Well, the real fact is that although she should take the SAT if she’s applying to Stanford, it’s actually a waste of her time. Stanford will not reject her based on her SAT scores, whatever they may be, nor will any other college that is lucky enough to receive an application from her. It’s probably best for her to go through the motions like everybody else, but that’ all it is.
Many top colleges accept guest students without any credentials at all. However, if someone is applying to a specific program like an undergraduate freshman or graduate school, the paperwork needs to be met.
If this young lady said can I come and hang out for an year in your school in one of the departments, there is no school in the world which will turn her down and in fact pay her for her services. However, I believe when they apply to a school, the minimum paperwork needs to be complete at most schools. Interestingly enough, the US schools would admit her without any of the credentials she is acquiring in UK (O levels, A levels whatever), with a simple transcript from her current high school and an SAT score.
@Hunt, arguably. Same is true for a 5 star football recruit. Though the same reasoning can be made about making her (and the 5 star player) fill out an application.
So should Stanford admit her (and Michelle Wie, etc.) even if they don’t submit an application?
Sure, if that’s what it takes to get her to enroll. I wouldn’t expect them to publicize exactly how it was accomplished, though.
@Hunt, maybe it’s a different philosophy, but I disagree. If it’s my alma mater, I do not believe that they should disregard the process they have for everyone to get people to enroll, no matter how special they are. I want people who want to be at that school and will put a tiny bit of effort in towards attending.
BTW, I’m 99% certain that Stanford requires everyone to submit an app and won’t cut corners for anyone.
Still, youngest Nobel Prize winner in history is staggeringly more impressive than Michelle Wie, Tiger Woods, Malia Obama or your regular Intel prize winner as an applicant.
How about if they fill out the application for her and just get her to sign it?
I understand the sentiment, but I have to believe that the process involved in arranging college attendance for somebody like this (or for a president’s child, or a really top athlete, etc.) is just entirely different than the process for normal applicants. They probably agree to go through the motions, but those have little to do with the actual process when the college is courting the applicant.
Since she didn’t ask for or Stanford denied the privilege to be exempt from SAT, the whole discussion is kind of empty. It is interesting to see some people are adamant that she be granted privilege. Should people be above a simple procedure? Does that mean following simple procedures amounts to admitting that you are no special? Is that why Hillary Clinton insisted on a personal server? Is personal worth now defined by how much you can evade general rules? The more you can defy, the greater your prestige?
I believe that the Stanford admissions office makes it very clear that it has discretion over any and all of its so-called “requirements.” Semi-stupid athletes get in all the time under “discretion.” You can believe that Stanford will waive whatever it can to get this girl to enroll, but it hardly seems a “fit,” as California is not only a vastly different culture than Pakistan’s, but an an entirely different culture to the rest of America.
It’s not a matter of privilege. It’s simply understanding the different between a buyer and a seller. Most college applicants are eager to buy what the college has to sell; they compete for admission to a place like Stanford. For this girl, the situation is reversed. She’s the seller, and colleges will compete mightily to get her to attend. They will send a private jet plane to bring her to campus for a tour if that’s what it takes–it’s silly to quibble about the application or the SAT. I don’t know about Clinton, but I suspect that Trump would understand this pretty well.
@sorghum, that’s great. I still don’t see why that should excuse her or anyone from doing the bare minimum required to complete an application.
Maybe I’m just not in the habit of bowing down to mere mortals, no matter how impressive they may be.
I like the way this is working out for Stanford though… If she shows up, it will count as Stanford holding up standards but if she ends up in Harvard, people will automatically assume she did not take the SAT and so Stanford didn’t admit her. 
Bow down? Stanford knows enough already, that she can read and write and count (which is what SAT would indicate), and that she has rather compelling ECs. Some cases are just that easy to decide. I agree she should have to fill out the application form.
@Hunt, some of us believe that some colleges are more than a commodity. And whoever said that her application process is similar to the average Jane? Straw man, anyone?
@makennacompton , the hard and fast requirements are on the Stanford website and are probably no more than submit an app, academic record, and test score. Maybe some recs as well.
@Iglooo , I agree. This desire by some folks to bestow privilege on others is just . . . weird. I can’t say I understand it.
Does the Nobel Prize guarantee that she is academically brilliant?
So let her take the SAT. If she scores 1800, maybe she isn’t cut out for Stanford; it would be pretty embarrassing if she were to flunk out.
Maybe Stanford takes its requirements seriously?
@sorghum, I didn’t know that being able to read, write, and count is all that is needed to attend Stanford. Some cases may be easy to decide, but I still don’t understand why you seem to think that a school that isn’t test optional for anyone else should be test optional for only one person.
@prezbucky, kids with 1800 SAT scores go to Stanford all the time. They tend to be special in other ways, though (like being a better football player than a lot of other people). Which makes the outrage over making her take the SAT rather inane from my perspective.
My question is why do we even believe this to be true?
The CBS video is based solely on a twitter comment by Jeff Goldberg, which itself has zero ‘proof’? Where is his source? Don’t they teach the need for TWO verifiable sources in journalism school anymore, or does CBS just assume that a tweet is all they need nowadays?
I always envisioned Malala attending Harvard. Any university would be lucky to have her.