<p>I got into Stanford off the wait list so I know that I am one of the last 40-60 people to be admitted to this class (I know the range because the admitted in chunks). I have been doing fine here. I have a good GPA and have not found things too stressful. You will be fine, relax.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Although this sounds kind of cliche, it is the truth. I have yet to meet someone who is smarter than me in every way. Likewise, I have never met some one who I am smarter than in every way.</p>
<p>What a lot of colleges say is 90% of the students can do the work, but they’re looking for the people that will fit the best and do the best there.</p>
<p>The other 10% probably have to try harder, but definitely could succeed at the college if they really wanted to.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t worry as long as you want to be there and are willing to do the work.</p>
<p>I was worried about applying at certain places and this thread has placated my fears. Thanks guys.</p>
<p>"Since you got into Cornell, I would bet the first one. "</p>
<p>OP didn’t get into Cornell. (yet) He/she received a likely</p>
<p>How are people getting into elite schools with such (relatively) low stats?</p>
<p>The problem isn’t performing once you get into these schools, it’s getting in to begin with. The average GPA accepted at Boston College from my son’s high school is 4.2. How does one even get accepted to Cornell with a 3.75 when I know of people getting denied with 4.5’s?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>a) Grade inflation (and deflation).
b) Weighted and unweighted grades.
c) Other stand-out qualities.</p>
<p>That 3.75 is likely unweighted, whereas the 4.5 is weighted. The 4.5 sounds inflated; maybe the 3.75 is deflated. Similarly, maybe the 3.75 had stellar essays whereas the 4.5 wrote something lackluster about a “pay to play” community service trip.</p>
<p>I wonder whether the people on this thread believe that there is variation in course content and grading among colleges that matches the variation in admission criteria. Do they think that colleges with tougher admission standards also have tougher courses and tougher grading? My kids go to a college that is a little bit easier to get into than an Ivy. Are the classes there a little bit easier than the same classes would be at an Ivy? Is the grading system a little bit easier? They sure don’t think so, especially when they compare with their friends at these schools. They do think, however, that their school’s courses and grading standards are tougher than our state’s well-regarded flagship university’s.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, adcoms say that 90% of the applicant pool is capable of doing the work. You can bet the 10% who aren’t capable are not part of the 5%-ish accepted to top schools.</p>
<p>thank you everyone for the feedback. you have addressed my fears and i am now confident i will do well no matter where i end up.</p>
<p>i am sorry if i made people think i was being dishonest or if they are questioning if i deserved it. </p>
<p>soccerguy: i do not understand why you think cornell was not a reach. the letter threw me off too. nothing is set in stone yet. i considered it a reach because of my low test scores (1800).<br>
ctmom2boys: i do not want to sound harsh, but i want to defend myself. the 3.8 is unweighted, i have a 4.4 weighted. you said you were wondering how i got accepted. that is why i started this thread. i was wondering if i will have to spend the next four years defending my “acceptance” to other students with higher stats and having to feel out of place. </p>
<p>i did not mean to cause confusion, so let me reiterate:
strong points: i have a 3.8, am in the top 2% of my class, am a URM, have strong extracurriculars, wrote strong essays, and am passionate.
weaknesses: i did not do well on the SAT (1800), was beat out for valedictorian, was never named a national merit scholar, was never voted “student of the year.” </p>
<p>this is why i consider myself a reach and am curious about how college will be and if i can live up to expectations. </p>
<p>limabeans said it perfectly. if you apply to top schools, you must think you are a good student. i think i am being too hard on myself, i know i put in the effort throughout high school and will continue to do so at college. with this mindset, i think all “reach” applicants can succeed. </p>
<p>i just wanted to know how students with similar stories do at top schools. it appears they adjust to it and do fine after time. thanks for all of the input :)</p>
<p>^ I don’t think you’re dishonest, but you’re not really a reach-reach, at least not more so than most Cornell applicants I’d say. I know several Cornell students that were weaker applicants.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>do you think Cornell sends likely letters to the rejected kids?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you thought Cornell was a reach, why did you apply to half of the top 10 schools? To waste money?</p>
<p>Obviously you bring something to the table that they want (and obviously it is not your SAT score).</p>
<p>Not at all. You’ll be surprised to find out how you truely stack up to the people who out performed you at their respective high schools.</p>
<p>At all schools, all statistics and scores are represented. There is typically a larger variation than many people notice, just because the students are so few and far between.</p>
<p>Hopeful- no offense intended, but are you a legacy or an athlete? The info you shared is not typical of ivy students.</p>
<p>I think this is largely a self-fulfilling prophesy issue. If you go in without a lot of confidence, and without setting ambitious goals, then when (this happens to everyone) you do bad on a test or struggle with material you aren’t going to go the extra mile and end up under-achieving.</p>
<p>I’d say anyone who has an SAT >2100 is very capable of graduating from any Ivy or MIT or (esp.) Stanford (due to grade inflation) with a 3.5+ in a science major. For humanities (where GPAs are inflated more) I’d say anyone admitted is capable of 3.7+. But you’re going to have to set the bar that high if you want to end up working hard enough to get there.</p>
<p>(This is based on my experience at MIT. People who don’t seem exceptionally smart but work hard do well.)</p>
<p>That wasnt a crazy example. 3.45 and 1680 SAT going to UCLA Woot woot lol. I defiently a reach student</p>
<p>
Yeah, I think that’s just due to the fact that Ivies aren’t that hard. The hardest schools to graduate from are the tech schools.</p>
<p>Caltech, MIT, HMU, Cal, GaTech, Purdue. </p>
<p>These are schools that do 1 of 2 things:
<p>I almost hate to say it, but I agree with GEOMOM and her post on 3/14-Knowing how resilient you are or can be is key to success as a reach student, in many cases (but certainly not every as some have described).</p>
<p>In my opinion, it really shouldn’t matter! You got accepted, and so did everyone else. The institution obviously has faith in you if they accepted you!</p>