There Is No Luck In Admissions

Colleges & Universities Yale University
1

<p>THERE IS NO LUCK IN THE ADMISSION PROCESS</p>

<p>Well it seems that every thread has the advice of a student that was newly admitted to a top school. The Lord blessed me to get into Yale so I figured why not, I like to pontificate anyway. So this thread is specifically going to address the concept of luck and randomness in the process. I would argue that it is not about luck at all but rather about strategy. If you are blessed to get admitted they allow you to speak to other admitted students and about every student who was contemplating other schools was choosing between Harvard, Yale, Stanford, or Princeton, which means that the top schools are probably looking for something in particular. When going through the process you should first identify the niche that you could present to the school. For me it was easy I was a black applicant who loved science and had been involved in research, but each one has a different niche that they fulfill. </p>

<p>It is important that you find a niche because you are not competing against random people in the process you are competing against others within your niche. For example the reason it is harder for a math/science inclined Asian applicant has more to do with the fact that more Asians are stereotypically inclined to those subjects thus more competition within that niche. Whereas (and this is advice given from college admission consultants) if an Asian applicant had significant ECs and interest in say history they would stand a much better chance. So the first thing to identify is your niche. This niche is what many people identify as passion.</p>

<p>So my advice is to:</p>

<p>1) Identify your niche, it should be based on your extracurricular. Look at the activities you have pursued and see how they related to you. If your ECs look random then you will look random and decrease your chances of getting in. For example in my case I had two niches that I could have fulfilled in the process I could go the political route (via debate and speech) or science route (via my research). I loved science more than politics and so it was natural for me to choose the latter and also the more strategic. Remember strategy is what you have to think about.</p>

<p>2) Your writing should best present your niche. When I was writing my application I made sure that each piece of writing focused on a different aspect of science and how it related to me (except the short answer which was about football). You should do the same. Also for those that do not know the people who vote to admit you don’t actually read your essays they read a brief summary of your application in front of a committee of people and then they vote on your summary NOT the actual essay. This is important because I think people focus more on the essay itself rather than what that essay says about you. Therefore the most important thing the essays do are demonstrate you want to be in front of the committee. Something that I think is an exercise that can help people is to read through your application completely and write a one-page summary of the applicant solely based on the information in your file and without your personal bias. If that summary is what you want to present to the admission committee then great, if there is something missing then tweak your essays to incorporate something about you.</p>

<p>3)You don’t have to list all of your ECs if they detract from your niche. The more cohesive a profile the better I think. To add credence to what I am saying I recently talked to my admission officer to ask what the faculty member thought of my research paper and she said that my application was so strong that they didn’t even read it, but voted me in based on the other parts of my profile. This is important because the more cohesive your profile the clearer your “niche” is to the people reading. For example I am the treasurer of English honor society but I didn’t list it because it would detract from the science basis of my application. Instead I listed only Parliamentarian of National Science Honor Society.</p>

<p>4)Make sure you are not one dimensional. The concept of formulating a niche seems great but also you do not want to limit yourself. It is better to have two really developed ECs and focus on those, but to write both of your essays about one. In particular something that I have read from a Michele Hernandez book (Google her and you will understand) is that one essay should focus on one particular EC and how that relates to you, basically showing why you love that topic and how you want to continue it.</p>

<p>5)Which brings me to the “Why Yale” essay, for many people the reason they want to go to Yale is different. It mostly is probably prestige, financial resources, amazing resources, or something along those lines. DO NOT WRITE THAT. Instead write about how you want to continue your niche activities to a larger scale in the world. Notice that I did not say college but rather the world. Yale and other top schools do not admit people based on who has done amazing things, but based on who WILL do amazing things. </p>

<p>6) Something else to consider is to apply to schools where you naturally stand a better a chance. For instance a computer science major at Yale is probably rarer than a computer science major at MIT. The less people in your niche the better. </p>

<p>This is a thread that I found INCREDIBLY helpful when I was writing my essays and I think it might be able to help others as well:</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/stanford-university/525549-advice-admissions-officer-who-admitted-me-hs-students.html?highlight=Advice+Admission+Officer[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/stanford-university/525549-advice-admissions-officer-who-admitted-me-hs-students.html?highlight=Advice+Admission+Officer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>I probably will not be on here much longer (as in this might be my last post) but I gained A LOT from this site and I hope others might gain something from my experience. Most importantly Good Luck to all of you. For those who are blessed enough to be admitted I can tell you first hand it is amazing and humbling. I hope this helps :)</p>

2

<p>theres no luck in poker either</p>

3

<p>That thread helped a lot last year too. =] frog139 for the win =D lol I’m gonna be having that lunch with the admissions officer at Stanford soon too. Maybe I’ll write something up for CC like she did.</p>

4

<p>Hey man, this is an awesome, clear, concise thread. I’ve thought of most of what you said before, and I totally agree. Of course, there still might be this “luck” involved caused by other confounding variables in the college admissions process, but yes, I do think that the “niche” idea is correct, and that we are competing against others in the same niche. Thank you!!! This confirmed my earlier thoughts regarding this whole process. </p>

<p>My only fear, as of now, is that my school hardly sends students to top-tier schools (harvard, yale, princeton, stanford, and MIT). HARDLY. most who go are URM’s or legacies. There have been a few, though, who have gone, including the school record holder in track, a nationally ranked violinist, among others. So, I realize that it does take quite a lot to get in. </p>

<p>The question is, how can a person in a stereotypical niche (such as an Asian strong in math/science for example) out compete others in his niche and gain the advantage?? Is it just describing his/her other activities outside of math/science? (such as sports, or debate, or volunteering?) </p>

<p>Any ideas? Thanks!</p>

5

<p>*My only fear, as of now, is that my school hardly sends students to top-tier schools (harvard, yale, princeton, stanford, and MIT). HARDLY. most who go are URM’s or legacies. There have been a few, though, who have gone, including the school record holder in track, a nationally ranked violinist, among others. So, I realize that it does take quite a lot to get in. *</p>

<p>I was having those fears this year as well. I go to an underperforming public school in Hawaii. No one has gone to a top school since three years ago when the val/football captain/nhs president/etc got into Stanford. 25% of my school goes to 4 year college, 50% to CC, the rest idk. Things turned out pretty well for me though, accepted to YS Duke Rice Pomona Haverford among others…waitlisted Harvard…rejected Princeton. I think that when you go to a bad school, it just becomes all that more important that you stand out from your class. I was val and had SAT/ACT/AP test scores MUCH higher than any of classmates (34…4/5’s…self studied a couple 5’s). It’s also important that you take advantage of all the opportunities given to you and even seek out new opportunities (I created an academic team…self studied some APs…took some online classes…among other things). If you do all that and then have it backed up with solid teacher rec’s (mine included phrases such as “best student of career”), then you’re on your way to getting accepted to HYPS. </p>

<p>I also completely agree with Dbate’s “niche” idea. My “niche”, or the angle I used, was emphasizing my “navy brat” lifestyle and how I’ve moved around entire life. I wrote my main essay about that and how it influenced my life and then I wrote my supp essay about my Filipino family (I’m half filipino half white). In the supp essay I also re-emphasized my navy brat lifestyle. I actually only wrote 2 main essays for the 11 colleges I applied to. The same common app and the same supp essay for 10 of them. For Stanford I had to write specific essays. I wrote my all my essays as informally as possible. For the short answers I wrote literally whatever the truth was and even used some humor when I could (I got a little handwritten note mentioning my humor from my adcom). I just tried to come off as a real person on the other side of the application, not just some academic robot.</p>

<p>So you really need the complete package to get accepted to HYPS. Academics, Extracurriculars, Personal Essays, Initiative, and of course, the all important “Niche.”</p>

<p>*lol sorry if this post is incoherent. I just wrote ideas as I thought of them.</p>

6

<p>Cool, thanks. but I was just wondering…</p>

<p>“The question is, how can a person in a stereotypical niche (such as an Asian strong in math/science for example) out compete others in his niche and gain the advantage?? Is it just describing his/her other activities outside of math/science? (such as sports, or debate, or volunteering?)”</p>

<p>Does this question make sense at all?</p>

7

<p>Yeah, it makes sense. Unfortunately I’m not qualified to answer your question. I didn’t have to fight against that kind of stereotype. Maybe another admitted student can comment.</p>

8

<p>Whoa. So why is there so much emphasis on writing witty, humorous essays if the adcoms don’t even read it?</p>

9

<p>Overall, very solid advice Dbate. I think next years applicants should read and take your advice very seriously.</p>

<p>On the other hand, to say that there is no luck/randomness in admissions is false. [See what elephant73 said].</p>

10

<p>I did not follow this advice and got in unhooked (white male who was not participating in my biggest EC in college, no legacy applied for aid, etc.)… I have to go out but I have some serious qualms with this advice, particularly with the suggestion that adcoms don’t care about the voice demonstrated in your essay or the quality of the writing in it. I will be back in this thread later. I would implore 2014 wannabes to take this all with a grain of salt.</p>

11

<p>

</p>

<p>This is incorrect. Admissions officers do read applicants’ essays, and applicants can definitely distinguish themselves with essays that give the committee an indication of who they are and how they became that person. Focusing on your academic niche, as the OP did, is fine so long as you don’t write something that any one of thousands of other applicants could have written. But focusing on your academic niche is not essential, and I certainly wouldn’t recommend any approach that makes you appear one-dimensional. Write something that underscores your interests and strengths, whatever they may be.</p>

12

<p>

</p>

<p>I would say then that what you have to do is to incorporate those activities into who you are and what you will do in the future. For instance taking a math person who is asian, a good way to break the mold might be to talk about math in an abstract way that represents emotions or how you see yourself in math. Basically I guess (and bear in mind this is only advice you don’t have to take it if you don’t want) that you should try to make you as unique within those activities to make yourself standout.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>No you are mistaken. There are usually only two people who read your essays, the first admission officer and then another. Those are the first two barriers where people get cut, but not where people get admitted. The people who actually vote you into the school are a committee of admissions officers of whom only two or so have actually read your essay. The others have only heard the short presentation of your profile. This is the model outlined in various books on the topic if you want to google it.</p>

13

<p>Whew. It’s a relief that a well-written essay is at least READ.</p>

14

<p>My resume was not cohesive at all. I had a lot of activities that varied from involvement in my county government, to theatre, to music, to politics, to business, to satellites!</p>

<p>I think that people overestimate the whole “go in depth with one thing” thing. I’m all for being involved in a lot IN ADDITION TO going into depth with one or two things. Unless you’re going to the olympics, your “focus” in one activity isn’t going to help out your application much.</p>

<p>Also, I think one should let one’s resume speak for itself. Use essays to talk about how you view the world. No matter what, there are going to be people who do the same activities as you… but NO ONE can talk about your unique perspective on life or your philosophy.</p>

15

<p>Your OP indicated (to this reader, anyway) that no one seated at the admissions table will have read your essay. In fact, one or two people who have read and loved a candidate’s essays can be powerful advocates for him/her around the table. Thanks for clarifying.</p>

16

<p>Is it only your regional admissions officer that reads your essay?</p>

<p>Good advice though!</p>

17

<p>

If you really want to get in based on your ability in your stereotypical niche, you just have to be the best. Unless you are USAMO-level, that probably isn’t going to work at Stanford. There is something interesting about everyone. Figure out what it is and talk about it.</p>

18

<p>

Lol. 10char</p>

19

<p>Dabte:</p>

<p>I really like what you wrote, it made a lot sense. In fact, I think you should go in to College Admission Consulting business. </p>

<p>However, how do you explain the fact you are rejected by H & P if there is indeed No Luck in College Admissions?</p>

20

<p>My Why Yale essay focused on why I liked Yale, not why I liked Yale’s opportunities for continuing my niche. I do agree that this should be taken with a grain of salt, even if some of it is helpful and accurate.</p>

<p>Additionally, about the schools rarely sending kids to top colleges, mine is the same way. The Class of 2008’s best college was Notre Dame; the year before, one Stanford and nothing else. Like llpitch, I differentiated myself from my classmates, in part by my test scores and self-studying, like he did. I would agree its important to do if you want to meet success in the admissions process.</p>