriculating to Stanford that I was aware of. However, the HS was in upstate NY, so it likely had few Stanford apps compared to HYPM and few that would have chosen Stanford over a closer, highly selective private colleges in the northeast.</p>
<p>There are sooooo many amazing students out there coming out of average high schools it just seems odd a university that values diversity admits multiple students from the same high schools year, after year, after year, after year, after year… It seems odd a university that values diversity admits so many students from the least diverse high schools in the country. I guess diversity is only important in college.<br>
It would be cool if Stanford said next year we are only going to admit students from high schools that have not been represented for at least 10 years.</p>
<p>You have to realize that each region has a “reader” who presents the applicant to the committee. If school A has 10 kids (or 1) that go and do well every yeast and school B has never had a student go then Kids from school A have a much higher chance of being accepted. </p>
<p>I have had a Dean of admission from a top school tell me that it is rare to accept someone who does not WOW them from an unknown school</p>
<p>
I’m guessing the comment above relates to the recent article in the alumni magazine that was linked in this forum. Note that it mentioned 5 admission officers dedicated to the LA area last year as an example, not 1 reader per region. The article also mentioned that decisions are made by a majority vote, including 3 or more admissions officers + either the dean or assistant dean of admissions. If the decision is not clear cut, then the applicant moves to a larger group for further review. It’s not a setup where, if the part-time reader assigned to your region doesn’t like your HS, you don’t have a chance. </p>
<p>
I previously analyzed the RD thread of this forum and was able to correctly predict the vast majority of admissions decisions among this sample group (I realize it is a biased, non-representative group), without even considering anything about high school type or acceptance history from that HS. The more surprising acceptances tended to come from non-magnet public HSs, rather than ones I’d expect to have a history of many acceptances each year. I suspect this relates to considering how well the applicant “has taken advantage of what was available to you in your school and community”, as described on the admissions website.</p>
<p>
I believe the article said each applicant is only guaranteed one reader (legacies are guaranteed two). Perhaps, though, each application is reviewed by one reader but then important details are filtered out and the applicant is submitted to a majority vote? I didn’t catch that part, but I was skimming…</p>
<p>Data,
This is not from the article but from being involved</p>
<p>The readers are not “part-time”, but full members of the committee. And yes LA has more readers than (eg) Kentucky. The reason is beneficial to the applicant as they know the schools in their area, To my understanding, most schools do this although some smaller ones have everybody read.</p>
<p>Legacies also get an assistant Dean read and “super-legacies” (large donors, heavily involved in alumni affairs) also have the Dean read. Supposedly all on the committee have an equal vote.</p>
<p>The reader does present the application to the group - so if he/she does not like the applicant (or feels that an “A” at their school is not the same as an “A” at another) they obviously don’t get presented with as much enthusiasm - but they are pretty honest with that bias)</p>
<p>It is a majority vote: accept, defer (also to larger group), reject.</p>
<p>However, while Richard is trying to change it, it remains that an applicant from an unknown school really needs the WOW factor over one from a known/proven school!</p>
<p>
The Stanford Daily article at [Stanford</a> Daily | Office of Undergraduate Admissions expanding to meet rising interest](<a href=“http://www.stanforddaily.com/2012/09/28/office-of-undergraduate-admissions-expanding-to-meet-rising-interest/]Stanford”>Office of Undergraduate Admissions expanding to meet rising interest) states the majority of readers were “part-time” in 2012-13, as quoted below:</p>
<p>“Last year, the office employed 28 part-time readers. That number will swell to 38 this year, according to the University’s 2012-13 budget report.”</p>
<p>
With a ~5% acceptance rate and tens of thousands of applicants, the vast majority of accepted students need to have something on their app that WOWs. When I reviewed the RD thread, this pattern was evident in the high correlation with acceptance and ECs/awards that wowed. Apps who had great stats and not much else that really stood out were almost universally rejected, regardless of HS. And apps who had great stats + something else that was noteworthy on a state/national level were usually accepted, regardless of type of HS. Various other factors, such as hook vs non-hook, also had a clear impact; but HS did not have an obvious impact. I realize that this group is not representative of the full app pool. Nevertheless, if name of HS has such a big impact on admissions decisiosn, I’d expect there to be a clear impact among admissions decisions for members of this site that would be noticeable in admission results threads.</p>
<p>Also Data…excluding the top national/international level recruited athletes Stanford gets every year…each year there are about 100-150 truly WOW “walks on water” applicants …creme de la creme…that Stanford and Harvard in particular seem to fight for…they call them TROPHY students (the institutions are proud to say he/she attends here)…the ones you can google their names to easily ascertain their prowess…</p>
<p>…and, as I have said before…MOST of these students do not divulge their credentials on College Confidential…their achievements go even beyond what many here on CC think is noteworthy…</p>
<p>…food for thought.</p>
<p>Data, arguing semantics: They are full members of the committee - may not work full time, but are same year after year. </p>
<p>My quote on HS from senior member of ad com and from ad com I am on at a of different Univ - unfortunate facts of life. What is a GPA of 5 (on 4 pt) from school A, B which can’t go higher than a 4, etc. A 4.0 at say Exeter is harder than that at my public high school.</p>
<p>Lots of data that SAT/ACT not equal for all students (note more and more schools are not using them)</p>
<p>
They are called “part-time” in both referenced articles and various other sources. “Part-time” may mean something related to committee membership to you, but that is not the standard definition. The articles also discuss the “competitive selection” for hiring readers, implying that some of the part-time readers are new. Or more obviously, Stanford had significantly more readers last year than they have ever had before, making it impossible for all of them to have been the same ones from the previous year.
Different colleges have different admissions policies, sometimes very different. One cannot assume that that admissions policies and criteria weighting used at another college is also used at Stanford.
Nobody said GPAs are equivalent in different HSs. Stanford recalculates GPA according to their own system and also considers course selection and how the HS grades students when evaluating GPA.</p>
<p>Applications at Stanford are read first by territory, and then at least one or maybe two other individual readers examine each and every file. Then the file moves to a committee of at least four admissions officers, and depending on where the applicant falls in the process, the file may even come to a committee of the entire staff. -</p>
<p>The territory readers are not temps</p>
<p>It’s correct that the admissions officers who are assigned to territories are not temps, but the part-time readers can also be assigned to a territory (some would call this a territory reader) and can do first reads, if experienced. Quotes from the ad Stanford put out for hiring new part-time readers for 2013-14 are below:</p>
<p>“the Seasonal Reader will work with one or more Admission Officers in reviewing applications received within a territory”</p>
<p>“The Seasonal Reader will be primarily charged with conducting second reads on assigned applications but may be enlisted to assist with first-reads”</p>
<p>Data
Your post strengthens my original argument. If the reader does not know school A nor the history of school A, it is harder for a student from that school.</p>
<p>I used to visit hundreds of schools during the “off period” both to promote and to learn what their grades meant and how hard their courses are and what an “A” really meant. Yes, hopefully that data is submitted by the school with the transcripts - but first hand knowledge helps.
The bottom line is that without the WOW factor, it is harder for a kid to get in from an unknown school as opposed to eg Exeter.</p>
<p>It depends how you look at it. Stanford considers the available opportunities within their high school and environment when evaluating students. If a student attends an unknown HS that only offers 1 AP class, he is not expected to take as many advanced classes as a student attending Exeter. I have a relative who was admitted to Stanford without taking a single honors or AP class because she grew up in a small, rural farming community where different level classes within the same grade were not offered. If a student at Exeter took her same course schedule without advanced classes that student would have far less chance of being admitted. Similarly it’s most likely going to be easier for a student at an unknown HS to maintain a high class rank than at Exeter and most likely going to be easier to stand out among his classmates. The relative I mentioned and her 3 siblings were all valedictorians of their HS. This isn’t as impressive as it sounds, considering that hardly any students at the HS took classes seriously or planned on attending college after graduating. Instead they planned to stay in the farming community. It would undoubtedly be more difficulty to achieve a high class rank at Exeter. The non-hook students I’m aware of who were accepted with weak stats generally came from public HSs that did not have a history of Stanford admissions, rather than well known privates that get many admissions each year.</p>
<p>For example, I was accepted to Stanford several years ago from an unknown HS without hooks. I had a 3.4/3.5 HS GPA and 500 verbal SAT (800 math). One of the areas that helped me stand out was I had the initiative to take a good number of college classes at external universities beyond the level that was offered at my HS and achieved A’s in all such classes. Most of the classes I took at external universities are offered to students at Exeter (Multivariable Calculus, Linear Algebra,…) within the HS, so it wouldn’t be anywhere near as helpful for admissions for an Exeter student to take the same class schedule as I did. It’s a similar idea with LORs.</p>
<p>Stanford also makes a point of looking for persons with a variety of backgrounds who bring something unique to the community. This can be advantageous for persons who grew up in an environment that differs from most apps, including not attending a top private/magnet. For example, there was a recent poster on this forum who mentioned that her unhooked daughter was admitted with an 1890 SAT and haven taken only 1 AP class. She grew up in a rural community and was heavily involved in Future Farmers of America. I expect that she brought a unique voice to Stanford with her unique background.</p>
<p>That said, I’d expect that student attending the well known private HS who thrives in the challenging environment with more opportunities generally has the advantage. However, if he does not do very well, then I’d expect most would be better off from an admissions standpoint had they remained at their local HS. As I mentioned earlier, the RD thread with decisions for members of this site does not show an obvious advantage either way, like it does for various other factors (ECs, awards, URM status, …), suggesting it does not have a huge impact among forum members.</p>
<p>Data
You had the wow
But agree with conclsion</p>