<p>Can you just pick a username you like already? Lol.</p>
<p>I like all of em silly.</p>
<p>my goodness that was a quick response.</p>
<p>IM over CC
how sad</p>
<p>idk, all of my friends are annoyed cause I’ve been a bit obsessive the last few weeks. I see nothing wrong with talking to prospective classmates.</p>
<p>Haha whoamg when I read that I thought you mean “I am over CC,” and I was like “no! we only have a week left, don’t be over it!!!”</p>
<p>I agree ungst.
Actually, nobody knows I do CC except my sister, who knows everything.
So…they don’t know/care.</p>
<p>One of my friends from school (eswartz89) actually found a thread I posted here once and posted a few times himself… it was a bit awkward, but as far as I know, no one else knows or cares.</p>
<p>back to whoamp’s post early, I say standardized tests are unfair (as in the ACT/SAT) because some people get prep that others do not, some people just naturally suck at them (myself), and they just bug me.</p>
<p>I once saw a kid in my TOK class checking CC while we were in the library researching something, but I realized he was way too entrenched in the UPenn forum to ever bother finding out who I am.</p>
<p>I just used the prep book myself for the most part and did pretty well on the SAT. I guess people who did well like them and people who didn’t don’t. (lol, “didn’t don’t”)</p>
<p>What’s TOK?</p>
<p>Theory of Knowledge – it’s an IB requirement, sort of like a philosophy class.</p>
<p>Theory of Knowledge…it’s required for IB Diploma and it’s amazing.</p>
<p>Sorry, camelia, great minds think alike.
Which is actually untrue, I think, in many ways.
But we can pretend.</p>
<p>The reason why standardized tests have become so important is due to the discussion we previously had about gpa. The colleges have no way of evaluating grades at all of these schools. Even though they have regional admission officers who can explain the grading at a particular school there is really no way to compare an A at one high school and an A at another. At some high schools it is very easy to get an A. At other high schools a B is considered a high grade for an honors or AP course. Some schools grade on the 100 point scale, the 4.0 point scale, the 5.9 scale. Standardized tests have become so important as an evaluative tool even if they are not fair.
Even the ACT versus SAT thing is not fair. I know of those who did not perform well on the SAT and took it several times. Even taking subject tests. Then they took the ACT once and did a little better, so they took the ACT a second time in the fall and did better than that. Except for schools like Harvard that require the subject II tests also they can apply to schools like Yale and Princeton and send in just the one ACT test score. So basically, these schools dont see that they have taken the SAT I several times, and took SAT II subject tests, they just see the one good ACT score.
Those who send in the SAT as you all know are in a situation where all theere SAT tests and scores are shown. That part does not seem fair.
I do think that most ivy league schools imagine that those who submit just the ACT and are not from states that mostly use the ACT perhaps did not do well on the SAT, but who knows</p>
<p>I think standardized tests are more fair than GPA though. I understand that some people spend thousands of dollars on prep courses and private tutors, but I also know that many of my friends did that and I sat the exam without so much as looking at a SAT prep book and I did much better despite my lack of ability to guess and such. </p>
<p>I don’t know, it’s not fair. The more you (we) talk about every part of admissions, the less fair it seems, but at this point I don’t think it will do any good. It doesn’t really matter if you killed yourself at track practice every single day and the girl next to you lied in the middle of the track and tanned and you both can write the same amount of time on the application. It doesn’t really matter if your friend whose grandfather went to Africa one in 1945 wrote that he was partially African-American on his application. It’s unfair and it’s not OK, but we can’t do anything about it. </p>
<p>Sorry if this seems dismissive, but I’m just becoming increasingly aware of the fact that it’s much more easy to deal with all of this (by this I mean impending decisions) if you accept the things you cannot change.</p>
<p>And I’m thinking about that quote…accepting the things you cannot change, having courage to change the things you can, and having wisdom to know the difference. I don’t know what that’s from and it’s kinda cheesy, but I like it.</p>
<p>True. The reality is that one has an edge if they can stand out in the admission pool of almost 20,000 applicants. The reality is that most of the applicants have compettive SAT scores and grades and once they are in the range it really is not the factor. The reality is that thousands and thousands of applicants have the same extracurriculars that many applicants are indistinguisable from one another. Those who have passion and leadership in things that are unique and or have exceptional talent in the arts ect will stand out. Others will stand out by writing interesting essays, ect. Some other appicants such as URM’s or those coming from an area where not many apply as well as recruited atheltes and development admits will have an advantage. The reality is that each school will look to bring students who will contribute to the community and enhance the school environment.
With so many applicants some amazing ones will get lost in the shuffle. Since it is up t a regional admission officer to advocate for each applicant and there are so many, some will just get lost. Perhaps that it is why it is a crapshoot even for the most compelling applicants who stand out.
I am a firm believer that one has to be their own advocate. It does not matter if one comes from a high school where the guidance counselors have close relationships or not. All applicants should really advocate for themselves. While some will say that top tier schools do not care about applicant interest as they already have very high yields, they do care about inetrest and they are more apt to accept someone if that applicant has articulated that they have something to offer the school community and they are very intersested in attending.</p>
<p>nice post!</p>
<p>ok, i’ll ask this for the last time- does anyone know if Princeton has regional admission officers?</p>
<p>No. Princeton is the only ivy league school I know of that does not have regional admission officers. Each application is reviewed by all the admission officers. I think that this is a plus. At the other ivy leagues regional admission officers are assigned to each geographic area. Some regions have regional admission officers who have been doing this for years. Others states have regional admission officers who may have been doing this for a year or two. Although I am just guessing, I would imagine that those who are more senior and have been doing this for twenty years might have more clout in the admission committee, ie. might be able to advocate more aggressively for those appilcants in their region - but I am just speculating.
When one applies to a school that has regional admission officers the appilcation is read by one regional admission officer and then read by someone else in the regional committee. I think we all have some type of belief that we fill out our applications and the Dean of Admissions and the senior admission officers are all reading them, but at schools where they divide the applicants up by region, that usually is not the case. At most schools the unconnected applicant (ie. not a recruited athlete, legacy or development admit) application is only seen by the two regional people. At the admissions committee, if one gets that far, the regional admission officer briefly according to what I read, sums up each applicant. Thus an entire appliccation is summed up and advocated for by the regional admission officer. I have read that the regional admission officer ranks their appicants from their area. I always wondered if for example a particular state only will have about 25 regular decision applicants accepted, and presents his or her 250 applicant at committee, discussing the ones ranked 1-20 first, if the majority of the others get the same chance to get accepted. I have no idea.
I believe that that at Harvard the Dean of Admissions will read each application when it comes in. The other ivys do not. Princeton does not have regional admission officers so the great thing is that the application you send im will get reviewd by all the admission officers, so it seems</p>
<p>That’s good to hear, I guess.</p>
<p>(A few people I know, know I’m on CC, (I rave on and on about it :)), but very few of them actually bother to come on. :D)</p>
<p>^Where are you getting all this???</p>
<p>I asked my guidance counselor about regional admission officers. I had wanted to email my regional admission officer and was told Princeton does not have regional admission officers. As for the other parts, one of the Harvard thrreads on cc had a thread on what goes on behind admission doors which linked to other articles about the process and especially at University of Pennsylvania where they went into detail.</p>