<p>@texaspg, You don’t even know me, so how will you judge my academics?</p>
<p>I keep bringing it back to the URM situation, because I have seen 6 people over the past 4 years at my HS and other high schools in my area, students admitted to Stanford and Harvard who you’d think would have no shot.</p>
<p>And, college admissions is NOT even based on merit. Because if it was, they wouldn’t consider your skin color in the admissions process, your socioeconomic background, the state which you are located in, your essays wouldn’t mean a thing. So, if it was really merit based then they would look at GPA, Course Rigor, test scores, and Awards. That’s it. End of story.</p>
<p>Let’s both post our stats and let’s see who has better academics!</p>
<p>And, we’ll find out if my academics are good enough in about a week or so, when they release decisions</p>
<p>I was asking you a question! You said if a coach wants somebody admitted he or she can make it happen! Then, I asked you so if a prospective athlete had an 18 on the ACT and 2.0 GPA he or she could get admitted to Stanford because the coach wanted them to. I never said anybody at Stanford had a 2.0 or an 18. So don’t put words in my mouth.</p>
<p>I also wrote “P.S. I am not trying to insinuate URM’s are underachievers.” So, learn how to read before you criticize someone.</p>
<p>Those links you posted revolve around athletics, show me something academic they’ve done.</p>
<p>@StanfordCS, yes this is a discussion thread, but you have to realize that the purpose of this thread is for Stanford REA applicants to get to know each other. You and texaspg are disrupting this process since the majority of the applicants here is rejecting this topic. this is not Rush10’s thread but it’s also not yours.</p>
<p>do you seriously think colleges are reading these threads, when they hardly have enough time to give their full attention to the actual applications? be real</p>
<p>Yes, I do. If you go back and read some results thread, someone on there made there CC username as same as their email account, the student was accepted, and he posted Stanford made some sort of mistake on CC. Then, in his hand written letter he got from Stanford they said “Despite your assertions on College Confidential, we did not make a mistake”</p>
<p>stanfordCS - I am a parent. I don’t accept you making belittling statements about URMs. </p>
<p>If you believe you have better credentials than an african american kid who was school president, number 2 in her class of 700, community leader, but who just happened to be best high school basketball player of the year than so be it.</p>
<p>Rush - I will give you a reference point for waitlists if you are still reading - 3 years ago, someone i know personally was waitlisted SCEA by Stanford - 2nd in class, national merit, 2400, 36. Got in RD but also got into Harvard, Princeton, Columbia and Penn.</p>
<p>There’s a difference between the members of a thread rejecting a thread and ignoring it. Just because they’re not partaking in that particular topic of discussion doesn’t mean that they want it no longer to be an point of argument. It just means they have nothing to see. Ignorance is not tacit rejection.</p>
<p>@StanfordCS: From the USABasketball article:</p>
<p>“The 6-3 forward from Cy-Fair High School outside of Houston served as her school’s student body president and ranked No. 2 among a class of nearly 700 students. She is a member of the National Honor Society, Spanish National Honor Society, Fellowship of Christian Athletes and the Superintendent Student Leadership Committee. Accepted to Stanford, Ogwumike wants to earn her law degree and an MBA. She’s the co-founder of ‘Step Up 2 A Reason,’ a fund-raising event to benefit underprivileged families in Houston. She follows soccer and easily rattles off names of players from the Ivory Coast, France and Argentina. She reads Shakespeare for fun. And she plays the piano. Oh yeah, she also earned 2010 National Player of the Year honors from Gatorade, USA Today and Parade Magazine.”</p>
<p>She’s not academically unqualified. </p>
<p>Any assertions should be backed up by evidence or, at least, consensus. You continually fail to garner either, and I fail to see why anyone on this thread should take anything you say seriously at all.</p>
<p>@solemn
thanks for the point, but the fact that people are ignoring this thread because “they have nothing to see” shows that StanfordCS’s and texaspg’s argument is not beneficial to this thread. by beneficial i mean nothing serious. i want to come here and read stuff that’s interesting and amusing. im sure others want this too. this argument is doing the opposite.</p>