<p>Good news – I just heard today that my application for U.S. permanent resident status was officially approved! 
(I’m a Canadian citizen) This should make FA less of a problem…</p>
<p>^ Congrats! Applying as a US citizen rather than an international certainly doesn’t hurt either.</p>
<p>^ Lol, that’s very true. 
Are permanent residents and citizens counted equally in the process?</p>
<p>^I believe they are</p>
<p>I’m a hopeful - but I think I’ll be nothing more than a hopeful.</p>
<p>My stats are just inferior to some of those crazy stats… having written this, now I’m not even sure if I should apply or not. It’s definitely my dream school, though :(</p>
<p>^</p>
<p>It’s better to apply and get rejected than to not apply and think, “what if…”</p>
<p>that’s true… :)</p>
<p>^ plus Stanford is (at least percieved to be) more of a “crapshoot” than other very top tier schools. So for someone who doesn’t have extremely impressive stats but has some sort of other interesting thing about them, Stanford wouldn’t be the worst “dream school” to have.</p>
<p>^I think that is more myth than reality. If you go to the decision threads of any of the very top schools, you’ll see the same kind of hand-wringing and disappointment (and sometimes, anger) by students, or friends of students, with amazing stats who were nevertheless rejected, and the same kinds of posts about students with somewhat-less-amazing stats who were admitted. All of these schools (with the possible exception of Caltech) take into account URM status, first-generation-to-college/low income status, geographic and ethnic diversity, and a host of other factors in addition to stats. The bottom line is, once a student is academically qualified for a top-tier school and thus can pass the initial bar, other factors will come into play. Sometimes the “other factor” will be academic superstardom, sometimes it will be any number of other things that make a student stand out.</p>
<p>Good luck, 2015 hopefuls!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, but this is even more pervasive at Stanford.</p>
<p>^ As evidenced by what?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>During an information session, a Stanford admissions officer indicated that they value subjective elements even more than the Ivy League schools, and their lower score ranges (despite comparable selectivity) support this.</p>
<p>The score ranges are only incrementally different, and I would evaluate the admissions officer’s comment with the understanding that his main objective, like that of all admissions officers, is to encourage ever-higher numbers of applications. (Also, Stanford has a different approach to recruiting and providing scholarship support to top athletes, which may have some bearing on the small score-range differential, though I know that Stanford’s athletes tend to also have good academic qualifications, if not typically in the top quartile for the class.)</p>
<p>And I’m certainly not trying to discourage anyone who is considering applying–chances of admission are 0% without an application. I just think everyone should be aware that all of the top schools, save Caltech, have significant “lottery” and “hook” components, and are much more similar in their approaches than they are different.</p>
<p>Basically this means they will get more applications, which = good for them. My scores are mediocre at best, but knowing Stanford, I will be applying due to the subjective elements.</p>
<p>^Might as well–you can’t win if you don’t play. My point is not that Stanford doesn’t apply subjective elements in the decision process, but rather that all the top schools do (except for the much more numbers-driven Caltech, which practices no affirmative action of any kind).</p>
<p>I’m a big fan of Caltech admissions; unfortunately, I’m not interested in the school lol.</p>
<p>Hello fellow CC’ers! I need some advice…</p>
<p>Stanford is my number one choice this coming year as I apply to college. I really want to apply Early Action, but that would prevent me from applying to any of my other schools early. Most of the other schools I am applying to do not restrict me from applying to other schools early if I apply early to theirs.
So, basically, my choices are to apply to Stanford early and let it be my only Early Action school, or apply to 3-4 of my other schools early and apply to Stanford RD. </p>
<p>Any suggestions?</p>
<p>^ It would help to know more about your situation, but in general I recommend waiting until RD rather than electing for a restrictive EA program. If, for example, you need to turn around a downward grade trend first semester senior year, applying RD is especially important. Just keep this in mind: there is no advantage beyond potentially early notification in applying early to Yale or Stanford.</p>
<p>silverturtle’s words are correct in most situations</p>
<p>for me, i knew stanford was my #1 by far and i really wanted to know early, so i applied early.</p>
<p>anyone planning to apply without sat 2?</p>