<p>Hello,</p>
<p>Stanford seems like the school that accepts people that are passionate about a certain subject and do something in that particular subject. For example inventing something new. Would inventing something new and having slightly above average grades get you in?</p>
<p>Thanks,
Duke</p>
<p>“Would inventing something new and having slightly above average grades get you in?”</p>
<p>I would discourage you from thinking this way. There’s no formula for admission, so Stanford can’t really say that doing “X,Y, and Z” (as you’ve done) will get you in. </p>
<p>To actually answer your question…It depends on how much skill your invention requires and the impact it has on the world. Its rarity matters as well. Example of an invention that won’t get you in: iPhone app…this has been tried many times and has resulted in few (if any) acceptances. Example of an invention that will get you in: inventing an artificial brain that detects cancer with 99% accuracy and becomes more accurate with every sample it takes. </p>
<p>You certainly don’t have to invent something to get in. A vast majority of Stanford admits haven’t invented something.</p>
<p>Strive to be the best academically in and out of classroom (not just “above average” as you say), after all, Stanford is FIRST and foremost an ACADEMIC institution looking for the brightest students (they don’t have to SETTLE for mediocrity no matter what your outside talents may be)…and, what you do for extracurricular activity(ies) like “inventing something new” is totally up to YOU…it should not be up to Stanford students/alumni/parents to advise you on such a PERSONAL matter…find your passion whether it be inventing, research, writing, athletics, music, art, whatever…pursue what you love…not what would “look” good in your application.</p>
<p>…the most important point that prospective applicants don’t seem to understand is the following: NO ONE can divine HOW many students will be “inventors” applying with a similar profile as YOURS…so if there are 20 so-called inventors applying in the same application cycle as you…and they all have similar GPA/test scores…which 1 of the 20 (about 5%) do you think they will pick?..hard to say…isn’t it? (by the way I just used 20 as a simple number for calculation purposes…it could easily be hypothetically anywhere between 1 to thousands for all I know)</p>
<p>…the above example of “inventors” can be substituted with top pianists, cellists, violinists, artists, singers, actors, dancers, writers, debaters, app-developers, Intel winners, Olympiad winners, athletes, etc…the BIG unknown is NO ONE knows HOW many of these people with special talents will be applying at any particular application cycle to Stanford in the early round versus the regular round…</p>
<p>…that is why one’s extracurricular endeavors pursued with CONVICTION and PASSION to the FULLEST and HIGHEST levels (…in your particular activity did you separate yourself from others with national, international awards or accolades) plus one’s ESSAYS (best-MOVING ESSAY to worst-GENERIC ESSAY) become the INTANGIBLE components of your application that no one can predict…no one can predict how the admissions officer(s) will be FEELING that day (they may have awoke on the wrong side of the bed) when they read your file…there is and always will be a CERTAIN amount of UNCERTAINTY in college admissions…c’est la vie.</p>
<p>Ok … I did try to invent( and did) invent something … Which i felt was useful, i had good grades, i didn’t make the cut</p>
<p>See u have a really good example now :)</p>
<p>Totally agree with gravitas2. You have to remember that they TYPICALLY use ECs and inventions to make distinctions between people who are HIGHLY qualified students (unless, perhaps, you’re a highly sought after athletic recruit, development case, or fit some extraordinarily rare niche).</p>
<p>I had several friends with truly amazing ECs (i.e., started actual Non-Profit Organizations, spoke several languages, etc.) and/or compelling personal stories who were not admitted because they simply didn’t make the academic cut.</p>
<p>Thank guys. So basically being an inventor has nothing to do with acceptance.</p>
<p>“So basically being an inventor has nothing to do with acceptance.”</p>
<p>This isn’t the point we were all trying to make. The point is that there is no formula for admission to Stanford. In short, “there is nothing, literally nothing, that in and of itself will get you into [Stanford]”. Sound familiar? That’s because it’s from this excellent article:</p>
<p>[Applying</a> Sideways | MIT Admissions](<a href=“http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/applying_sideways]Applying”>Applying Sideways | MIT Admissions) </p>
<p>Just as you can invent a fully-functioning nuclear reactor and not get into MIT, you can be an inventor and not get into Stanford. </p>
<p>If you’re passionate about a subject area and want to invent something dealing with that subject, then by all means you should invent something. Likewise, if you’re passionate about entrepreneurship or inventing for its own sake, then invent something. Invent things because you like making the world a better place. Stanford LOVES people who’re passionate about things and whose applications RADIATE that passion. Inventing can certainly be a way to showcase a passion you have. </p>
<p>Will your invention get you into Stanford or a comparable school? No one knows without seeing your ENTIRE file and comparing it to the files of all other applicants in your particular year. It certainly might help, but if Stanford suspects that you’re doing it just to get in then it’ll likely be more of a hindrance. </p>
<p>In short, don’t do things just to get into Stanford. Do what you are passionate about, do it really well, and the rest will fall into place.</p>