<p>fwiw, our objective was never a “top” school, but a good fit. I posted that he got into a school that fit this thread more to show that it can be done if the USNWR ranking is the objective; but we were all along looking for a place where a kid of substantial intellect but sub-par achievement in high school would thrive!</p>
<p>^^ The only reason I posted on this thread was to share the fact that my son was waitlisted at so-called “Top 20” schools, not admitted. </p>
<p>PaperChaserPop started this thread, and I can see that his son has incredibly high standardized text scores and very impressive extra-curricular activities, with a 3.5 gpa in rigorous courses. I think, given that kind of profile, a student does have a chance at some of the most selective schools.</p>
<p>But I think anything below a 3.5 becomes far more difficult, especially if there’s a downward trend in junior year. Our son’s junior grades slipped from 3.6 to 3.2 his junior year (unweighted), and even though he could explain it, it was incredibly hard to figure out where he should apply with a reasonable chance.</p>
<p>Ironically, during his senior year, his unweighted gpa for fall semester was 3.8 and now is 4.0 for spring. But doing well by the senior year is too late for most highly selective schools. It’s too late by the senior year, even if you take the most rigorous course load in your school. At least, this is what I’ve concluded.</p>
<p>But you know what? The B+/A- student can definitely gain admission to good Tier 1 schools and find places where he/she is a good fit. And when that becomes the goal – rather than “Let’s see how many top-20 schools I can bag” – everything will work out fine.</p>
<p>Obstinate: Of course subjective factors matter. Of course white/Asian students get into schools like Columbia with less than a 4.0. But from an objective POV, your chances as a URM were significantly higher than your chances as a white/Asian.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It was the goal of this thread to work on applying T20’s. How some of us arrived at this goal is a different story. Some may indeed had trophy hunting mindset, and ignored the cold reality of a 3.5 GPA. I got here because S1 had his eyes set on MIT and since he was already aiming high, we might as well broaden the net to cover similar caliber schools with comparable offerings.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I completely agree that our kids were in a very difficult position to gain admissions to T20’s (or even getting on their waitlists). I knew that going in - although I did not realize the critical weight of GPA until August of last year - and posted this opinion very early upthread. The whole thread discussed what they or we can do to increase their chances. They must have something very strong to make up for lost ground. Downward trend on top of a 3.5 GPA is a hole that is very difficult to climb out of.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I had similar vacillation. Reach for the stars, but first lay down a cushion so you can land softly, if the stars proof too far. Too lessen the blow, we leveraged EA’s and adjusted RD’s based on the EA results. PG, I’m rooting for your twins!</p>
<p>Thank you, PCP!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, and I believe this almost certainly doomed my son’s applications to Stanford and Rice. After junior year, his GPA was 3.55 UW, including about 3.5 in the junior year itself, when he took a course load that would have been daunting for most college freshmen. If he had applied EA/ED at that point, I think his chances would have been a lot better.</p>
<p>However, his first-semester senior-year grades took a big dip. He loaded up with seven even more difficult classes, and ended up with three C’s, bringing his seven-semester GPA down to around 3.4. Furthermore, he developed a reputation with his teachers for being chronically harried and late with work. I know this was reflected in at least one of his recommendation letters, from a teacher whose recommendation early in the school year was so glowing that it blew my mind, who later was clearly disappointed that my son did not keep up that performance as the year went on.</p>
<p>I don’t want to minimize the benefits of taking a really hard course load. He is ten times better-prepared for college than I was, with my all-honors-and-a-couple-of-APs curriculum. I expect he’s going to get to college and perhaps be a little bored at first, until he finds something else to fill the time that today is filled with constant studying and projects. And I admire him for boldly setting out to find where his limits are.</p>
<p>But if one’s goal is top-20 admission, period, then I would advise holding back a little on the course load, taking only what you know you can handle and still keep excellent grades, and if you find out you can handle more, do a special project or volunteer work or something. A crushing workload is demoralizing and affects not only grades but also the quality of the application you submit.</p>
<p>
I think this is basically true, but it varies somewhat from school to school. Here’s what we were looking at:</p>
<ol>
<li>Very good test scores (2230/2400)</li>
<li>A trend that was a “smiley face” through junior year: freshman 3.3, soph. 2.9, junior 3.5</li>
<li>Cumulative GPA through junior year: 3.2 </li>
<li>1st half senior grades: 4.5</li>
<li>Cumulative including 1st half senior year 3.4</li>
</ol>
<p>We were hoping that the adcoms would note the turnaround from soph to junior year, and the continuation of that trend into senior year, and see what we saw: a kid who gradually got his act together. But we realized that this would depend on them taking a really careful look. Otherwise they might just see a kid who came into senior year with a 3.2 and suddenly sprouted a 4.5 and think “slacker trying to slide in.” And I suspect that this is what did happen at the reaches that waitlisted or rejected him.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The reality is not that they don’t take a really careful look, but that the competition has test scores + consistency of grades (including, often, consistency of a 4.5 W). It is, again, not personal: it’s about the competition. If they can have everything that the sons of the last two posters had plus a 4.0 UW, why would they not choose those who comparatively speaking “have it all”?</p>
<p>FWIW, I follow Stanford admissions closely. The only unhooked applicant I’ve seen get in during the last 10 years whose stats were sub-par (the sub-par part were test scores due to her LD, not grades, which were fine) was the daughter of a very active alum. Stanford does reward for legacy if they’re active, and in that respect is unlike some of the other Elites as of late. So, while hooks are normally only URM, recruited athlete, significant development admit, or celebrity, at Stanford legacy could almost be considered a hook as well. Be that as it may be, I have not seen non-hooked candidates get into S in the last ten years with much under 3.8 UW gpas.</p>
<p>S2 was pretty consistent – 3.42-3.71 every semester (at his school, this means 3-5 As out of seven courses). No Cs on the transcript. A couple subjects were consistently Bs (and aggravatingly high Bs at that), but he had very strong standardized scores in those same areas to offset and made AP National Scholar after junior year, so there was no doubt he was challenging himself.</p>
<p>He also attended a really tough program that was well-known to a number of the schools on his list. We paid careful attention to admissions results from his HS and looked carefully at schools with a good record of admitting students from this program.</p>
<p>^^True, epiphany. I keep forgetting what thread I’m in. We were fishing, relative to most folks here, in somewhat less exalted waters: not so much top 20 as top 40. We did apply to Cornell, but we didn’t really expect anything but a “no” there. It was Tufts, Brandeis, Rochester and Skidmore that we had hopes for–not really top 20 schools. As Emily Litella would say, “Never mind.”</p>
<p>I confess to having to look up Emily Litella. That one slipped past me. Although I was a regular viewer of SNL much later than that, I never knew her.</p>
<p>Btw, I recommend Rochester to lots of people, but in addition to that, nightchef’s son has plenty of great acceptances.</p>
<p>There are only two really important aspects to college: One is to discover who you really are (and make friends with that in mind); another is to bloom. Nothing can hold back a well-nourished shoot.</p>
<p>1) Continue to take the most rigorous curriculum that you can manage.
2) Do everything in your power to turn in a good mid-year report. This is VERY important even for EA/ED schools because they may defer you to RD.
3) Prepare for and do well on your PSAT – you can line up significant scholarships from many colleges if you become National Merit Finalist.
4) Prepare for and do well on your SAT I and SAT II’s. You are already low on GPA (for T20 admissions), and can ill afford to be down on test scores. Get your scores to 75% or above of your target schools.
5) If available, apply early action to schools that you like and can see yourself attending. Adjust your RD list based on your EA results.
6) Thoroughly research the schools you apply and let your readers know why their schools fit you well and what you can bring to their schools.
7) Really work on your applications, especially the long and short essays. Start them in the summer before your senior year.
8) Don’t push to sell yourself in your essays. A slice-of-life essay that shows depth of reflection or awareness is much better than the I-am-great varieties.
9) Establish good rapport early with teachers from whom you seek LOR’s. They should know you well both in and out of their classes. The same with your GC.
10) Focus on and commit to EC’s that you really like. You need to show not only passion but also good results. It is best if your EC’s are activities that can benefit others. Excel in at least one non-academic activity.
11) Tie your classes, LOR’s, EC’s, awards and essays to your declared major/field of interest. Not everything needs to sing the same tune, but your app needs to support your declared interest.
12) Prepare for your interviews. Practice with someone who’s done interviews before.
13) Apply for outside scholarships early. If you get them, list them as “awards”. Your willingness and ability to get outside scholarships can be a tipping factor.
14) Apply to more reaches than matches, more matches than safeties. Cast your net wide.
15) Make sure you have at least a few matches and safeties, especially ones that are likely to give merit scholarships.</p>
<p>16) And for these students, even more than regular CC students - love your safety. It’s fine to reach for the stars, but realistically, even if you do 1-14, you may not beat the odds. Once you have a safety you really like, (or get into an EA school), you can be as risky as you want.</p>
<p>PCP - I agree with just about everything on your list except #11. LOR’s, EC’s ,awards do not need to tie to declared major/ field of interest. Essay needs to tie to it only if it’s part of the essay prompt.</p>
<p>Most T20 schools are very aware that a very high percentage of students enter school thinking about one or two majors when they apply…and change. While there are some students who enter a T20 knowing exactly what they want to do, and end up doing it 4 years later — they are in the minority. A very small percentage of students enter a liberal arts college/university (and most T20’s, outside of the technical schools, are essentially liberal arts) knowing exactly what they want to do with their lives.</p>
<p>When it comes to EC’s, follow your #10…especially the first sentence. When it comes to LOR’s, get them from teachers who know you well, have taught you in any key academic subject and who can write something specific about what you’ve done that stands out in their class. </p>
<p>As for awards…somewhat like the EC advice. They’re more likely to be won if they relate to something you really like.</p>
<p>I agree and disagree with post 2076. The point that PCP might have been making is that it advantages you if you are lucky enough to have these all tied together, or at least not in radical asynchrony. So if it happens to be that you are considering (equally) two e.c.'s and emotionally could go with either, two LOR teachers and both know you equally well/ write equally well, etc., then matching those choices to your genuine academic interests has proven to pay off in results.</p>
<p>No, you will not be penalized per se if you don’t have your future all planned out (and the most planned, determined students do often change those goals as an undergrad or later). Rather, it is that the committee members can envision you better if you happen to be well-defined, which in turn aids them in imagining you, the whole & many-dimensional person, on their campus, despite how realistic they may be about the vicissitudes of adolescence.</p>
<p>This is good to hear – D’s academic interest is chemistry, but her big EC that she has passion for relates more to physics / astronomy. S’s academic interest is history / politics / int’l relations, but his big EC’s relate more to media, teaching, and animal welfare. </p>
<p>One of the ways I’m trying to think about it is to have them answer the question, “What’s your sentence?” What one sentence sums you up … are you the indie quirky girl who has a passion to do X, or the thoughtful quiet one who gets jazzed by Y, or the outgoing one who secretly does Z.</p>
<p>I agree with 2078, I think Calmom once said she thought her daughter was helped by the fact that she was “the dancer who spent her junior year of high school in Russia”. My son’s activities didn’t exactly line up with what he said he was interested in (history or international relations). He didn’t like the kids in our Model UN so he didn’t join. But he was the kid who from his essays “thought like an historian and made origami earrings”.</p>
<p>Yup – Football playing, debate captain, chef and IB diploma candidate here.</p>
<p>Show, not tell in essays. Why I am a great fit for your school is BORING, not to mention arrogant.</p>
<p>Agree that URoch is a great place!</p>
<p>PCP’s list in post #2074 mentions EA, but doesn’t mention ED. </p>
<p>Applying ED at a well-chosen low reach school, can be just the bump needed to fall into the accepted pile. FA can be a problem for ED applications, of course. Higher ranked schools generally have better need-based FA than lower ranked schools, however. </p>
<p>Not that many colleges even offer EA. None of the schools that my S was interested in applying to offered EA. </p>
<p>This page lists info list lots of info for all of the Common App schools, including if they have EA, ED, and their application deadlines.
<a href=“https://www.commonapp.org/CommonApp/docs/downloadforms/common2009_Grid.pdf[/url]”>https://www.commonapp.org/CommonApp/docs/downloadforms/common2009_Grid.pdf</a></p>
<p>I’m very glad that my S ended up applying ED to WashU, and was accepted. Reading the WashU RD acceptance threads, many students with similar test scores but much better grades didn’t get accepted. Was ED the bump that got him in? Would he have been accepted RD at WashU? We’ll never know, but I think it helped.</p>
<p>CountingDown had a great point in post #2071, about paying attention to the results from your own HS. Getting a 3.5 GPA at HS#1 may be very different from getting that same GPA at HS#2.</p>