Harvey Mudd does not have regular EA. They have ED1 and ED2.
Why does this student need to apply SCEA to ANY of these colleges?
@thumper1 only Stanford is REA school. Probably for the same reasons people use REA. To gain small advantage in admission.
I don’t think you gain any advantage with Stanford, if anything that’s the school NOT to SCEA.
@DrGoogle that is why I posted this question here to get more information from people who being thru the process. Do you mind to share your opinion why Stanford is not the school to ScEA?
Because Stanford rejects most students and only defers about 10% on the SCEA round, while other schools tend to defer most SCEA and not rejecting them. From one of my kid’s high school, the Valedictorian was deferred, I believed she had 2400 SAT, many APs but not as many as your daughter has, she had summer research, all teachers loved her. Time frame was 2008. It’s worse now.
here is the unfortunate reality about SCEA and Stanford-
they have a LOT of sports teams, and recruited athletes are"accepted" during the SCEA round. They have a lot of profs and their kids, if smart and qualified [ and many are] are often given the nod during the SCEA round. There are the extraordinarily wealthy alumni who donate to Stanford and their DA kids are also usually accepted early. Then there are the WOW [ walk on water kids] who will get in one way or another. Last there are the smart , accomplished, often athletic kids, [and there are a lot of them these days] who often get the nod in the first round. And recently there are thousands of rich, full pay International kids who apply early from around the world. And lastly, the head of Admissions wants Stanford to diversify and be more like Yale [ where he is from] by accepting a larger % of students from the rest of the US- that does not leave too many open spots left open for other great non hooked Calif students in the early round.
I agree after Shaw was hired there was more rejects from Stanford for California kids. In the past my kid’s high school had much higher rate of being accepted, probably about 6-10 per year but not when the diversity campaign started, the number was like 1-3. Another thing I notices was among acceptances, white male, if your Asian make or female, odds are not so good. Just anecdote evidence.
^ agreed. My DS’s school [ which is full of alumni kids] used to get 12-15 kids in per year- not any more…
Harvard has preferences for local kids, I think Stanford should do the same.
^ they do-but its mostly faculty kids and kids of alumni who have given back to Stanford over many years, [thousands of whom still live in N. Calif], who get a second look, and extra consideration.
OP - check out the Iovine and Young Academy program at USC - it’s a very interesting interdisciplinary program hitting on your D’s interests. As others have mentioned, she is a strong candidate for merit at USC, and it has strong programs in all of her interests (even outside the Iovine and Young thing).
Thank you @Cameron121 for a very interesting information. I will look into Iovine & Young Academy.
What is the COA for Stanford? On the chance your daughter gets in, can you afford it for four years? You say you are middle class?
We are considering different options. We would prefer for her to graduate loan free and for us not to dip into our savings. That is why I would prefer Trustee scholarship from USC. But it is as hard to get Trustee as to get into the Stanford.
Those Trustee scholarships are not necessarily for the high stats kids either because USC uses the term holistic now for Trustee scholarships, but on the website it seems kind of misleading referring to top 1%. So if USC can kill 2 birds with one stone, they as the people at USC will certainly do it. Many years after my kid was admitted and attended there, I’ve heard many complaints from people on CC wondering why they didn’t get the Trustee scholarship despite the high stats.
“Those Trustee scholarships are not necessarily for the high stats kids either because USC uses the term holistic now for Trustee scholarships, but on the website it seems kind of misleading referring to top 1%”
“I’ve heard many complaints from people on CC wondering why they didn’t get the Trustee scholarship despite the high stats.”
The Trustee scholarship are NOT automatically awarded to the students with the highest scores ! Anymore than they are at Wash U or other highly competitive universities that offer merit scholarships! sheesh…
the top 1% divider is the first sorting mechanism- where USC start’s the process of deciding who they do or dont want to interview for the scholarship.
Next comes the interview, which is VERY important. Faculty participating in the interviews have a say because the trustee scholarships are divied up between the different colleges.
So if a college REALLY wants a student- and the student has indicated both in the interview and in his essays that they REALLY want to go to USC, then the final decisions are made as to who to offer the full scholarships to or not.
"But it is as hard to get Trustee as to get into the Stanford. "
Yes it is.
Remember, those who have been invited have already have an acceptance to USC. Which is something many students would give their eye-teeth to have.
It’s not automatic but I’ve seen kids with 1880-1900 got Trustee scholarships. But I would bet those kids would also have $0 EFC. But I don’t think it’s every kids. They may have like 35% are high stat kids, then 65% of holistic kids. Because the interview rarely matters, even though I do read some kids got demoted to Dean after the interview.
“Because the interview rarely matters”
that is completely false.
If it “rarely mattered” then explain why
each year numerous kids also get bumped UP to Trustee after the interview, like my son did.
About as many as get bumped down to Deans as get bumped up .
And some students said they completely screwed up the interview and still got Trustees. All reported back on CC so that’s why I think it didn’t matter. See post by Sequoia, it’s get to know you kind of interview. Not like Oxford interview.