<p>Amciw, i would have aced math if i didn’t forget to fill in a bubble. Colleges know that some people are incapable of taking a lengthy test without simple screw ups in concentration. If heard from a Harvard admissions officer that anything above a 750 is the same. </p>
<p>And 2400s are meaningless. That’s one test. Ask any undergrad at Stanford about their SAT score and they’ll tell you that it’s meaningless. SATs and GPAs get you in the door. They don’t get you accepted.</p>
<p>Those leadership positions weren’t my sole extracurricular. I emphasized Japanese (I’ve studied it with a tutor since middle school, I went to Japan for a month by myself as a student ambassador, etc) and theater (I love acting, it’s my favorite extracurricular). I didn’t just have a bunch of stuff obviously picked to impress colleges.</p>
<p>
Now people can’t celebrate getting into Stanford?
Because amciw from collegeconfidential.com’s feelings will get hurt? </p>
<p>Stanford is only 8% black… yet somehow EVERY rejection was due to a black applicant getting in over you. Hmmm. Shouldn’t Stanford be like 75% black if that was true?</p>
<p>You guys can think whatever you want if it makes you feel better, but a lot of you guys are making yourselves look really ignorant and classless.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I hope the same.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You got accepted, I thought, so you can’t truly grasp how I feel. Regardless, its nice having an opportunity to vent. I recognize life isn’t fair, but over-compensating for previous unfairness solves absolutely nothing. Its justifiable to be a bit disenchanted with the whole admissions process at the moment. I’m sure I’ll get over it, but its not going to be as easy as you make it out to be.</p>
<p>Gecko, that isn’t necessarily true. Eagle Scout is commonly known as a very nice leadership position to have, so who say’s someone did not do that to get in. Additionally, religious-based leadership positions look the same; they have no real indication of your sincerity in doing them. Your last statement, actually, is. That makes sense for a lot of colleges. It just seems that Stanford’s vision includes less Caucasians than other colleges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Celebrate publicly (i.e. actively on a forum context). Please read before you make unnecessarily insulting statements. Yes celebrate, but don’t do it on the forum. Needing to brag to people on an internet forum about how you got accepted to Stanford is just as pathetic as doing so in real life, especially when many of the members here suffered a rejection despite great everything. I’m speaking for more than myself when I told them to stop celebrating</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nice assumption and fallacy…please don’t misrepresent my statements. Maybe there are more URMs than black? Oh, lol, there is.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As did you with your post, and any URM not giving their race significant credit for their admissions, or anyone celebrating in a public manner.</p>
<p>Edit: Gecko, in regards to your other statement, I would have been at Stanford had my parents been something other than white or Asian. Some people aren’t capable of getting the right genes, you know…</p>
<p>blu_g8orade, </p>
<p>Regardless, Stanford most likely had 3 qualified people for each slot. The black people who got in were equally qualified. And, indeed these people seem ignorant. If you got denied, get over it. You probably have amazing safety schools.</p>
<p>geckolord, that’s just it, we can’t assume everyone was equally qualified. Several of my close friends and I were rejected, we’ve spoken with numerous accepted students, the general consensus is that we were more qualified. There was just something strange in the admissions process this year.</p>
<p>Guys, this needs to stop. Amciw is clearly bitter, and why wouldn’t he be? The admissions process was basically the strangest and most disheartening thing I have ever seen. Don’t blame him for saying it like it is.</p>
<p>If there are three equally qualified (considering ALL the app) candidates, and one is a URM/legacy/etc., they will get in over the others. Did this situation come up countless times? I’m sure.</p>
<p>They got in because they were tipped into the admit pool. Why? Because of their race. Was there anything the other two candidates could have done? No. They were not accepted because they weren’t URMs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Besides getting into Stanford, getting Eagle was the hardest thing I ever did. One must be self motivated. Sure, its not whats gonna get you in the door, but it looks better than being the president of some club.</p>
<p>With respect to Religious based leadership, I have been helped run my Church’s preschool-8th grade R.E program for 4 years. I started out as an aid to the Nun who ran it. After she left, I became the “transition manager”. The Nun’s replacement personally asked me to assist her as she was new to my parish. When that director moved to become Adult R.E director, her replacement called me to ask me to help him run the children’s R.E program. I am the go to man for all new staff members. And, our R.E program is not small. We have 800 kids total and 300 on Sunday.
I meant something of that caliber.</p>
<p>I got in!! yay. but I agree Stanford is pretty random. I definitely didn’t have the most amazing scores, but did have great grades and a lot of cool summer stuff, teacher recs and experiences. I did my app like I was me, a vulnerable 18 yr old not like I was trying to be exactly what I thought stanford wanted. Don’t worry though guys, by this time next year we will all be at schools and couldn’t imagine being any where else.</p>
<p>
I have a Mexican(real mexican) friend who got into Stanford. I bet you anything he is more qualifed than you. I have never met more dedicated kid than this one. When accepted to an expensive summer program, he worked his ass off to pay for it himself. When I met him, he begged for me to teach him calc. Something possessed him, some unnatural drive. </p>
<p>Besides academics, he also organized an organization to help build homes for poor Mexicans. </p>
<p>Sure, being Mexican helped, but this kid would have gotten in as an Asian.</p>
<p>@ecko. I do not doubt at all that you put a lot of effort and energy into your Eagle Scout award and church activities, and I’m not trying to take away from that at all. </p>
<p>But I just want to remind you that just because you put some much energy/devotion into a particular award doesn’t mean everyone did. I was an Eagle Scout, and it was just some offhand thing I did when I had time. But I was also a club president of Key Club before becoming an IT, and it was one of the most meaningful leadership positions I’ve held in my life. </p>
<p>It puts things into perspective. The admissions officers have a crappy job.</p>
<p>I guess my question is whether or not all these kids that got straight up rejected at stanford even with 2300 plus SAT, valedictorian and a decent amount of ECs had a chance in RD? </p>
<p>I assume not…because if so, they would have been deferred right?</p>
<p>And does a deferral mean that you are on a lesser priority than the RD kids?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are stuck on an incorrect assumption. SATs do not get you admitted. Ask any undergrad.</p>
<p>We aren’t saying SATs get you admitted. We’re saying they can help. We’re saying an applicant with a 2400 is likely to be more qualified than an applicant with a 2000. We’re saying a valedictorian is likely to be more qualified than an applicant who’s ranked significantly lower in their class. We’re saying an applicant with significant extracurriculars is more likely to be qualified than an applicant with trivial ones. </p>
<p>These are reasonable statements.</p>
<p>Public thanks to Baelor…</p>
<p>Gecko, I’m sure the fact he was a real Mexican (and thus a first-generation immigrant) might have helped his drive a bit. You can’t use one example, also, to prove a point.</p>
<p>I invested over three hundred hours writing a novel in this year alone, and it got me absolutely nothing in terms of admission. Please don’t pretend I have no drive or no passion, either. Just because it isn’t leadership, doesn’t mean its bad. I’m sure one of the other top Ivies will recognize the drive in writing a book and self-studying three AP classes beyond what my school offers, even if Stanford ignored it for their misguided AA policies.</p>
<p>jcy, to answer your questions, there is a chance, yes, because supposedly, more hooked candidates are taken early. Considering the randomness of the decisions, its very difficult to predict whether or not a deferral was indicative of their RD decision. One would be inclined to say no, because Stanford likes to pretend they give a final decision in SCEA that reflects the RD decision. They don’t have the prescience to claim that honestly. Finally, no. Deferred kids are accepted near the same rate as standard RD kids, according to many sets of statistics.</p>
<p>Edit: Also, gecko, everyone knows you are a URM, so if you could stop discrediting certain parts of the application you were weak in but were negated by your race, such action would greatly appreciated.</p>
<p>
Sure. I’m just saying 2200-2400 is mostly the same. </p>
<p>Also, I know a white kid who got in with a 1900</p>
<p>wow, this thread is sickening, can those who got accepted not assume that everyone who got rejected with stellar stats, ec’s, recs,etc had empty accomplishments done solely for college admissions? If this were a different year and our positions were reversed I’m sure I’d be seeing hatemail clog my inbox with what you guys have been doing. Seriously STOP. This thread is for discussion, not self-defense. Those who got in were qualified and should be proud of themselves but realize that you may not have been the MOST qualified people, just those that Stanford needed. Heck, even if everyone who applied was a finalist for IMO, intel finalist, siemens, etc, etc ,etc they’d still get rejected because Stanford can’t fill their entire student body with the same type of students. Just like those of us who got rejected should get over our decisions, those who were accepted need to get over it too. Seriously, just because you got in doesn’t make you suddenly better than everyone else. Just like how according to you guys SATs only show how good you are at taking a test, I could make the same argument that getting in only shows how suited you are for the NEEDS of the university not how qualified you are.</p>
<p>Gecko, did he have any hooks? Oh, and Princeton disagrees with you about the SAT. Just check the admitted student profile.</p>
<p>personally i don’t believe race should be used at all in the decision process. but i also don’t agree with people trying to hide their race to avoid some type of stereotype or stigma. do it because it’s unfair and unjust and irrelevant, not because you think it will help you. to me there are much more effective ways to diversify a student body and much more relevant information to look at than just ethnicity.</p>
<p>Amciw, you have reason to be upset. However, you have no reason to be this mad. Anyone who gets furious at getting denied to one of the most selective schools in the world is irrational. Your logic is also flawed in that your blaming others for not getting accepted. If you were truly the wonder you believe to yourself be, race would not be a deciding factor. </p>
<p>And, don’t discredit my qualifications. Even if you haven’t said so, your general attitude reveals it. I have many other hooks that trump your novel (academic hooks).</p>