<p>I have close ties to Stanford and know people at other top schools. I’ve asked a number of faculty and administrators from HYPSM the following question: If your school admitted kids based only on academics, what percent of your freshman class would be here? It is amazing that most have given me the same answer: 1/3. Those that didn’t give me this exact number gave me a number pretty close. (Caltech is very different.)</p>
<p>At all of these schools, including Stanford, it can be helpful to think of the undergraduates as falling roughly into thirds. The top 1/3 are lights out academically. Very high board scores (certainly all over 750, many with straight 800s including subject tests), super high grades, many with national or international academic awards: International Mathematical Olympiad, Intel Science, National Latin Exam, Concord Review, etc. I think when most people think of the typical Stanford undergrad, they think of a kid from this group.</p>
<p>But this in only 1/3 of the entering class. Consider the following. The Class of 2018 Stanford admitted only 9% of the applicants with 800 on their math SAT. Yet 25% of the entering students had math SAT scores below 700. There were a few admits who had math scores below 600.</p>
<p><a href=“http://admission.stanford.edu/pdf/counselor_newsletter/cn_fall14.pdf”>Page Not Found : Stanford University;
<p><a href=“Stanford Common Data Set | University Communications”>http://ucomm.stanford.edu/cds/2014</a></p>
<p>If academics were the only criteria, virtually everyone at Stanford would have at least 750 on the math SAT. </p>
<p>So who are the other kids at a school like Stanford?</p>
<p>The next 1/3 of the entering class “isn’t chopped liver” (as someone from the top 1/3 told me). These are kids with very strong academic records but not the absolute highest. They usually have some very unusual extra-curricular achievement, and this can be the decisive reason why they were admitted. I know one kid who falls into this group who started his own profitable business. I know another kid who was on the school board in this community as a high school student. After graduating from Yale he joined the Marines and was sent to Afghanistan where he saw action. He is now at a top 10 (but not top 5) business school.</p>
<p>Then there is the remaining 1/3. These aren’t bad kids by any means. Many will accomplish much in their lives. But they aren’t the strongest academically. Why are they admitted to a place like Stanford or Harvard (the two schools I know best)? There is always a reason, but that reason varies. The biggest reason is a recruited athlete. Not all recruited athletes fall into this category, but many, probably most, do. At one time the NCAA published the SAT scores of varsity athletes by team. Stanford and Georgetown had the biggest gap between the recruited athletes and the regular students. At Stanford women’s basketball had the lowest SAT of any varsity team. A current freshman at Stanford told me “there is a pretty big gap between most of the varsity athletes at Stanford and the regular students.” There are also a few kids of celebrity parents. There are also URM and kids with unusual challenges (very poor, broken families, severe illness, etc.). Then there are a few kids from very wealthy families.</p>
<p>People—especially applicants—should realize that top schools (with the notable exception of Caltech) do not admit solely based on academics. So yes, there will be kids with relatively low boards and grades who are admitted, and you will not be admitted even though your grades and boards are much higher. That’s reality.</p>
<p>Is the focus on non-academics (for at least 2/3 of the admitted class) good or bad? It depends on whom you talk with. Some people love such a “holistic” admission process. It certainly gives a lot more power to the admissions staff. Others say that a school like Stanford should focus exclusively on academics. Caltech has gone this route with all of its students. So have Oxford and Cambridge. The other top U.S. schools (including Stanford) have gone this route for graduate admissions but not for undergraduate admissions. Whether you agree or disagree with this approach, it is unlikely to change in the near future.</p>
<p>Best of luck to all of you who are applying.</p>