|
To all those hard-working seniors in high school working for a shot at a top school, I will answer any questions you may have about the college application process!
Even if you have extremely common questions like:
How many schools should I apply to? Can I get in if I only have a 2390? Which schools should I apply to? What should I write my essay about? What if I can't afford college? How can I improve my SAT score? What is College Confidential? What if I'm asian? What is this deal with SCEA, EA, ED, RD? But I haven't won the Nobel Peace Prize! What do rankings mean?
Or less common questions like:
My cat died, how can I work that into a solid essay? I'm applying to college X/Y but don't know which better suits my interest? Common App or school-specific app? How can I tie together my unquenchable thirst for knowledge and my prowess in the MMA ring in a thought-provoking essay? If the college asks for a picture, should I go topless/ shop it? How do I dig up dirt on my interviewer so I know how to play to his/her interests during the interview?
I will try to answer ANY questions! But since this is RL, if I don't know the answer, I'll just be straightforward and admit my inability to help you. Philosophy #1: First, do no harm.
Ask away! ^_^~~
|
On average what grades do you need to enter a good univiersity? I wanna enter some sort of science courses (cause that's where I want my career to be headed) at a good Canadian university like WAterloo, Queens, or Mcgill. Not sure if my marks are up to scratch though (low 90s in history, english and math, but only only 86 in Chemistry and 84 in biology).
Also, what grades do Canadian universities look at? Does the first term of grade 12 matter as much as your grade 11 marks? I'm in grade 12 this year. Basically, if I can get 90s in Chem and Biology this year will universities still accept me or will they go "na, ur grade 11 marks sucked for the sciences and you're trying to enter a science course....GTFO"?
And yes, how many schools should I apply to?
|
... What if I'm Asian.... T___T
|
How much does college cost in the US?
|
United States24342 Posts
On September 05 2010 01:18 Catch]22 wrote: How much does college cost in the US? This obviously will vary a ton. A top school could cost you like 50,000 dollars a year tuition I bet. Can someone confirm this?
If you go to an in-state public university it will vary by state but be more on the order of magnitude of 8-10k tuition per year I think.
If you commute to a community college or something like that then it's probably significantly less.
|
I'm traveling a but right now but I'll definitely return to ask a ton of random questions!
I have this compulsion to ask my elders (not old people, but more like older high school students/college students) for random advice on life and academics ><
|
On September 05 2010 01:16 SubtleArt wrote: On average what grades do you need to enter a good univiersity? I wanna enter some sort of science courses (cause that's where I want my career to be headed) at a good Canadian university like WAterloo, Queens, or Mcgill. Not sure if my marks are up to scratch though (low 90s in history, english and math, but only only 86 in Chemistry and 84 in biology).
Also, what grades do Canadian universities look at? Does the first term of grade 12 matter as much as your grade 11 marks? I'm in grade 12 this year. Basically, if I can get 90s in Chem and Biology this year will universities still accept me or will they go "na, ur grade 11 marks sucked for the sciences and you're trying to enter a science course....GTFO"?
And yes, how many schools should I apply to? I was wondering this as well. My grade 11 marks were terrible, but i plan on working my ass off this year. Do they look at grade 11 marks at all? ( I want to apply to the BioMedical Science program at University of Waterloo ) I saw on their website that the entrance averages were high 70's but somehow i don't believe that XP seems quite low.
|
On September 05 2010 01:16 SubtleArt wrote: On average what grades do you need to enter a good univiersity? I wanna enter some sort of science courses (cause that's where I want my career to be headed) at a good Canadian university like WAterloo, Queens, or Mcgill. Not sure if my marks are up to scratch though (low 90s in history, english and math, but only only 86 in Chemistry and 84 in biology).
Also, what grades do Canadian universities look at? Does the first term of grade 12 matter as much as your grade 11 marks? I'm in grade 12 this year.
And yes, how many schools should I apply to?
Ok. I'm admittedly a product of the American university system, but I had a friend who was accepted to McGill from an American University. I will use her example to answer your question, but please take it with a grain of salt (since "international" admits might be judged by a different standard).
So are you good enough to get in?
So this friend had ~2200 SAT from a large public high school. Her marks were superb, essentially a 4.0 (which is the highest possible), but the school itself was not particularly competitive...
She did band and had >=6 AP tests (presumably all 4s and 5s) and was involved in a lot of essay-worthy extracurricular activities.
If you want a larger sample, I encourage you to go to go to http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/mcgill-university/ and scour some recent admit pages to see what their stats looked like for domestic students.
Now regarding whether grade 11 marks are more important than 1st semester grade 12 marks: It depends on when you're applying.
A rule of thumb is that the most recent marks are always the most indicative of ones academic prowess, but on the other hand if you're applying EA/SCEA/ED, the first semester marks may not be available until after the college has made its decision. At which point, if you're admitted you need only maintain a ~3.5 (A/B average GPA, depends on the school) so that your admission is not revoked.
On September 05 2010 01:17 synapse wrote: ... What if I'm Asian.... T___T
Well you're fucked. But given that you're fucked there are a few things you can do to not exacerbate the situation. On the forms that ask for your ethnicity, be straightforward about your ethnicity. Check the "Asian American" and be specific whether it's Korean or Chinese or Japanese, etc... It cannot hurt you to do so, and in a sense, it actually helps you. It's because if you refuse to supply that information the college: 1.) Will probably assume you're asian anyway given your name anyway. 2.) Will not look kindly upon your personality, and since one of the major factors in the decisions at top universities is this abstract "personality" attribute, to attempt to hide this information will not work in your favor.
That being said, I presume you have asian-worthy academics: That means decent AP/IB scores, with 2-3 SAT II/s over 750 and an SAT score > 2200. GPA > 3.8. If you have these decent academics, what you should then focus on in your application is to differentiate yourself from the average Fresh Off Boat asian with comparable academics. It's an obvious strategy... if you think you're going to end up in as part of an over-represented group, try to differentiate yourself as much as possible.
Concrete ways to achieve this: Focus your essays on some non-academic pursuits that show personality. You do dance? Great! You do a varsity sport? Awesome! You take part in some national competition/organization/event? Perfect!
|
is it a good idea to get a 2 year degree at a community college then the other 2 years for the 4 year degree at a much better state college and save money this way or to get all 4 years at the much better state college (which will cost around 10k~ more)
|
16927 Posts
On September 05 2010 01:32 unit wrote: is it a good idea to get a 2 year degree at a community college then the other 2 years for the 4 year degree at a much better state college and save money this way or to get all 4 years at the much better state college (which will cost around 10k~ more)
Only if you think the extra two years at the state college in terms of environment and lifestyle would be worth your money.
|
On September 05 2010 01:20 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 01:18 Catch]22 wrote: How much does college cost in the US? This obviously will vary a ton. A top school could cost you like 50,000 dollars a year tuition I bet. Can someone confirm this? If you go to an in-state public university it will vary by state but be more on the order of magnitude of 8-10k tuition per year I think. If you commute to a community college or something like that then it's probably significantly less.
This is actually a very complicated question that I will answer with a few points: 1.) The cost of attending school is heavily dependent on your income. If your family makes >$200k a year, the top schools, (read: harvard yale princeton stanford MIT CalTech, etc....) will not give you much in the way of financial aid, leaving your cost of attendance ~$50k a year. If, however your income <= $150k a year, these same top schools will give you a disproportionate amount of financial aid, leaving your cost of attendance potentially < $20k a year. 2.) The cost of attendance is also heavily dependent on your academics/athletic ability. State schools/lower-tier schools (I mean this as in schools that are potentially very good, but aren't quite as rich or name-brand as the ones I mentioned above) will often give merit-based/athletic scholarships. Ex: Arizona, Alabama often give you full scholarship without your even applying if you're a national merit scholar... Other solid schools have excellent merit-based scholarships as well... Ex: USC has a trustee's scholarship which is almost a full-ride. UCSD has this Jacob's Scholar for engineering majors which is in fact a full-scholarship + stipend.
So what does this mean for you? If your academics are excellent and your family makes ~$200k a year, you're going to find that public schools will be cheaper.
If your academics are less than top-notch but you can get into a top school by some other means(athletic/national competition winner/legacy) and your family makes <= $150k, you will often find that Harvard or Yale will cost you less than your local state school.
If your academics are in fact top-notch and your family makes ~200k, you'll find that a lot of lower-tier schools and state schools will be basically free.
I hope that answered your question.
|
On September 05 2010 01:30 love1another wrote:
Concrete ways to achieve this: Focus your essays on some non-academic pursuits that show personality. You do dance? Great! You do a varsity sport? Awesome! You take part in some national competition/organization/event? Perfect!
Any other tips/fundamentals to writing a good essay?
|
On September 05 2010 01:32 unit wrote: is it a good idea to get a 2 year degree at a community college then the other 2 years for the 4 year degree at a much better state college and save money this way or to get all 4 years at the much better state college (which will cost around 10k~ more) If cost is a binding constraint then by all means go to a 2-year community college and then transfer to a 4-year at a much better college. Especially if you are in one of the states with excellent public school systems like California, New Jersey, Michigan, etc...
Many of my friends went to a local community college and then their 3rd year they transferred to UC Berkeley or UCLA or UofM, etc...
For the purposes of grad school/employment, people really only care where you graduated from.
|
i gotta get started on my essay~ i might come back here
|
On September 05 2010 01:20 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 01:18 Catch]22 wrote: How much does college cost in the US? This obviously will vary a ton. A top school could cost you like 50,000 dollars a year tuition I bet. Can someone confirm this? If you go to an in-state public university it will vary by state but be more on the order of magnitude of 8-10k tuition per year I think. If you commute to a community college or something like that then it's probably significantly less.
Top schools usually have need-based financial aid (that covers 100% of what you can't cover), so that shouldn't really be a problem. If you're rich, yeah expect to pay 40k+ for an Ivy League.
Ahhhh my HS gpa is terrible T.T Had to bring it up from a 3.42 in freshman year, now I only have 3.72
|
On September 05 2010 01:39 Crisis_ wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 01:30 love1another wrote:
Concrete ways to achieve this: Focus your essays on some non-academic pursuits that show personality. You do dance? Great! You do a varsity sport? Awesome! You take part in some national competition/organization/event? Perfect!
Any other tips/fundamentals to writing a good essay? What is considered a "good essay" varies considerably depending on the rest of your package... But here are some objectives to keep in mind.
1.) The essay needs to be at the very least a good piece of writing. It needs to be coherent, show a mastery of the English language, and somewhat fun to read. This is universal.
2.) The essay needs to have a tight, concrete theme that runs through the whole piece. It needs to have an objective at every point. Don't write about when your grandpa died and what he taught you on his death bed. It's potentially interesting and tear-jerking, but makes it very difficult to express your personal merits without sounding like a douche.
3.) Pick the objective of your essay based on what is already in your application. If you have National AP Scholar, Siemens/Intel/USAMO, 2400 SAT, etc... you needn't spend additional time denoting the field in which you're pro. Talk about something else.... Talk about that summer you volunteered as an swim-tutor, or the trip you took to Thailand. Just remember that your application is a complete package and you want to expose as much of your awesomeness as possible in a very limited amount of space. Do not waste that space by repeating yourself.
|
what are your credentials?
|
On September 05 2010 01:47 Bereft wrote: what are your credentials? I'm not (currently) a professional, but here they are:
1.) I'm currently attending a top University, and have studied the curriculum of many "college consulting" services. 2.) I did, briefly, open up a business on this matter, but we only ended up taking free clients before we realized it was too time consuming for our student-schedules... Nonetheless, I have been paid on multiple occasions to look over college essays. 3.) I was an SAT tutor for 2 years... 4.) I was an active poster on College Confidential (lol) 5.) I'm pretty familiar with the admissions department at my college.
The basic rule here that should make things less problematic is to not take my word as the absolute truth, but to use it as a starting point to make your own judgments. Most of what I say is based on sound reasoning rather than unconfirmable insider knowledge, and can be found on the websites of the colleges people are asking about. It's just that I've already been throught the process and have looked through the information so I can save people some of that pain by getting them on the right track.
Then again, if you feel I'm unqualified to offer some helpful tips, nobody's forcing you to listen :D
|
United States24342 Posts
When applying for financial aid the amount that the government/colleges assume your parents can afford to pay tends to be a bit ridiculous... loans loans loans lol
|
On September 05 2010 01:54 micronesia wrote: When applying for financial aid the amount that the government/colleges assume your parents can afford to pay tends to be a bit ridiculous... loans loans loans lol This is true, but based on the forms you must submit for evaluation, you will find that hard assets like real estate are a lot easier to "hide" than W2 income. And even with income, "capital gains" income is also easier to hide, because you can offset it with (often fictitious) losses...
But as always, different colleges evaluate your "expected contribution" in different ways: a friend of mine was offered $30k in financial aid from the school he is currently attending, but only $12k from another top-tier school.
The simple conclusion, though, is that if you're good enough to get into a top college, don't not apply just because you think you can't afford it.
|
And yes, how many schools should I apply to? When I was applying, the general rule of thumb was 10. I know your circumstances are different, but even in my own circumstances, this was not a hard-and-fast rule.
For example applications to the University of California college system were all on the same application so there was no reason not to submit the same application to 3 colleges instead of just one. (except like an extra $30 per college blehh...)
Meanwhile, almost all the private schools I applied to, with the exception of MIT and Stanford(?), were on the Common App. I just submitted that (along with a 1-page supplement unique to each college), to 6 or so top-tier colleges (again paying an addition ~$100 fee for each one).
The idea is really just one of insurance. At the end of the day there is a stochastic element from your perspective as to whether or not you get in, and thus the more places you apply to, the better off you are.
This is completely different from, say, the Asian system where your test score determines 95% of whether you get into a college, and what college you put as your 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice actually matters.
|
how much do rankings matter?
|
On September 05 2010 02:05 geometryb wrote: how much do rankings matter? It depends entirely on which ranking you're using.
I'm not saying that rankings are entirely arbitrary (in fact most reputable ranking systems are based on some concrete formula in some form or another) but their relevance to the on-campus experience is tenuous at best.
They key issue is that the standards used by the rankers and your personal standards may be entirely different. In fact, no standardized metric will work for the "mass" of students with their myriad interests and goals.
I'll give an example:
My school's compsci department is not very highly rated. One of the reasons is that it is incredibly small. Each class only graduates a few dozen (tops) majors, and the CS program is not necessarily the best outlet into going to a top-5 CS grad program.
Nonetheless, I enjoy the major program a lot because of the ridiculous personal attention each student receives. No class above the intro level ever has more than 20 or so people... and often you're on a first-name basis (as a lowly undergrad) with all the grad students and many of the Profs. The resources spent on the department are also enormous, and when divided among so few undergraduates, means you can freely get an entire lab to yourself for several days at a time to run a CPU-intensive computational experiment.
So I guess my advice is to take rankings with a grain of salt. More important than the number or rank is the explanation.
|
How much does the writing score on the SAT matter? I took the SAT in the spring and my writing score was significantly lower then my other two scores. I heard that since the writing was new that some schools wouldn't really take the test into consideration, is that the case? (M 700,CR 710,W 630)
|
It's not very new, no. And it does matter to almost all top schools (with as of 4 years ago, a few notable exceptions). That being said, it probably matters proportionally less than the other two sections.
However, depending on which schools you're shooting at (private/public) you can retake and only shoot for the writing section.
This is because almost all private schools give you the benefit of a "super score." That means on the application when it asks you to fill in your SAT score, you just write the best score you've gotten on a section through all your attempts (assuming <=3 attempts).
Many state schools require your best "single-sitting" SAT score however, so if that's your target, you might need to put in a little more effort into restudying for the SAT.
But seriously... I don't want to sound like a jackass, but the SAT is one of the easiest ways (in terms of time investment vs. return) to improve your chances of getting into a good school. If you're willing to put the time in I'd recommend you retake. You're in the range where if you get 1-2 more questions right in each section and get your act together in writing, you could be looking at 750+ across the board...
I don't want to turn this into an SAT thread, but if you want some more tips as to how to improve your SAT score, feel free to PM me.
However, don't take this as a "OMG NOW I HAVE TO RETAKE THE SAT \WRISTS." I'm just saying that given your current scores, getting just a few more questions right puts you into the "star student" range of many colleges. That range is usually 2250+.
|
It's okay synapse. My GPA has been dropping since Freshmen year, and I need perfect grades to boost up my GPA and to look okay on transcript.
I know that downhill is bad, aka I'm screwed.
|
On September 05 2010 02:58 supernovamaniac wrote: It's okay synapse. My GPA has been dropping since Freshmen year, and I need perfect grades to boost up my GPA and to look okay on transcript.
I know that downhill is bad, aka I'm screwed. GPA doesn't matter in a strict sense, but your GPA relative to your classmates DOES matter. Top colleges want to know if you're in the top 1%, top 5%, etc... academically. One sort of unfair trend is that if you're slightly above average at a super-competitive school, vs. top 3 of a shit school, the latter is more likely to get you accepted... even if the former student has better standardized test scores...
But regardless, just do your best, and keep looking forward!
|
On September 05 2010 03:01 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 02:58 supernovamaniac wrote: It's okay synapse. My GPA has been dropping since Freshmen year, and I need perfect grades to boost up my GPA and to look okay on transcript.
I know that downhill is bad, aka I'm screwed. GPA doesn't matter in a strict sense, but your GPA relative to your classmates DOES matter. Top colleges want to know if you're in the top 1%, top 5%, etc... academically. One sort of unfair trend is that if you're slightly above average at a super-competitive school, vs. top 3 of a shit school, the latter is more likely to get you accepted... even if the former student has better standardized test scores... But regardless, just do your best, and keep looking forward! I'm looking forward everyday, it's just the fact that stupid transcript confirmation arrived in my mail and it just went *BOOM FU* on my face.
I'm just hoping my extra curricular activities and my SAT/ACT scores will cover up the GPA shit T.T
Thanks for the encouraging words though =3
|
On September 05 2010 03:04 supernovamaniac wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:01 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 02:58 supernovamaniac wrote: It's okay synapse. My GPA has been dropping since Freshmen year, and I need perfect grades to boost up my GPA and to look okay on transcript.
I know that downhill is bad, aka I'm screwed. GPA doesn't matter in a strict sense, but your GPA relative to your classmates DOES matter. Top colleges want to know if you're in the top 1%, top 5%, etc... academically. One sort of unfair trend is that if you're slightly above average at a super-competitive school, vs. top 3 of a shit school, the latter is more likely to get you accepted... even if the former student has better standardized test scores... But regardless, just do your best, and keep looking forward! I'm looking forward everyday, it's just the fact that stupid transcript confirmation arrived in my mail and it just went *BOOM FU* on my face. I'm just hoping my extra curricular activities and my SAT/ACT scores will cover up the GPA shit T.T Thanks for the encouraging words though =3 Yeah... what tends to happen is that a 2400 + 36 will make people not exactly care about your GPA. More than a few of my friends took this route... did shitty in high school, then crammed for the SAT, and got 2350+. Then they all got into their top choice of UC Berkeley.
|
I was a pretty horrid student my freshman and sophomore year (like 3.23 gpa), and didn't take many challenging classes; however, my junior year I took a few AP classes and got all A's and my gpa is rising. My senior year, I'm taking even more AP classes, and hopefully my gpa will rise to at least a 3.9+ (if that's possible).
My question is, am I unable to go to a top school like MIT because of those two horrible, horrible years? What can I do to improve my chances?
|
Would you say it's easier or harder to get into an American college if you are a foreigner? As I'm from Sweden, I'm interested in studying psychology maybe sometime in the future, and I was considering studying in America or in another English-speaking country. Though, I'm wondering if foreign applicants are generally biased against, and if so, biased against negatively or positively?
Does the fact that I'm a foreigner increase or lower my chances of acceptance?
|
United States24342 Posts
What do you guys think about class rank? How important is it? How often is it used? My high school didn't calculate a class rank intentionally.
|
On September 05 2010 03:06 MidasMulligan wrote: I was a pretty horrid student my freshman and sophomore year (like 3.23 gpa), and didn't take many challenging classes; however, my junior year I took a few AP classes and got all A's and my gpa is rising. My senior year, I'm taking even more AP classes, and hopefully my gpa will rise to at least a 3.9+ (if that's possible).
My question is, am I unable to go to a top school like MIT because of those two horrible, horrible years? What can I do to improve my chances?
Hmmm.... A simple calculation will tell you that, assuming your GPA is unweighted, that your 3.23 will not average with even a 4.0 to produce anything approaching 3.9. (3.23 * 1 + 4.0 * X)/(X+1) = 3.9
Solve for x to find that you'll have to take something like 5 times as many classes your last two years as you did your first two years to catch up.
That being said, if you are a female and you can pull off a 2250+ SAT score and can talk confidently about some extracurriculars, you can probably get in.
If you're white/desi/east-asian, however, and you're not at one of the top high schools in the nation, you're chances aren't looking good.
That being said, however, my conclusion only has a basis if you're talking specifically about MIT. MIT is notorious for its male/female affirmative action, where females have something like a 3x higher admit rate (source questionable, but I think it's in the right ballpark) than males.
If you're talking about other good schools, like NYU (or a lot of liberal arts schools for that matter), the situation is totallly reversed.
Anyway, good luck and keep working hard!
|
On September 05 2010 03:11 love1another wrote: If you're talking about other good schools, like NYU (or a lot of liberal arts schools for that matter), the situation is totallly reversed. At our school it's considered average T.T
I hate my school's standards.
On September 05 2010 03:06 MidasMulligan wrote: I was a pretty horrid student my freshman and sophomore year (like 3.23 gpa), and didn't take many challenging classes; however, my junior year I took a few AP classes and got all A's and my gpa is rising. My senior year, I'm taking even more AP classes, and hopefully my gpa will rise to at least a 3.9+ (if that's possible).
My question is, am I unable to go to a top school like MIT because of those two horrible, horrible years? What can I do to improve my chances?
Believe it or not, extra curricular can help, especially Math Team.
I only have 3.5 unweighted (Fuck you junior year) and only aiming around 3.6 with senior year boost. But I'm going to apply to top schools due to things other than the ones on transcript.
IMO, without GPA, I think I can get into good schools that I want to go into (especially math related).
|
On September 05 2010 03:11 micronesia wrote: What do you guys think about class rank? How important is it? How often is it used? My high school didn't calculate a class rank intentionally. The particular number is rarely important, but you often are forced by the college application to give some estimate. So long as you have some sense as to whether you're in the top 1%/top 5% you should be okay.
It is used almost exclusively as the metric in the admissions offices, since it is completely ridiculous to compare the GPA of one school (which is out of 100) to the GPA of another school (which is out of 4.0 unscaled) to the GPA of yet another school (which gives you bonus points for AP/Honors classes).
Thus, the only real way admissions officers can compare you to a student from another school (this is actually rarely ever done in the sense of putting two apps next to each other, but in a broad sense... in order to establish thresholds at each stage) these officers must use a more "fair" ranking system, and that is class rank.
See my previous posts for a bit more detail, or just download the application for the colleges you're interested in to see precisely what they ask for.
|
On September 05 2010 02:04 love1another wrote:When I was applying, the general rule of thumb was 10. I know your circumstances are different, but even in my own circumstances, this was not a hard-and-fast rule. For example applications to the University of California college system were all on the same application so there was no reason not to submit the same application to 3 colleges instead of just one. (except like an extra $30 per college blehh...) Meanwhile, almost all the private schools I applied to, with the exception of MIT and Stanford(?), were on the Common App. I just submitted that (along with a 1-page supplement unique to each college), to 6 or so top-tier colleges (again paying an addition ~$100 fee for each one). The idea is really just one of insurance. At the end of the day there is a stochastic element from your perspective as to whether or not you get in, and thus the more places you apply to, the better off you are. This is completely different from, say, the Asian system where your test score determines 95% of whether you get into a college, and what college you put as your 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice actually matters. also... something that could make life easier is applying to a uni that you're keen on going to that has early action- then come regular application time, if you've been accepted to an EA school, you don't have to worry about applying to safety schools.
|
On September 05 2010 03:07 SolHeiM wrote: Would you say it's easier or harder to get into an American college if you are a foreigner? As I'm from Sweden, I'm interested in studying psychology maybe sometime in the future, and I was considering studying in America or in another English-speaking country. Though, I'm wondering if foreign applicants are generally biased against, and if so, biased against negatively or positively?
Does the fact that I'm a foreigner increase or lower my chances of acceptance? I'd say the most important factors are: 1.) What country you're from and 2.) How much money your family makes.
If you're from an under-represented country it's a plus, because colleges like to brag that "we have students from 173 countries in our freshman class!"
The second factor comes in because a lot of top colleges are "need blind" to domestic students. That means that your financials and your applicant statistics are completely separate and are looked at by completely separate people so that your ability to pay does not affect whether or not you are accepted. Fortunately, or unfortunately, most of these schools do not extend the "need blind" policy to foreign students. Simple conclusion? If you're rich it's a good thing. If you're poor, well you better damn well be amazing.
|
United States24342 Posts
On September 05 2010 03:15 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:11 micronesia wrote: What do you guys think about class rank? How important is it? How often is it used? My high school didn't calculate a class rank intentionally. The particular number is rarely important, but you often are forced by the college application to give some estimate. So long as you have some sense as to whether you're in the top 1%/top 5% you should be okay. It is used almost exclusively as the metric in the admissions offices, since it is completely ridiculous to compare the GPA of one school (which is out of 100) to the GPA of another school (which is out of 4.0 unscaled) to the GPA of yet another school (which gives you bonus points for AP/Honors classes). Thus, the only real way admissions officers can compare you to a student from another school (this is actually rarely ever done in the sense of putting two apps next to each other, but in a broad sense... in order to establish thresholds at each stage) these officers must use a more "fair" ranking system, and that is class rank. See my previous posts for a bit more detail, or just download the application for the colleges you're interested in to see precisely what they ask for. Actually my guidance department had a stamp they used wherever an application said "class rank" or "approximate class rank" which said "class rank precluded by board of education" or something like that :p
But I'm guessing in special case high schools the admission officers are already familiar with them and can get the same basic info from the gpa etc
|
On September 05 2010 03:11 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:06 MidasMulligan wrote: I was a pretty horrid student my freshman and sophomore year (like 3.23 gpa), and didn't take many challenging classes; however, my junior year I took a few AP classes and got all A's and my gpa is rising. My senior year, I'm taking even more AP classes, and hopefully my gpa will rise to at least a 3.9+ (if that's possible).
My question is, am I unable to go to a top school like MIT because of those two horrible, horrible years? What can I do to improve my chances? That being said, if you are a female and you can pull off a 2250+ SAT score and can talk confidently about some extracurriculars, you can probably get in.
This is kind of a weird question, but what exactly IS an extracurricular? What kind of extracurricular are out there? Are there specific ones that MIT might be more interested in? How do I go about finding them?
|
On September 05 2010 03:22 MidasMulligan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:11 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 03:06 MidasMulligan wrote: I was a pretty horrid student my freshman and sophomore year (like 3.23 gpa), and didn't take many challenging classes; however, my junior year I took a few AP classes and got all A's and my gpa is rising. My senior year, I'm taking even more AP classes, and hopefully my gpa will rise to at least a 3.9+ (if that's possible).
My question is, am I unable to go to a top school like MIT because of those two horrible, horrible years? What can I do to improve my chances? That being said, if you are a female and you can pull off a 2250+ SAT score and can talk confidently about some extracurriculars, you can probably get in. This is kind of a weird question, but what exactly IS an extracurricular? What kind of extracurricular are out there? Are there specific ones that MIT might be more interested in? How do I go about finding them? Something that MIT is interested in: AMC/AIME scores (I FUCKED UP AIME T.T). It's a math competition held in USA every year during Feb.~Mar.
|
On September 05 2010 03:18 Bereft wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 02:04 love1another wrote:And yes, how many schools should I apply to? When I was applying, the general rule of thumb was 10. I know your circumstances are different, but even in my own circumstances, this was not a hard-and-fast rule. For example applications to the University of California college system were all on the same application so there was no reason not to submit the same application to 3 colleges instead of just one. (except like an extra $30 per college blehh...) Meanwhile, almost all the private schools I applied to, with the exception of MIT and Stanford(?), were on the Common App. I just submitted that (along with a 1-page supplement unique to each college), to 6 or so top-tier colleges (again paying an addition ~$100 fee for each one). The idea is really just one of insurance. At the end of the day there is a stochastic element from your perspective as to whether or not you get in, and thus the more places you apply to, the better off you are. This is completely different from, say, the Asian system where your test score determines 95% of whether you get into a college, and what college you put as your 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice actually matters. also... something that could make life easier is applying to a uni that you're keen on going to that has early action- then come regular application time, if you've been accepted to an EA school, you don't have to worry about applying to safety schools.
While this is true, a lot of colleges start reading apps as soon as they start coming in. So especially if you're an under-represented minority, my gut-instinct says that you're better off submitting your application early (for regular decision) than waiting until you've heard back from your early decision.
Realistically this only makes a difference at the most competitive schools. The following example is purely theorycraft of what could go wrong:
If, say, your goal school is Harvard, but you already got into Yale early action, simply because Harvard doesn't have an early action option:
It sucks to end up in a situation where the Harvard interviewer asks "so I assume you applied to Yale early action, did you get in?" At which point you have to either lie or say "yes."
It's basically a lose-lose situation, if you're deadset on Harvard, since if you say "no..." the Harvard admissions officers might think "there must be some reason that Yale said no..." If you say yes, however, they'll think "ehh.... Yale early action has like a 90% matriculation rate... he's probably not gonna choose us anyway if we accept him... And we're not screwing him over anyway. Why bother to purposely degrade our admission stats?"
|
On September 05 2010 01:53 love1another wrote: Then again, if you feel I'm unqualified to offer some helpful tips, nobody's forcing you to listen :D gotcha. didnt mean my question as an undermining one; it's just that often times aspects of college applications and the decision making process are quite arbitrary and subjective, i wasn't sure what would qualify one to answer something like "can i get into X university an SAT score of Y?" or "what should i write my essay about?"- just wondered if you were a college admissions recruiter, or just a student who'd been through the process, etc etc.
|
On September 05 2010 03:19 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:15 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 03:11 micronesia wrote: What do you guys think about class rank? How important is it? How often is it used? My high school didn't calculate a class rank intentionally. The particular number is rarely important, but you often are forced by the college application to give some estimate. So long as you have some sense as to whether you're in the top 1%/top 5% you should be okay. It is used almost exclusively as the metric in the admissions offices, since it is completely ridiculous to compare the GPA of one school (which is out of 100) to the GPA of another school (which is out of 4.0 unscaled) to the GPA of yet another school (which gives you bonus points for AP/Honors classes). Thus, the only real way admissions officers can compare you to a student from another school (this is actually rarely ever done in the sense of putting two apps next to each other, but in a broad sense... in order to establish thresholds at each stage) these officers must use a more "fair" ranking system, and that is class rank. See my previous posts for a bit more detail, or just download the application for the colleges you're interested in to see precisely what they ask for. Actually my guidance department had a stamp they used wherever an application said "class rank" or "approximate class rank" which said "class rank precluded by board of education" or something like that :p But I'm guessing in special case high schools the admission officers are already familiar with them and can get the same basic info from the gpa etc
In many cases, you are the one who has to fill out that information, whether it be through the online Common Application or otherwise... You can't really send it to your school for them to stamp it (and even if you could it would look strange), so you're best off just giving a reasonable estimate.
|
On September 05 2010 03:25 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:18 Bereft wrote:On September 05 2010 02:04 love1another wrote:And yes, how many schools should I apply to? When I was applying, the general rule of thumb was 10. I know your circumstances are different, but even in my own circumstances, this was not a hard-and-fast rule. For example applications to the University of California college system were all on the same application so there was no reason not to submit the same application to 3 colleges instead of just one. (except like an extra $30 per college blehh...) Meanwhile, almost all the private schools I applied to, with the exception of MIT and Stanford(?), were on the Common App. I just submitted that (along with a 1-page supplement unique to each college), to 6 or so top-tier colleges (again paying an addition ~$100 fee for each one). The idea is really just one of insurance. At the end of the day there is a stochastic element from your perspective as to whether or not you get in, and thus the more places you apply to, the better off you are. This is completely different from, say, the Asian system where your test score determines 95% of whether you get into a college, and what college you put as your 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice actually matters. also... something that could make life easier is applying to a uni that you're keen on going to that has early action- then come regular application time, if you've been accepted to an EA school, you don't have to worry about applying to safety schools. While this is true, a lot of colleges start reading apps as soon as they start coming in. So especially if you're an under-represented minority, my gut-instinct says that you're better off submitting your application early (for regular decision) than waiting until you've heard back from your early decision. Realistically this only makes a difference at the most competitive schools. The following example is purely theorycraft of what could go wrong: If, say, your goal school is Harvard, but you already got into Yale early action, simply because Harvard doesn't have an early action option:It sucks to end up in a situation where the Harvard interviewer asks "so I assume you applied to Yale early action, did you get in?" At which point you have to either lie or say "yes." It's basically a lose-lose situation, if you're deadset on Harvard, since if you say "no..." the Harvard admissions officers might think "there must be some reason that Yale said no..." If you say yes, however, they'll think "ehh.... Yale early action has like a 90% matriculation rate... he's probably not gonna choose us anyway if we accept him... And we're not screwing him over anyway. Why bother to purposely degrade our admission stats?" if you were in that situation, couldn't you apply to yale EA and harvard ED? and in your experience, how often do you encounter in interviews that an interviewer asks you about whether you've been accepted to other schools?
|
On September 05 2010 03:23 supernovamaniac wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:22 MidasMulligan wrote:On September 05 2010 03:11 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 03:06 MidasMulligan wrote: I was a pretty horrid student my freshman and sophomore year (like 3.23 gpa), and didn't take many challenging classes; however, my junior year I took a few AP classes and got all A's and my gpa is rising. My senior year, I'm taking even more AP classes, and hopefully my gpa will rise to at least a 3.9+ (if that's possible).
My question is, am I unable to go to a top school like MIT because of those two horrible, horrible years? What can I do to improve my chances? That being said, if you are a female and you can pull off a 2250+ SAT score and can talk confidently about some extracurriculars, you can probably get in. This is kind of a weird question, but what exactly IS an extracurricular? What kind of extracurricular are out there? Are there specific ones that MIT might be more interested in? How do I go about finding them? Something that MIT is interested in: AMC/AIME scores (I FUCKED UP AIME T.T). It's a math competition held in USA every year during Feb.~Mar. There are a lot of other interesting math science competitions, like Siemens/Intel/USAMOUSAMO(related to AIME). Also there are a lot of nationwide organizations and honor societies that are sort of in the "we know it's bullshit but it couldn't hurt" category. Varsity sports are also awesome. Volunteering/job experience also lend your application a bit of real-world credibility.
|
On September 05 2010 03:31 Bereft wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:25 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 03:18 Bereft wrote:On September 05 2010 02:04 love1another wrote:And yes, how many schools should I apply to? When I was applying, the general rule of thumb was 10. I know your circumstances are different, but even in my own circumstances, this was not a hard-and-fast rule. For example applications to the University of California college system were all on the same application so there was no reason not to submit the same application to 3 colleges instead of just one. (except like an extra $30 per college blehh...) Meanwhile, almost all the private schools I applied to, with the exception of MIT and Stanford(?), were on the Common App. I just submitted that (along with a 1-page supplement unique to each college), to 6 or so top-tier colleges (again paying an addition ~$100 fee for each one). The idea is really just one of insurance. At the end of the day there is a stochastic element from your perspective as to whether or not you get in, and thus the more places you apply to, the better off you are. This is completely different from, say, the Asian system where your test score determines 95% of whether you get into a college, and what college you put as your 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice actually matters. also... something that could make life easier is applying to a uni that you're keen on going to that has early action- then come regular application time, if you've been accepted to an EA school, you don't have to worry about applying to safety schools. While this is true, a lot of colleges start reading apps as soon as they start coming in. So especially if you're an under-represented minority, my gut-instinct says that you're better off submitting your application early (for regular decision) than waiting until you've heard back from your early decision. Realistically this only makes a difference at the most competitive schools. The following example is purely theorycraft of what could go wrong: If, say, your goal school is Harvard, but you already got into Yale early action, simply because Harvard doesn't have an early action option:It sucks to end up in a situation where the Harvard interviewer asks "so I assume you applied to Yale early action, did you get in?" At which point you have to either lie or say "yes." It's basically a lose-lose situation, if you're deadset on Harvard, since if you say "no..." the Harvard admissions officers might think "there must be some reason that Yale said no..." If you say yes, however, they'll think "ehh.... Yale early action has like a 90% matriculation rate... he's probably not gonna choose us anyway if we accept him... And we're not screwing him over anyway. Why bother to purposely degrade our admission stats?" if you were in that situation, couldn't you apply to yale EA and harvard ED? and in your experience, how often do you encounter in interviews that an interviewer asks you about whether you've been accepted to other schools? As of 2006, Harvard eliminated it's ED, so it only has a regular decision. (They say somewhere on their website though that they start reading apps in November? it's been a while... so correct me if I'm wrong.)
When you're being interviewed by those top schools, it is almost going to come up 100%. That's not to say you won't get accepted anyway because you're just that amazing, but if your heart is really set on one school, and you'll live the rest of your life in regret if you don't get in, you might want to think a bit more carefully about applying early to another school.
|
On September 05 2010 03:32 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:23 supernovamaniac wrote:On September 05 2010 03:22 MidasMulligan wrote:On September 05 2010 03:11 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 03:06 MidasMulligan wrote: I was a pretty horrid student my freshman and sophomore year (like 3.23 gpa), and didn't take many challenging classes; however, my junior year I took a few AP classes and got all A's and my gpa is rising. My senior year, I'm taking even more AP classes, and hopefully my gpa will rise to at least a 3.9+ (if that's possible).
My question is, am I unable to go to a top school like MIT because of those two horrible, horrible years? What can I do to improve my chances? That being said, if you are a female and you can pull off a 2250+ SAT score and can talk confidently about some extracurriculars, you can probably get in. This is kind of a weird question, but what exactly IS an extracurricular? What kind of extracurricular are out there? Are there specific ones that MIT might be more interested in? How do I go about finding them? Something that MIT is interested in: AMC/AIME scores (I FUCKED UP AIME T.T). It's a math competition held in USA every year during Feb.~Mar. There are a lot of other interesting math science competitions, like Siemens/Intel/USAMO(related to AIME). Also there are a lot of nationwide organizations and honor societies that are sort of in the "we know it's bullshit but it couldn't hurt" category. Varsity sports are also awesome. Volunteering/job experience also lend your application a bit of real-world credibility. I didn't put down USAMO/IMO for few reasons (AJFWEAIOFJAWEF). =(
Although being an organizer for one of the best high school math team across the country rocks XD
With that being said, does it matter on what you volunteered for? For example, I have one with PGA Tour Barclays where I volunteered and helped out the PGA Playoffs tournament, The Barclays. In contrast to that, I had an internship at KAVC (Korean American Voter's Council) where we helped Koreans get naturalized, voter's registration, and help pass a HR Resolution.
(I know I'm putting down everything; I just want to know the importance so that everyone can understand that aspect a little better.)
|
On September 05 2010 01:18 Catch]22 wrote: How much does college cost in the US?
really really depends. some private schools can be as much as $50-60k a year but there are other schools that are just as good that can be $8-10k a year depending on if you live in the state or not.
|
On September 05 2010 03:38 SilentCrono wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 01:18 Catch]22 wrote: How much does college cost in the US? really really depends. some private schools can be as much as $50-60k a year but there are other schools that are just as good that can be $8-10k a year depending on if you live in the state or not. 50-60k is a bit high if you're talking just tuition. The most expensive schools are more like 45-50k just tuition. Though if you include room and board (and most schools require living in housing your first year), then 50-60k is just about right.
|
My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all?
|
On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all? 1.) Your SAT could use some work. Unless you're black or hispanic. No racist implications here, just calls 'em as I sees 'em: People get into harvard yale standford princeton with 1700s if they're latino/black so long as they have some angle. If you're asian, retake it without a moment's hesitation.
2.) Extracurriculars that don't imply unethical/illegal activity can almost never hurt. They say to the college "I'm not a weirdo/robot."
|
On September 05 2010 03:41 theonemephisto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:38 SilentCrono wrote:On September 05 2010 01:18 Catch]22 wrote: How much does college cost in the US? really really depends. some private schools can be as much as $50-60k a year but there are other schools that are just as good that can be $8-10k a year depending on if you live in the state or not. 50-60k is a bit high if you're talking just tuition. The most expensive schools are more like 45-50k just tuition. Though if you include room and board (and most schools require living in housing your first year), then 50-60k is just about right.
See my more detailed explanation at the beginning of this thread. The cost of attendance usually caps off >= $50k for top schools. Maybe a few thousand extra for incidentals/transportation, but this sum almost always ALREADY includes room+board.
|
On September 05 2010 03:49 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:41 theonemephisto wrote:On September 05 2010 03:38 SilentCrono wrote:On September 05 2010 01:18 Catch]22 wrote: How much does college cost in the US? really really depends. some private schools can be as much as $50-60k a year but there are other schools that are just as good that can be $8-10k a year depending on if you live in the state or not. 50-60k is a bit high if you're talking just tuition. The most expensive schools are more like 45-50k just tuition. Though if you include room and board (and most schools require living in housing your first year), then 50-60k is just about right. See my more detailed explanation at the beginning of this thread. The cost of attendance usually caps off >= $50k for top schools. Maybe a few thousand extra for incidentals/transportation, but this sum almost always ALREADY includes room+board. I'm paying >40k tuition and ~13k room and board. And that doesn't include flying, textbooks, or supplies (another ~2k). I believe last quarter's bill was around 18k (3 quarters = 1 year), so it's around 54k per year + ~2k for flying/books. I don't think my family is particularly wealthy, I'd self-characterize us as upper-middle class (~150k household income), but we're getting essentially zero financial aid, in large part because I'm an only child. But that still adds up to about 56k a year, even if a lot of my situation makes me near the top end of expenditures. But that's just an anecdotal example, but it certainly isn't impossible to pay a 55k tuition even if you aren't particularly rich.
For reference, I go to the University of Chicago.
|
United States24342 Posts
On September 05 2010 03:27 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:19 micronesia wrote:On September 05 2010 03:15 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 03:11 micronesia wrote: What do you guys think about class rank? How important is it? How often is it used? My high school didn't calculate a class rank intentionally. The particular number is rarely important, but you often are forced by the college application to give some estimate. So long as you have some sense as to whether you're in the top 1%/top 5% you should be okay. It is used almost exclusively as the metric in the admissions offices, since it is completely ridiculous to compare the GPA of one school (which is out of 100) to the GPA of another school (which is out of 4.0 unscaled) to the GPA of yet another school (which gives you bonus points for AP/Honors classes). Thus, the only real way admissions officers can compare you to a student from another school (this is actually rarely ever done in the sense of putting two apps next to each other, but in a broad sense... in order to establish thresholds at each stage) these officers must use a more "fair" ranking system, and that is class rank. See my previous posts for a bit more detail, or just download the application for the colleges you're interested in to see precisely what they ask for. Actually my guidance department had a stamp they used wherever an application said "class rank" or "approximate class rank" which said "class rank precluded by board of education" or something like that :p But I'm guessing in special case high schools the admission officers are already familiar with them and can get the same basic info from the gpa etc In many cases, you are the one who has to fill out that information, whether it be through the online Common Application or otherwise... You can't really send it to your school for them to stamp it (and even if you could it would look strange), so you're best off just giving a reasonable estimate. Good thing I didn't apply to one of those schools then LOL I have no idea what my class rank was at that overly competitive school.
|
Where are you now Mr. Micronesia?!?!?!
|
Is there a big disadvantage applying to good unis with ACT scores instead of SAT scores?
|
On September 05 2010 05:02 commiboi wrote: Is there a big disadvantage applying to good unis with ACT scores instead of SAT scores? I don't really know. Sorry :/ I'm sure you can find discussions on this via google (ACT vs. SAT).
AFAIK, a lot of my friends took both and just used whichever one had the higher relative score.
|
United States24342 Posts
On September 05 2010 04:43 love1another wrote: Where are you now Mr. Micronesia?!?!?! I graduated from college in 2007. I'm about to graduate from grad school at Hofstra lol
|
On September 05 2010 03:48 love1another wrote: 2.) Extracurriculars that don't imply unethical/illegal activity can almost never hurt. They say to the college "I'm not a weirdo/robot."
This is definitely true, but I think it's kind of an understatement.
Especially when you're talking about Ivy League schools, where pretty much everyone who gets accepted is going to have near-perfect grades and SAT scores (unless they're a minority), what you did outside of school is going to be what makes your application.
Some extracurriculars may help demonstrate certain qualities you have (like leadership) or give you some sort of experience in your intended field (academic clubs, etc.), but that's not the most important part. Extracurriculars not only prove that you're capable of multitasking many responsibilities outside of one area, but they also provide evidence for the college that you are a well-adjusted individual by showing that you have hobbies and interests. These qualities all point to you being a more successful person down the line. (Also, you will be hard pressed to find anything to write an essay about in your application if you haven't done anything outside of schoolwork.)
I don't have any real credentials so if I'm horribly wrong let me know, but this is based off my perceptions of who I see getting into top schools.
|
I'm going to say something that I notice a lot of high school students don't ask but should know and consider. It may be slightly off topic, but too many seniors don't think about this. I highly discourage applying/attending a college that you barely managed to get into. I'll explain.
It's very common for people to apply to top colleges with no real expectations because they understand their grades/scores/etc are not too great, but by some miracle they get in, all happy that they got into such a great school. In 2 or 3 years, they drop out, sometimes even in 1 year. Although it's great that you got accepted, it's really not a good decision to go to a school that you didn't think you had a decent chance for (unless you're just being paranoid). This is because, to be blunt, you probably can't actually handle it. Despite what parents may say (maybe this is just an Asian parent thing; being an Asian, I wouldn't know) going to the best college you can get into is not always the wisest choice.
Now, this is not always the case. Sometimes students slacked off in high school, get into a good college and then take school seriously and succeed. Good for them! But, please think carefully when it comes to the top schools, or at least the best schools that you apply for. Underestimating the rigor of college (particularly the "upper tier" ones) is not something to be taken lightly. If after contemplation, you think you can succeed in such a place, by all means go for it. I'm not here to prevent it; I just want to make people aware of it. Choosing your college is a huge decision; don't make a bad decision because of a college's prestige. I'm sorry to say I probably can't help with any specific questions regarding this, and I feel awkward leaving such questions to OP, but whenever I encounter "applying to college" topics, I almost always see this issue neglected, despite being a serious consideration in my opinion.
That's the end of my little rant. Good luck to all applicants and good job helping others, OP.
|
On September 05 2010 05:11 matjlav wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:48 love1another wrote: 2.) Extracurriculars that don't imply unethical/illegal activity can almost never hurt. They say to the college "I'm not a weirdo/robot." This is definitely true, but I think it's kind of an understatement. Especially when you're talking about Ivy League schools, where pretty much everyone who gets accepted is going to have near-perfect grades and SAT scores (unless they're a minority), what you did outside of school is going to be what makes your application. Some extracurriculars may help demonstrate certain qualities you have (like leadership) or give you some sort of experience in your intended field (academic clubs, etc.), but that's not the most important part. Extracurriculars not only prove that you're capable of multitasking many responsibilities outside of one area, but they also provide evidence for the college that you are a well-adjusted individual by showing that you have hobbies and interests. These qualities all point to you being a more successful person down the line. (Also, you will be hard pressed to find anything to write an essay about in your application if you haven't done anything outside of schoolwork.) This. In addition, another key advantage of extracurriculars comes down to definition: Extracurriculars are something you do on your own initiative. A self-motivated learner is something that all top schools are looking for, and being involved in an extracurricular activity is an excellent way to demonstrate this quality.
|
what can i do if i didn't get accepted into the school I wanted?
|
On September 05 2010 01:16 SubtleArt wrote: On average what grades do you need to enter a good univiersity? I wanna enter some sort of science courses (cause that's where I want my career to be headed) at a good Canadian university like WAterloo, Queens, or Mcgill. Not sure if my marks are up to scratch though (low 90s in history, english and math, but only only 86 in Chemistry and 84 in biology).
Also, what grades do Canadian universities look at? Does the first term of grade 12 matter as much as your grade 11 marks? I'm in grade 12 this year. Basically, if I can get 90s in Chem and Biology this year will universities still accept me or will they go "na, ur grade 11 marks sucked for the sciences and you're trying to enter a science course....GTFO"?
And yes, how many schools should I apply to? Grade 11 marks matter. However you should also work your ass-off first term of grade 12 as they look at those even more. Typically with me, they looked at gr. 11 marks when looking for early acceptances, solid gr. 11 marks - more chance of an early acceptance. Universities won't decline you for having bad gr. 11 marks though, it just may take longer for you to get an acceptance letter.
|
On September 05 2010 05:14 geometryb wrote: what can i do if i didn't get accepted into the school I wanted? Did you get waitlisted or flat-out rejected? If you got wait-listed it's quite likely that if you express continued interest in the school, via emails, and updates, that you can still get in. My friend got into both Yale and Princeton on waitlist simply by continuing to let them know he was interested.
If, however, you got flat-out rejected, it's 99% of the time not worth your time to push the issue further. Evaluate your other options and almost always you'll find that wherever you end up will be awesome.
|
when do people usually visit colleges? before they apply or after they get accepted?
|
On September 05 2010 06:01 geometryb wrote: when do people usually visit colleges? before they apply or after they get accepted? I know people who have done both. In my experience, the "before accepted" trips are optional, but the "after accepted" trips are basically mandatory.
|
On September 05 2010 05:12 KazeHydra wrote: I'm going to say something that I notice a lot of high school students don't ask but should know and consider. It may be slightly off topic, but too many seniors don't think about this. I highly discourage applying/attending a college that you barely managed to get into. I'll explain.
It's very common for people to apply to top colleges with no real expectations because they understand their grades/scores/etc are not too great, but by some miracle they get in, all happy that they got into such a great school. In 2 or 3 years, they drop out, sometimes even in 1 year. Although it's great that you got accepted, it's really not a good decision to go to a school that you didn't think you had a decent chance for (unless you're just being paranoid). This is because, to be blunt, you probably can't actually handle it. Despite what parents may say (maybe this is just an Asian parent thing; being an Asian, I wouldn't know) going to the best college you can get into is not always the wisest choice.
Now, this is not always the case. Sometimes students slacked off in high school, get into a good college and then take school seriously and succeed. Good for them! But, please think carefully when it comes to the top schools, or at least the best schools that you apply for. Underestimating the rigor of college (particularly the "upper tier" ones) is not something to be taken lightly. If after contemplation, you think you can succeed in such a place, by all means go for it. I'm not here to prevent it; I just want to make people aware of it. Choosing your college is a huge decision; don't make a bad decision because of a college's prestige. I'm sorry to say I probably can't help with any specific questions regarding this, and I feel awkward leaving such questions to OP, but whenever I encounter "applying to college" topics, I almost always see this issue neglected, despite being a serious consideration in my opinion.
That's the end of my little rant. Good luck to all applicants and good job helping others, OP.
Well... given that the acceptance rate at all the top schools of which you speak are <10%, you can almost rest assured that the false positives, those that happened to get in that didn't deserve to, are completely negligible in comparison to those that deserved to get in but didn't. And realistically, surviving at a top school is not very hard. Ivies tend to grade around a B~. If you suck and go to class once in a while, and show up for the exam, you're going to get at least a C. Flunking out is actually damn near impossible if you can, like, read English. Furthermore, if you find yourself lacking in some pre-requisite knowledge, a bunch of resources are always available to help you get to where you want to be... I know for a fact that my college has math/science/writing tutors at every residential unit. And besides, the admissions department knows that along with the IMO finalists and Intel winners, they'll be letting in a few less academically gifted minority students or athletes.
Even places like CalTech, which has a deserved reputation for being hard has fuck, don't count first year GPA so as to let students ease their way into a healthy and interesting courseload without forcing too much stress initially.
I'm not going to continue to further argue that "if you got in, you deserve it, and you should take advantage of it," but if the chance to go to your dream school suddenly becomes a reality, don't throw it away purely on account of modesty. But if you truly are concerned, I'll just tell you that with all the top schools, getting in is the hard part.
|
do you have any information correlating salaries between graduates of top schools (us news and world report) and other schools?
|
On September 05 2010 06:21 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 05:12 KazeHydra wrote: I'm going to say something that I notice a lot of high school students don't ask but should know and consider. It may be slightly off topic, but too many seniors don't think about this. I highly discourage applying/attending a college that you barely managed to get into. I'll explain.
It's very common for people to apply to top colleges with no real expectations because they understand their grades/scores/etc are not too great, but by some miracle they get in, all happy that they got into such a great school. In 2 or 3 years, they drop out, sometimes even in 1 year. Although it's great that you got accepted, it's really not a good decision to go to a school that you didn't think you had a decent chance for (unless you're just being paranoid). This is because, to be blunt, you probably can't actually handle it. Despite what parents may say (maybe this is just an Asian parent thing; being an Asian, I wouldn't know) going to the best college you can get into is not always the wisest choice.
Now, this is not always the case. Sometimes students slacked off in high school, get into a good college and then take school seriously and succeed. Good for them! But, please think carefully when it comes to the top schools, or at least the best schools that you apply for. Underestimating the rigor of college (particularly the "upper tier" ones) is not something to be taken lightly. If after contemplation, you think you can succeed in such a place, by all means go for it. I'm not here to prevent it; I just want to make people aware of it. Choosing your college is a huge decision; don't make a bad decision because of a college's prestige. I'm sorry to say I probably can't help with any specific questions regarding this, and I feel awkward leaving such questions to OP, but whenever I encounter "applying to college" topics, I almost always see this issue neglected, despite being a serious consideration in my opinion.
That's the end of my little rant. Good luck to all applicants and good job helping others, OP. Well... given that the acceptance rate at all the top schools of which you speak are <10%, you can almost rest assured that the false positives, those that happened to get in that didn't deserve to, are completely negligible in comparison to those that deserved to get in but didn't. And realistically, surviving at a top school is not very hard. Ivies tend to grade around a B~. If you suck and go to class once in a while, and show up for the exam, you're going to get at least a C. Flunking out is actually damn near impossible if you can, like, read English. Furthermore, if you find yourself lacking in some pre-requisite knowledge, a bunch of resources are always available to help you get to where you want to be... I know for a fact that my college has math/science/writing tutors at every residential unit. And besides, the admissions department knows that along with the IMO finalists and Intel winners, they'll be letting in a few less academically gifted minority students or athletes. Even places like CalTech, which has a deserved reputation for being hard has fuck, don't count first year GPA so as to let students ease their way into a healthy and interesting courseload without forcing too much stress initially. I'm not going to continue to further argue that "if you got in, you deserve it, and you should take advantage of it," but if the chance to go to your dream school suddenly becomes a reality, don't throw it away purely on account of modesty. But if you truly are concerned, I'll just tell you that with all the top schools, getting in is the hard part.
well, you're right that the majority of people that get in can at least survive. But I'm not referring to the "whew I managed to get in" type that can survive with a ~2.8 GPA, but rather the "how in the world did this happen?" To relate to starcraft, it would be like a bronze/silver person beating a diamond level player. Just because it happens once, doesn't mean he's diamond level. (this may be more extreme than intended) Furthermore, it's not flunking out that I'm addressing; the people that I said "drop out" choose to leave because either 1)they can't handle the academic pressure/expectations or 2)their grades are far from their expectations. Of course no one realistically expects a 4.0, but for some, they never thought they'd get a C in a class and become incredibly depressed/unmotivated/etc. This specifically applies to the top students at crap schools. It's not their fault; they've never encountered anything challenging before.
But maybe I sounded harsher than I intended. If I somehow made you lose confidence in your academic abilities, please do not listen to me! My goal was only to get people to consider difficulty of the school as a factor when deciding where to go. If it's a person's dream school, that's already a great reason to disregard my post as less than important. Absolutely don't refuse an acceptance solely because of modesty or because it "sounds hard." Do research, ask current attendees, and evaluate yourself as fairly and objectively as possible.
Anyways, I also don't want to continue my argument, especially since there is no absolute to this; it is always dependent on the individual. I also don't want to derail this thread; from what I've read, you've done an excellent job answering questions =)
|
On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all?
I would say SATs are probably the least valued criteria in college admissions provided your other areas are solid. My personal estimates rank them in this order:
1. GPA=>Class standing 2. Personal Statement 3. Teacher Recs 3. Extracurricular, especially if you have titles in those groups 5. Standardized testing scores
(Yes I know there are two 3s)
My reasoning for this is that everyone has testing scores and it really doesn't tell shit about you as a student or a person after you reach a certain score plateau. You're class standing indicates potential, if you are not tops in your school, then you already have proven that X amount of people are better than you in your particular situation. Personal statement is big and a lot of kids fuck this up because they can't write about their life worth a damn, aka making it actually personal.
As for your ECs, that's perfectly fine, ECs are suppose to show colleges of your interests and your dedication/involvement with those interests; they're not gonna hold it against someone if their personal interests differ from their academic pursuits.
Don't worry about your SATs unless you sucked it up badly on one particular subject, especially if your math is bad (I consider 750 bad in math, but I am Chinese...) and you want to be in engineering.
Obviously the admissions committee would weigh all the available information they have on you to make a decision, so what I am saying is a rough estimate based on my personal experience with college admissions and what I can gather from other people (since people keep sending me their PSs to read over).
|
On September 05 2010 01:20 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 01:18 Catch]22 wrote: How much does college cost in the US? This obviously will vary a ton. A top school could cost you like 50,000 dollars a year tuition I bet. Can someone confirm this? If you go to an in-state public university it will vary by state but be more on the order of magnitude of 8-10k tuition per year I think. If you commute to a community college or something like that then it's probably significantly less.
I went to a state school in California and I paid 6k/year without a scholarship.
Attending Georgetown and is around 45k/yr
|
On September 05 2010 08:57 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all? I would say SATs are probably the least valued criteria in college admissions provided your other areas are solid. My personal estimates rank them in this order: 1. GPA=>Class standing 2. Personal Statement 3. Teacher Recs 3. Extracurricular, especially if you have titles in those groups 5. Standardized testing scores (Yes I know there are two 3s) My reasoning for this is that everyone has testing scores and it really doesn't tell shit about you as a student or a person after you reach a certain score plateau. You're class standing indicates potential, if you are not tops in your school, then you already have proven that X amount of people are better than you in your particular situation. Personal statement is big and a lot of kids fuck this up because they can't write about their life worth a damn, aka making it actually personal. As for your ECs, that's perfectly fine, ECs are suppose to show colleges of your interests and your dedication/involvement with those interests; they're not gonna hold it against someone if their personal interests differ from their academic pursuits. Don't worry about your SATs unless you sucked it up badly on one particular subject, especially if your math is bad (I consider 750 bad in math, but I am Chinese...) and you want to be in engineering. Obviously the admissions committee would weigh all the available information they have on you to make a decision, so what I am saying is a rough estimate based on my personal experience with college admissions and what I can gather from other people (since people keep sending me their PSs to read over). I can't say I really agree with this, though I wouldn't be the one to ask. I do think that after a certain plateau differences don't matter, but I think that plateau is around 2200-2300, a college might consider a 2250 and 2350 pretty equally, but IMO a 1960 will definitely have an impact on your admission chances.
In fact, depending on the school you go to and how much history the college has with that particular high school, a low SAT score relative to your GPA might just make them think the school is an easier school in general.
|
On September 05 2010 09:16 theonemephisto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 08:57 Judicator wrote:On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all? I would say SATs are probably the least valued criteria in college admissions provided your other areas are solid. My personal estimates rank them in this order: 1. GPA=>Class standing 2. Personal Statement 3. Teacher Recs 3. Extracurricular, especially if you have titles in those groups 5. Standardized testing scores (Yes I know there are two 3s) My reasoning for this is that everyone has testing scores and it really doesn't tell shit about you as a student or a person after you reach a certain score plateau. You're class standing indicates potential, if you are not tops in your school, then you already have proven that X amount of people are better than you in your particular situation. Personal statement is big and a lot of kids fuck this up because they can't write about their life worth a damn, aka making it actually personal. As for your ECs, that's perfectly fine, ECs are suppose to show colleges of your interests and your dedication/involvement with those interests; they're not gonna hold it against someone if their personal interests differ from their academic pursuits. Don't worry about your SATs unless you sucked it up badly on one particular subject, especially if your math is bad (I consider 750 bad in math, but I am Chinese...) and you want to be in engineering. Obviously the admissions committee would weigh all the available information they have on you to make a decision, so what I am saying is a rough estimate based on my personal experience with college admissions and what I can gather from other people (since people keep sending me their PSs to read over). I can't say I really agree with this, though I wouldn't be the one to ask. I do think that after a certain plateau differences don't matter, but I think that plateau is around 2200-2300, a college might consider a 2250 and 2350 pretty equally, but IMO a 1960 will definitely have an impact on your admission chances. In fact, depending on the school you go to and how much history the college has with that particular high school, a low SAT score relative to your GPA might just make them think the school is an easier school in general.
I think he meant it in the same way you described, at least that's the impression I received. Standardized tests are just idiot bars, once you pass them, they don't distinguish candidates much (although, I think getting perfect scores help).
|
On September 05 2010 08:57 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all? I would say SATs are probably the least valued criteria in college admissions provided your other areas are solid. My personal estimates rank them in this order: 1. GPA=>Class standing 2. Personal Statement 3. Teacher Recs 3. Extracurricular, especially if you have titles in those groups 5. Standardized testing scores (Yes I know there are two 3s) My reasoning for this is that everyone has testing scores and it really doesn't tell shit about you as a student or a person after you reach a certain score plateau. You're class standing indicates potential, if you are not tops in your school, then you already have proven that X amount of people are better than you in your particular situation. Personal statement is big and a lot of kids fuck this up because they can't write about their life worth a damn, aka making it actually personal. As for your ECs, that's perfectly fine, ECs are suppose to show colleges of your interests and your dedication/involvement with those interests; they're not gonna hold it against someone if their personal interests differ from their academic pursuits. Don't worry about your SATs unless you sucked it up badly on one particular subject, especially if your math is bad (I consider 750 bad in math, but I am Chinese...) and you want to be in engineering. Obviously the admissions committee would weigh all the available information they have on you to make a decision, so what I am saying is a rough estimate based on my personal experience with college admissions and what I can gather from other people (since people keep sending me their PSs to read over).
Hey Judicator, where are you coming from? If you're asian/white and your SAT score is under 2k, admissions officers are not going to take your application seriously. Btw, what are your credentials regarding this matter?
|
On September 05 2010 08:32 geometryb wrote: do you have any information correlating salaries between graduates of top schools (us news and world report) and other schools? No I do not have this information, but I've heard there is no correlation.
|
On September 05 2010 09:31 Cambium wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 09:16 theonemephisto wrote:On September 05 2010 08:57 Judicator wrote:On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all? I would say SATs are probably the least valued criteria in college admissions provided your other areas are solid. My personal estimates rank them in this order: 1. GPA=>Class standing 2. Personal Statement 3. Teacher Recs 3. Extracurricular, especially if you have titles in those groups 5. Standardized testing scores (Yes I know there are two 3s) My reasoning for this is that everyone has testing scores and it really doesn't tell shit about you as a student or a person after you reach a certain score plateau. You're class standing indicates potential, if you are not tops in your school, then you already have proven that X amount of people are better than you in your particular situation. Personal statement is big and a lot of kids fuck this up because they can't write about their life worth a damn, aka making it actually personal. As for your ECs, that's perfectly fine, ECs are suppose to show colleges of your interests and your dedication/involvement with those interests; they're not gonna hold it against someone if their personal interests differ from their academic pursuits. Don't worry about your SATs unless you sucked it up badly on one particular subject, especially if your math is bad (I consider 750 bad in math, but I am Chinese...) and you want to be in engineering. Obviously the admissions committee would weigh all the available information they have on you to make a decision, so what I am saying is a rough estimate based on my personal experience with college admissions and what I can gather from other people (since people keep sending me their PSs to read over). I can't say I really agree with this, though I wouldn't be the one to ask. I do think that after a certain plateau differences don't matter, but I think that plateau is around 2200-2300, a college might consider a 2250 and 2350 pretty equally, but IMO a 1960 will definitely have an impact on your admission chances. In fact, depending on the school you go to and how much history the college has with that particular high school, a low SAT score relative to your GPA might just make them think the school is an easier school in general. I think he meant it in the same way you described, at least that's the impression I received. Standardized tests are just idiot bars, once you pass them, they don't distinguish candidates much (although, I think getting perfect scores help).
This is true. They basically are idiot bars, but that bar varies a lot depending on your ethnicity, and that for whites/asians/desi/other majority/over-represented minority, the bar is a lot higher... in the 2250 range.
But I'm not entirely sure that perfect scores help. I mean more than one school rejected my 2400 . But I'm not kidding, retake your 1960. You can spend 10 hours studying, and like $40 to take it once more... get yourself at least a 2100. It's like the cheapest time investment you can put in to increase your chances of getting in by A LOT. That's like, what, one day of SC2?
On September 05 2010 09:16 theonemephisto wrote: I can't say I really agree with this, though I wouldn't be the one to ask. I do think that after a certain plateau differences don't matter, but I think that plateau is around 2200-2300, a college might consider a 2250 and 2350 pretty equally, but IMO a 1960 will definitely have an impact on your admission chances.
In fact, depending on the school you go to and how much history the college has with that particular high school, a low SAT score relative to your GPA might just make them think the school is an easier school in general.
This. Most of what Judicator said is true, but seriously, don't just give up on the SAT because Judicator said "ehhh it's not important."
|
United States10774 Posts
On September 05 2010 08:57 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all? I would say SATs are probably the least valued criteria in college admissions provided your other areas are solid. My personal estimates rank them in this order: 1. GPA=>Class standing 2. Personal Statement 3. Teacher Recs 3. Extracurricular, especially if you have titles in those groups 5. Standardized testing scores (Yes I know there are two 3s) My reasoning for this is that everyone has testing scores and it really doesn't tell shit about you as a student or a person after you reach a certain score plateau. You're class standing indicates potential, if you are not tops in your school, then you already have proven that X amount of people are better than you in your particular situation. Personal statement is big and a lot of kids fuck this up because they can't write about their life worth a damn, aka making it actually personal. As for your ECs, that's perfectly fine, ECs are suppose to show colleges of your interests and your dedication/involvement with those interests; they're not gonna hold it against someone if their personal interests differ from their academic pursuits. Don't worry about your SATs unless you sucked it up badly on one particular subject, especially if your math is bad (I consider 750 bad in math, but I am Chinese...) and you want to be in engineering. Obviously the admissions committee would weigh all the available information they have on you to make a decision, so what I am saying is a rough estimate based on my personal experience with college admissions and what I can gather from other people (since people keep sending me their PSs to read over). This is wrong.
GPA and SAT scores are almost equally important for top schools. You can't even make the first cut at some schools if your GPA / SAT scores don't meet the minimum benchmarks - meaning they won't even look at your teacher recommendations.
|
Thanks OneOther. The consensus being, yeah.... retake your SAT.
|
On September 05 2010 09:52 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 08:57 Judicator wrote:On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all? I would say SATs are probably the least valued criteria in college admissions provided your other areas are solid. My personal estimates rank them in this order: 1. GPA=>Class standing 2. Personal Statement 3. Teacher Recs 3. Extracurricular, especially if you have titles in those groups 5. Standardized testing scores (Yes I know there are two 3s) My reasoning for this is that everyone has testing scores and it really doesn't tell shit about you as a student or a person after you reach a certain score plateau. You're class standing indicates potential, if you are not tops in your school, then you already have proven that X amount of people are better than you in your particular situation. Personal statement is big and a lot of kids fuck this up because they can't write about their life worth a damn, aka making it actually personal. As for your ECs, that's perfectly fine, ECs are suppose to show colleges of your interests and your dedication/involvement with those interests; they're not gonna hold it against someone if their personal interests differ from their academic pursuits. Don't worry about your SATs unless you sucked it up badly on one particular subject, especially if your math is bad (I consider 750 bad in math, but I am Chinese...) and you want to be in engineering. Obviously the admissions committee would weigh all the available information they have on you to make a decision, so what I am saying is a rough estimate based on my personal experience with college admissions and what I can gather from other people (since people keep sending me their PSs to read over). Hey Judicator, where are you coming from? If you're asian/white and your SAT score is under 2k, admissions officers are not going to take your application seriously. Btw, what are your credentials regarding this matter?
Cornell University, applied to like 10 schools iirc.
Helped two others get into Cornell after I read over their PS and advised them on the process. Helped an international student from China get into Florida-Gainsville after I walked him through the process for business grad school.
The reason I said SAT scores weren't important because I actually polled my floor freshmen year to get a rough idea where everyone stood academically since I thought my grades and scores were borderline to get into Cornell. Turned out the common denominator (assuming everyone was telling the truth) was that we were all at least top 5% of our classes, me being the lowest at 5%, everyone else being closer to 1-2% with 3 valedictorians. So I reasoned that my sub par ECs (I moved during sophomore year of HS so getting involved was more difficult), and "low" class ranking was supported by my PS, Teacher Recs (sort of weak iirc they weren't the teachers closest to me), and the fact that I had 14 APs under my belt so my schedules could be considered "highly competitive".
I also know that plenty of people with much better SATs than me (1510 on the old scale with 800 verbal, with a 780 on SAT2 Writing) didn't get into Cornell my year or the year immediately after me. My floor mates scored anywhere from 1200s to 1400s with nobody topping 1500 so in comparison I actually had the highest SAT score but they were all around better students (with some MUCH better) than me in every other aspect (with Teacher Recs as an unknown). Same for the year after according to Cornell's statistics for SAT scores.
I am not saying I am completely right, but I am just going by what I would tell and have told prospective students going through the admissions process. It's just my theory if you will.
And the notion that there are absolute benchmarks is entirely correct OneOther, except that some schools use a comprehensive lowest line rather than just a single category. IIRC the SAT averages for pretty much all of the schools I applied to (all top 20s in a major science/engineering field except my super back up) were all around 1300s on the old scale which would translate to about 2100 on the new test?
My point was that after you reach a certain score, the benefit to you for improving on the score is very little compared to "improvement" in the other criterion.
|
On September 05 2010 10:16 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 09:52 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 08:57 Judicator wrote:On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all? I would say SATs are probably the least valued criteria in college admissions provided your other areas are solid. My personal estimates rank them in this order: 1. GPA=>Class standing 2. Personal Statement 3. Teacher Recs 3. Extracurricular, especially if you have titles in those groups 5. Standardized testing scores (Yes I know there are two 3s) My reasoning for this is that everyone has testing scores and it really doesn't tell shit about you as a student or a person after you reach a certain score plateau. You're class standing indicates potential, if you are not tops in your school, then you already have proven that X amount of people are better than you in your particular situation. Personal statement is big and a lot of kids fuck this up because they can't write about their life worth a damn, aka making it actually personal. As for your ECs, that's perfectly fine, ECs are suppose to show colleges of your interests and your dedication/involvement with those interests; they're not gonna hold it against someone if their personal interests differ from their academic pursuits. Don't worry about your SATs unless you sucked it up badly on one particular subject, especially if your math is bad (I consider 750 bad in math, but I am Chinese...) and you want to be in engineering. Obviously the admissions committee would weigh all the available information they have on you to make a decision, so what I am saying is a rough estimate based on my personal experience with college admissions and what I can gather from other people (since people keep sending me their PSs to read over). Hey Judicator, where are you coming from? If you're asian/white and your SAT score is under 2k, admissions officers are not going to take your application seriously. Btw, what are your credentials regarding this matter? Cornell University, applied to like 10 schools iirc. Helped two others get into Cornell after I read over their PS and advised them on the process. Helped an international student from China get into Florida-Gainsville after I walked him through the process for business grad school. The reason I said SAT scores weren't important because I actually polled my floor freshmen year to get a rough idea where everyone stood academically since I thought my grades and scores were borderline to get into Cornell. Turned out the common denominator (assuming everyone was telling the truth) was that we were all at least top 5% of our classes, me being the lowest at 5%, everyone else being closer to 1-2% with 3 valedictorians. So I reasoned that my sub par ECs (I moved during sophomore year of HS so getting involved was more difficult), and "low" class ranking was supported by my PS, Teacher Recs (sort of weak iirc they weren't the teachers closest to me), and the fact that I had 14 APs under my belt so my schedules could be considered "highly competitive". I also know that plenty of people with much better SATs than me (1510 on the old scale with 800 verbal, with a 780 on SAT2 Writing) didn't get into Cornell my year or the year immediately after me. My floor mates scored anywhere from 1200s to 1400s with nobody topping 1500 so in comparison I actually had the highest SAT score but they were all around better students (with some MUCH better) than me in every other aspect (with Teacher Recs as an unknown). Same for the year after according to Cornell's statistics for SAT scores. I am not saying I am completely right, but I am just going by what I would tell and have told prospective students going through the admissions process. It's just my theory if you will. The last year the "Old SAT" was accepted was 2004. I believe your data is woefully out of date and probably suffers from the problem of a small sample size and an improper control for confounding variables.
Nobody from my high school with an SAT under 2200 gets into Ivy league schools unless they're stellar athletes. That being said all my friends who DID manage to get into Ivy league schools over the past few years from my high school had 2300+.
I think there's a very clear idiot-bar, and you'd be wise not to try to convince people that the SAT is unimportant.
|
On September 05 2010 10:22 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 10:16 Judicator wrote:On September 05 2010 09:52 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 08:57 Judicator wrote:On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all? I would say SATs are probably the least valued criteria in college admissions provided your other areas are solid. My personal estimates rank them in this order: 1. GPA=>Class standing 2. Personal Statement 3. Teacher Recs 3. Extracurricular, especially if you have titles in those groups 5. Standardized testing scores (Yes I know there are two 3s) My reasoning for this is that everyone has testing scores and it really doesn't tell shit about you as a student or a person after you reach a certain score plateau. You're class standing indicates potential, if you are not tops in your school, then you already have proven that X amount of people are better than you in your particular situation. Personal statement is big and a lot of kids fuck this up because they can't write about their life worth a damn, aka making it actually personal. As for your ECs, that's perfectly fine, ECs are suppose to show colleges of your interests and your dedication/involvement with those interests; they're not gonna hold it against someone if their personal interests differ from their academic pursuits. Don't worry about your SATs unless you sucked it up badly on one particular subject, especially if your math is bad (I consider 750 bad in math, but I am Chinese...) and you want to be in engineering. Obviously the admissions committee would weigh all the available information they have on you to make a decision, so what I am saying is a rough estimate based on my personal experience with college admissions and what I can gather from other people (since people keep sending me their PSs to read over). Hey Judicator, where are you coming from? If you're asian/white and your SAT score is under 2k, admissions officers are not going to take your application seriously. Btw, what are your credentials regarding this matter? Cornell University, applied to like 10 schools iirc. Helped two others get into Cornell after I read over their PS and advised them on the process. Helped an international student from China get into Florida-Gainsville after I walked him through the process for business grad school. The reason I said SAT scores weren't important because I actually polled my floor freshmen year to get a rough idea where everyone stood academically since I thought my grades and scores were borderline to get into Cornell. Turned out the common denominator (assuming everyone was telling the truth) was that we were all at least top 5% of our classes, me being the lowest at 5%, everyone else being closer to 1-2% with 3 valedictorians. So I reasoned that my sub par ECs (I moved during sophomore year of HS so getting involved was more difficult), and "low" class ranking was supported by my PS, Teacher Recs (sort of weak iirc they weren't the teachers closest to me), and the fact that I had 14 APs under my belt so my schedules could be considered "highly competitive". I also know that plenty of people with much better SATs than me (1510 on the old scale with 800 verbal, with a 780 on SAT2 Writing) didn't get into Cornell my year or the year immediately after me. My floor mates scored anywhere from 1200s to 1400s with nobody topping 1500 so in comparison I actually had the highest SAT score but they were all around better students (with some MUCH better) than me in every other aspect (with Teacher Recs as an unknown). Same for the year after according to Cornell's statistics for SAT scores. I am not saying I am completely right, but I am just going by what I would tell and have told prospective students going through the admissions process. It's just my theory if you will. The last year the "Old SAT" was accepted was 2004. I believe your data is woefully out of date and probably suffers from the problem of a small sample size and an improper control for confounding variables. Nobody from my high school with an SAT under 2200 gets into Ivy league schools unless they're stellar athletes. That being said all my friends who DID manage to get into Ivy league schools over the past few years from my high school had 2300+. I think there's a very clear idiot-bar, and you'd be wise not to try to convince people that the SAT is unimportant.
2005 and some for 2006 with schools requiring/wanting both/either actually, read my post again, I never said SATs weren't important, they're not as important as people think and for me would not be the reason I would not apply to a top school if I was borderline.
And they're not woefully out of date, you are more than welcome to dig up the average SAT scores for incoming classes of top20s, they're sit at around the same levels as they did before the change. Schools take standardized testing with a big spoon of salt.
Case in point, Harvard:
Acceptance rate: 8% Top 10% of high school students: 95% SAT score (25/75 percentile): 2080-2370 ACT score (25/75 percentile): 31-35
2080 is hardly mind blowing and that's only the 25 percentile with the vast majority of individuals sitting in 2100-2300, hardly super numbers.
Cornell sits similar, being out of the top 10, with the requirements.
I will give you this though, the SATs are "easier" than they were before the change with the removal of some of traditionally low scoring parts, but that's irrelevant since everyone is taking the same test. Should also point out that high SAT scores usually correlate with high GPAs.
Either way, not to derail the thread/blog further. I am just saying if given the chance to improve my SAT score (say in 2200-2300 range) X amount of points or to work on other aspects of my admissions process, I'll take the latter all day every day, that's what I learned
|
On September 05 2010 10:33 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 10:22 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 10:16 Judicator wrote:On September 05 2010 09:52 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 08:57 Judicator wrote:On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all? I would say SATs are probably the least valued criteria in college admissions provided your other areas are solid. My personal estimates rank them in this order: 1. GPA=>Class standing 2. Personal Statement 3. Teacher Recs 3. Extracurricular, especially if you have titles in those groups 5. Standardized testing scores (Yes I know there are two 3s) My reasoning for this is that everyone has testing scores and it really doesn't tell shit about you as a student or a person after you reach a certain score plateau. You're class standing indicates potential, if you are not tops in your school, then you already have proven that X amount of people are better than you in your particular situation. Personal statement is big and a lot of kids fuck this up because they can't write about their life worth a damn, aka making it actually personal. As for your ECs, that's perfectly fine, ECs are suppose to show colleges of your interests and your dedication/involvement with those interests; they're not gonna hold it against someone if their personal interests differ from their academic pursuits. Don't worry about your SATs unless you sucked it up badly on one particular subject, especially if your math is bad (I consider 750 bad in math, but I am Chinese...) and you want to be in engineering. Obviously the admissions committee would weigh all the available information they have on you to make a decision, so what I am saying is a rough estimate based on my personal experience with college admissions and what I can gather from other people (since people keep sending me their PSs to read over). Hey Judicator, where are you coming from? If you're asian/white and your SAT score is under 2k, admissions officers are not going to take your application seriously. Btw, what are your credentials regarding this matter? Cornell University, applied to like 10 schools iirc. Helped two others get into Cornell after I read over their PS and advised them on the process. Helped an international student from China get into Florida-Gainsville after I walked him through the process for business grad school. The reason I said SAT scores weren't important because I actually polled my floor freshmen year to get a rough idea where everyone stood academically since I thought my grades and scores were borderline to get into Cornell. Turned out the common denominator (assuming everyone was telling the truth) was that we were all at least top 5% of our classes, me being the lowest at 5%, everyone else being closer to 1-2% with 3 valedictorians. So I reasoned that my sub par ECs (I moved during sophomore year of HS so getting involved was more difficult), and "low" class ranking was supported by my PS, Teacher Recs (sort of weak iirc they weren't the teachers closest to me), and the fact that I had 14 APs under my belt so my schedules could be considered "highly competitive". I also know that plenty of people with much better SATs than me (1510 on the old scale with 800 verbal, with a 780 on SAT2 Writing) didn't get into Cornell my year or the year immediately after me. My floor mates scored anywhere from 1200s to 1400s with nobody topping 1500 so in comparison I actually had the highest SAT score but they were all around better students (with some MUCH better) than me in every other aspect (with Teacher Recs as an unknown). Same for the year after according to Cornell's statistics for SAT scores. I am not saying I am completely right, but I am just going by what I would tell and have told prospective students going through the admissions process. It's just my theory if you will. The last year the "Old SAT" was accepted was 2004. I believe your data is woefully out of date and probably suffers from the problem of a small sample size and an improper control for confounding variables. Nobody from my high school with an SAT under 2200 gets into Ivy league schools unless they're stellar athletes. That being said all my friends who DID manage to get into Ivy league schools over the past few years from my high school had 2300+. I think there's a very clear idiot-bar, and you'd be wise not to try to convince people that the SAT is unimportant. 2005 actually, read my post again, I never said SATs weren't important, they're not as important as people think and for me would not be the reason I would not apply to a top school if I was borderline. And they're not woefully out of date, you are more than welcome to dig up the average SAT scores for incoming classes of top20s, they're sit at around the same levels as they did before the change. Schools take standardized testing with a big spoon of salt. Case in point, Harvard: Acceptance rate: 8% Top 10% of high school students: 95% SAT score (25/75 percentile): 2080-2370 ACT score (25/75 percentile): 31-35 2080 is hardly mind blowing and that's only the 25 percentile with the vast majority of individuals sitting in 2100-2300, hardly super numbers. Cornell sits similar, being out of the top 10, with the requirements. I will give you this though, the SATs are "easier" than they were before the change with the removal of some of traditionally low scoring parts, but that's irrelevant since everyone is taking the same test. Should also point out that high SAT scores usually correlate with high GPAs. Either way, not to derail the thread/blog further. I am just saying if given the chance to improve my SAT score (say in 2200-2300 range) X amount of points or to work on other aspects of my admissions process, I'll take the latter all day every day, that's what I learned
I hate how this thread is turning into an argument about the importance of SAT scores... But just look at those statistics you've provided. ONLY 25% of students have scores at or below 2080. And that's a little less than the number of students who are affirmative action/athletes/legacy. The median score, I'm sure, is over 2200. And that is the number that would be applicants need to be targeting. With my last rebuttal I will now ban you from my blog before you poison any more innocent eyes with your heresy!
|
2200 is hardly that high of an average, 700ish per section
You really should read all of my post, because you just restate what I already explicitly stated
|
l10f
United States3241 Posts
Can I use TL as my extra-curricular activites :D
|
On September 05 2010 10:42 Judicator wrote:2200 is hardly that high of an average, 700ish per section You really should read all of my post, because you just restate what I already explicitly stated You were also advising someone with a 1960 to not worry about it though. If you want to get into a top20 school, and especially if you're out of state, you should be trying to get higher than a 1960. You've just changed your view from "1960 is fine" to exactly what we've been saying, "~2200 is the plateau for what colleges care about".
|
On September 05 2010 10:44 l10f wrote: Can I use TL as my extra-curricular activites :D
Yes actually. If you put in work and explain it properly so the reviewer can understand where you are coming from. One of my friends was a great beatboxer and I urged him to send in a DVD of him doing it live. Whatever you think portrays you in a positive light outside of the classroom.
It can't hurt if you have other ECs backing you up, but it can hurt if that's all you have.
|
On September 05 2010 10:42 Judicator wrote:2200 is hardly that high of an average, 700ish per section You really should read all of my post, because you just restate what I already explicitly stated > But you're telling people that going for a 2200 is the least worthwhile thing to spend time on. + Show Spoiler + How long does a single solid essay take to craft? 20-30 hours minimum.
How many hours does it take to get involved in a new extracurricular activity so that you have learned enough from it to write about it in your application? 40-50 hours minimum.
How long does it take to put together a paper and application for the Siemens Science Competition/Intel Science Talent Search? 30-40 hours.
How long do you need to study to get a decent score on the AIME? at least 50-60 hours.
How much hard work do you have to put into a class so you stand out enough for the teacher to write you a truly outstanding recommendation letter? All year most likely.
How long does it take to take 2 practice tests study mistakes and then take the real thing one more time, just to get 5-8 more questions right? 10-15 hours tops.
How long will the admissions officer spend looking over all that other stuff you present in your application if your SAT score is <2000? 0 hours.
Anywaaaay.... Yeah. You can probably write an essay about teamliquid, if you can find a way of weaving in your other activities/skills/experiences. Your essay better not read....
"I'm pretty pro at starcraft and spend all day posting on TL. The End." obviously. If you've taken part in any tournaments, though, or you have some youtube cast of your grudge-matches... that might be acceptable. (try to censor out the bad words though)
|
20-30 hours? Try 3 months and 4 revisions, everyone I know that got into MIT, Harvard, Princeton, Duke, Emory premed program, WashU premed program spent more than a summer on theirs. I had an International Science Fair winner at my school, my year, how many years did he spend on that?
But again, it varies from people to people.
Keep in mind that this is what I said originally:
I would say SATs are probably the least valued criteria in college admissions provided your other areas are solid.
In response to this
On September 05 2010 03:42 imBLIND wrote: My unweighted gpa is about a 3.8-3.9 right now, but my SAT is only a 1960. Do colleges overlook inconsistencies like these or do I have to work more to get a 2250+?
Also, if I plan on majoring in some form of engineering, chemical/nano specifically, would extracurriculars in music help me at all?
Two things for all of you guys jumping down my throat for supposedly dismissing SAT scores:
1. "Least-valued" is not a comparison term in the absolute sense...if you can point out where I said hey fuck your SAT scores you don't need them, then I would be all ears. 2. Where in the god damn post does the poster state where he/she is going?
And the reason I didn't explicitly say what you said, because well, you already said it, both love1another and theonemephisto already pointed out the importance of SAT scores. I just put it in context of the other common criterion.
On September 05 2010 10:51 love1another wrote: Anywaaaay.... Yeah. You can probably write an essay about teamliquid, if you can find a way of weaving in your other activities/skills/experiences. Your essay better not read....
"I'm pretty pro at starcraft and spend all day posting on TL. The End." obviously. If you've taken part in any tournaments, though, or you have some youtube cast of your grudge-matches... that might be acceptable. (try to censor out the bad words though)
I wouldn't even do that. Since he/she is a writer here, I would just describe the process of putting together a final product however big or small and his/her role in that process. Then you can talk about working with people of different backgrounds, overcoming problems as a team or personally, etc. If your PS can almost summarized in like 2 sentences, it's a shitty PS.
|
I apologize, I didn't mean for the tournaments/ youtube cast to substitute for his essay. I meant he might be able to use it as a supplement, since it's quite original compared to most of the stuff people feel are supplement-worthy.
|
Man, it's going to take forever going through everything. XP I have a shitload of homework over labor day weekend, so forgive me for bookmarking your blog and (probably) bumping it a long time after it has died to ask some questions
This is all I know about SAT (taken from a reply I made to someone's blog question), and it's very unorganized--sorry: + Show Spoiler +On August 21 2010 12:21 Z3kk wrote:Also, you need to let your parents know how the SAT works; I don't think you understand precisely yourself, so here goes (this is going to cram a lot of info into one attempt at explaining, so this isn't going to be a particularly sequential/ordered explanation, though I tried ): Just about every country except for the United States has just a few--2 or 3--"big" or "top" universities. Admission into said universities depends on a single "BIG TEST" towards/at the end of high school. If you do well on this big test, you're in; if you don't do well, then you can go [insert fitting verb of a menial task]. HOWEVER, the United States is a different matter. There are numerous top universities and a startling variety of schools from which you can choose. There are schools that excel in a particular course of study, liberal arts schools, extremely expensive schools, community colleges, etc. Thus, there is no single, objective test that determines where you're going to go. Your parents most likely are under the impression that the SAT is this "BIG TEST". Needless to say, it is not. In America, there are numerous factors that come into consideration when admissions officers are deliberating (GPA, SAT, extracurriculars, essays, and perhaps more). So what IS the point of the SAT? Well, look at it this way. There are schools all over the country, and they all are different. At one school in California, you might take be struggling to scrape out an A because your AP Psychology teacher is a total sadist who gives you hours and hours of homework. At another one in Texas (just random states--I'm not trying to imply anything here haha), the AP Psychology teacher might give you an A as long as you don't get out of your seat as everyone watches the comedy movies he plays every day. Colleges, therefore, need some sort of standard with which to measure and compare students--the SAT is this standard, and its customers are the colleges (I'll get to that in a moment) and not you. (You're forced to take the SAT; what are you going to do? Not take it? Take the ACT? No, students all over America are taking the SAT, and if you don't, it's your college you won't be getting into.) Because the SAT is meant to be the standard, this also means that the SAT's job is simple: crank out a bell curve. The colleges are going to use the SAT scores to compare students all over the US, and the SAT better give them a bell curve, or else the colleges won't care about the SAT's results. In other words, the SAT needs to have its scores produce a bell curve, or else colleges won't use it to compare students. Also, as I stated before, the SAT's customers are the universities and colleges. Why? If colleges find out that the SAT's scores aren't in a neat and tidy bell curve, then the shit starts to get real. Obviously, if they can't use the scores to compare students, there's no reason to use the SAT. If this were to happen, THEN the SAT would lose its business, because no one would have to take a test that doesn't matter. As a side-note, the SAT needs to maintain its bell curve by whatever means possible. This means making the test as hard as they can without utterly screwing everyone over. Think if it this way: if the bell curve were to shift to the right, what would that mean? It would mean that everyone is scoring higher. the SAT DOES NOT want this. The aforementioned situation would mean that the SAT's scores are unreliable, and if a student has a high score, then who cares? Everyone's scoring that high. On the other hand, if the bell curve were to shift to the left--that is, if people's scores became lower--then how does that impact the SAT? All they have to do (and they've done this before) is proclaim that the American school system sucks, that the teachers aren't teaching the right stuff, yadda yadda yadda. College board (the creators of the SAT) isn't on your side and will do whatever it takes to confuse you. OKAY, so back to the significance of the SAT. This is what you need to tell your parents (though you can tell them anything else I've stated too, if you want). How exactly does it factor into college admissions? Basically, certain faculty of the top schools--let's go with MIT here--get together and decide the "cut-off" point of the SATs. Let's say that MIT decides the cut-off is 2200, because otherwise stupid students might come in, and their Nobel prize-winning professor will want to go to UC Berkeley and teach math to all the smart kids there, because there's no point in teaching a bunch of lazy, stupid students. What happens with the students that make the cut-off? The admissions officer looks at the score, and turn over your application and continue reading. What happens if you *gasp* don't make it? The admissions officer laughs and tosses it in the junk pile of crushed dreams with the rest of the layabouts, right? WRONG. If you happen to not make it, then you just need something extra. You are by no means automatically rejected then and there. "Why not?" you ask. Well, let's say there's a student who has always been at the top of his class, with highest marks and scintillating compliments from his teacher; he's one of the most studious people out there. Unfortunately, he got really nervous on the SAT that one time and messed it up (or took it several times, and each time, he got scared and did poorly). What now? Is he doomed? Of course not! What if they get an application from a kid, and his SAT score is simply abysmal; the admissions officer is about to reject him, turns the page, and finds out his application is written entirely in SPANISH? Turns out this kid's a genius in Argentina but doesn't know a word of English! Better yet, the admissions officer opens up an application, sees a disgustingly poor SAT score, shakes his head at the embarrassing GPA, and then reads the essay. Apparently, this guy created a software program when he was 13 years old and sold it to Microsoft for $750 million. Are they going to reject this guy? NO WAY IN HELL!!! This kid's just unmotivated! He's going to go to MIT, graduate, become the CEO of Intel, donate billions of dollars to MIT, and MIT is going to take the money and make a building in his name! Thus, the SAT is far from the "BIG TEST"; it definitely helps, but it does not singlehandedly determine whether you get into your school of choice. Another thing you should tell your parents is that the SAT is equated (which is actually curving, but they're not about to admit that) to make a bell curve, so anything from a certain score to another is essentially the SAME score (i.e. 2290 and up, unless you get a perfect score, is basically the same score in the eyes of college admissions officers; this is to account for curving and variation).
|
Yeah I understand, but I don't know if that's the approach I would take since it doesn't definitively answer the question of: so what? Also, I feel like if you add in the the tournaments and youtube cast, it doesn't really do much for the person, rather it would confuse the reviewer and unless the reviewer can understand the significance of it, it goes to poo poo.
That's the reason why I suggest they go with an approach that a reviewer can relate to and understand without completely understanding what TL is.
But gotta answer the question of so what, if you don't it's a mediocre PS at best.
|
On September 05 2010 11:27 Z3kk wrote:Man, it's going to take forever going through everything. XP I have a shitload of homework over labor day weekend, so forgive me for bookmarking your blog and (probably) bumping it a long time after it has died to ask some questions This is all I know about SAT (taken from a reply I made to someone's blog question), and it's very unorganized--sorry: + Show Spoiler +On August 21 2010 12:21 Z3kk wrote:Also, you need to let your parents know how the SAT works; I don't think you understand precisely yourself, so here goes (this is going to cram a lot of info into one attempt at explaining, so this isn't going to be a particularly sequential/ordered explanation, though I tried ): Just about every country except for the United States has just a few--2 or 3--"big" or "top" universities. Admission into said universities depends on a single "BIG TEST" towards/at the end of high school. If you do well on this big test, you're in; if you don't do well, then you can go [insert fitting verb of a menial task]. HOWEVER, the United States is a different matter. There are numerous top universities and a startling variety of schools from which you can choose. There are schools that excel in a particular course of study, liberal arts schools, extremely expensive schools, community colleges, etc. Thus, there is no single, objective test that determines where you're going to go. Your parents most likely are under the impression that the SAT is this "BIG TEST". Needless to say, it is not. In America, there are numerous factors that come into consideration when admissions officers are deliberating (GPA, SAT, extracurriculars, essays, and perhaps more). So what IS the point of the SAT? Well, look at it this way. There are schools all over the country, and they all are different. At one school in California, you might take be struggling to scrape out an A because your AP Psychology teacher is a total sadist who gives you hours and hours of homework. At another one in Texas (just random states--I'm not trying to imply anything here haha), the AP Psychology teacher might give you an A as long as you don't get out of your seat as everyone watches the comedy movies he plays every day. Colleges, therefore, need some sort of standard with which to measure and compare students--the SAT is this standard, and its customers are the colleges (I'll get to that in a moment) and not you. (You're forced to take the SAT; what are you going to do? Not take it? Take the ACT? No, students all over America are taking the SAT, and if you don't, it's your college you won't be getting into.) Because the SAT is meant to be the standard, this also means that the SAT's job is simple: crank out a bell curve. The colleges are going to use the SAT scores to compare students all over the US, and the SAT better give them a bell curve, or else the colleges won't care about the SAT's results. In other words, the SAT needs to have its scores produce a bell curve, or else colleges won't use it to compare students. Also, as I stated before, the SAT's customers are the universities and colleges. Why? If colleges find out that the SAT's scores aren't in a neat and tidy bell curve, then the shit starts to get real. Obviously, if they can't use the scores to compare students, there's no reason to use the SAT. If this were to happen, THEN the SAT would lose its business, because no one would have to take a test that doesn't matter. As a side-note, the SAT needs to maintain its bell curve by whatever means possible. This means making the test as hard as they can without utterly screwing everyone over. Think if it this way: if the bell curve were to shift to the right, what would that mean? It would mean that everyone is scoring higher. the SAT DOES NOT want this. The aforementioned situation would mean that the SAT's scores are unreliable, and if a student has a high score, then who cares? Everyone's scoring that high. On the other hand, if the bell curve were to shift to the left--that is, if people's scores became lower--then how does that impact the SAT? All they have to do (and they've done this before) is proclaim that the American school system sucks, that the teachers aren't teaching the right stuff, yadda yadda yadda. College board (the creators of the SAT) isn't on your side and will do whatever it takes to confuse you. OKAY, so back to the significance of the SAT. This is what you need to tell your parents (though you can tell them anything else I've stated too, if you want). How exactly does it factor into college admissions? Basically, certain faculty of the top schools--let's go with MIT here--get together and decide the "cut-off" point of the SATs. Let's say that MIT decides the cut-off is 2200, because otherwise stupid students might come in, and their Nobel prize-winning professor will want to go to UC Berkeley and teach math to all the smart kids there, because there's no point in teaching a bunch of lazy, stupid students. What happens with the students that make the cut-off? The admissions officer looks at the score, and turn over your application and continue reading. What happens if you *gasp* don't make it? The admissions officer laughs and tosses it in the junk pile of crushed dreams with the rest of the layabouts, right? WRONG. If you happen to not make it, then you just need something extra. You are by no means automatically rejected then and there. "Why not?" you ask. Well, let's say there's a student who has always been at the top of his class, with highest marks and scintillating compliments from his teacher; he's one of the most studious people out there. Unfortunately, he got really nervous on the SAT that one time and messed it up (or took it several times, and each time, he got scared and did poorly). What now? Is he doomed? Of course not! What if they get an application from a kid, and his SAT score is simply abysmal; the admissions officer is about to reject him, turns the page, and finds out his application is written entirely in SPANISH? Turns out this kid's a genius in Argentina but doesn't know a word of English! Better yet, the admissions officer opens up an application, sees a disgustingly poor SAT score, shakes his head at the embarrassing GPA, and then reads the essay. Apparently, this guy created a software program when he was 13 years old and sold it to Microsoft for $750 million. Are they going to reject this guy? NO WAY IN HELL!!! This kid's just unmotivated! He's going to go to MIT, graduate, become the CEO of Intel, donate billions of dollars to MIT, and MIT is going to take the money and make a building in his name! Thus, the SAT is far from the "BIG TEST"; it definitely helps, but it does not singlehandedly determine whether you get into your school of choice. Another thing you should tell your parents is that the SAT is equated (which is actually curving, but they're not about to admit that) to make a bell curve, so anything from a certain score to another is essentially the SAME score (i.e. 2290 and up, unless you get a perfect score, is basically the same score in the eyes of college admissions officers; this is to account for curving and variation).
I don't really see any questions in there... I'd just like to point out that your examples toward the end are on the right track but the particularities are highly unrealistic.
I don't buy the example of the guy with good grades who chokes on the SAT multiple times. He still has to do APs/IBs right? He still has to do final exams right? If, even after several tries, he can't get his act together for a simple test, it calls the relevance of his high school curriculum question. The SAT will have been far from the biggest test he has taken up to that point.
A more realistic scenario for the talented Argentinian case would be an admission's officer saying, "Wtf... this is in Spanish. Steve, you took Spanish right? Could you take a look at it? Steve: uhh yeaaah... I'll get on that." If you don't speak English, you have no business going to a top American university.
In the second case, this person has already made 750 million dollars. Which college you're going to is hardly going to be a big concern when you're 3/4 the way to be a billionaire.
The conclusion of this thread is that the SAT only matters up to a point in that over 2250~ish everything is considered equivalent, in that it will no longer be the bottleneck of your application. Yes, there are exceptions if you are exceptional... but if you've won the nobel peace prize or are a movie star, you're probably not reading this thread for advice.
And I guess one more thing: No, you don't get a magic plaque for getting a perfect score (or at least none of the college I applied to gave me one.)
|
On September 05 2010 11:35 Judicator wrote: Yeah I understand, but I don't know if that's the approach I would take since it doesn't definitively answer the question of: so what? Also, I feel like if you add in the the tournaments and youtube cast, it doesn't really do much for the person, rather it would confuse the reviewer and unless the reviewer can understand the significance of it, it goes to poo poo.
That's the reason why I suggest they go with an approach that a reviewer can relate to and understand without completely understanding what TL is.
But gotta answer the question of so what, if you don't it's a mediocre PS at best.
Should sticky this: Every essay (btw, PS means personal statement to all you newbies out there) needs to have a so what. I stated this before, I think on page 2, but the key to any successful PS is that it clearly communicates some objective.
|
On September 05 2010 11:42 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 11:35 Judicator wrote: Yeah I understand, but I don't know if that's the approach I would take since it doesn't definitively answer the question of: so what? Also, I feel like if you add in the the tournaments and youtube cast, it doesn't really do much for the person, rather it would confuse the reviewer and unless the reviewer can understand the significance of it, it goes to poo poo.
That's the reason why I suggest they go with an approach that a reviewer can relate to and understand without completely understanding what TL is.
But gotta answer the question of so what, if you don't it's a mediocre PS at best. Should sticky this: Every essay (btw, PS means personal statement to all you newbies out there) needs to have a so what. I stated this before, I think on page 2, but the key to any successful PS is that it clearly communicates some objective.
I would even say, every sentence needs to have a "so-what". If it doesn't corroborate your application in anyway, it should not be there. The page limit makes every word precious.
|
On September 05 2010 11:50 Cambium wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 11:42 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 11:35 Judicator wrote: Yeah I understand, but I don't know if that's the approach I would take since it doesn't definitively answer the question of: so what? Also, I feel like if you add in the the tournaments and youtube cast, it doesn't really do much for the person, rather it would confuse the reviewer and unless the reviewer can understand the significance of it, it goes to poo poo.
That's the reason why I suggest they go with an approach that a reviewer can relate to and understand without completely understanding what TL is.
But gotta answer the question of so what, if you don't it's a mediocre PS at best. Should sticky this: Every essay (btw, PS means personal statement to all you newbies out there) needs to have a so what. I stated this before, I think on page 2, but the key to any successful PS is that it clearly communicates some objective. I would even say, every sentence needs to have a "so-what". If it doesn't corroborate your application in anyway, it should not be there. The page limit makes every word precious.
I would even say that every word needs to have a "so-what." If there is a better, more concise, way to express an identical idea do it. The only problem with this is the time-spent vs. return. It's like saying "it'll be better if you can play with 2000 apm no spam."
|
I have a friend who decided to apply to MIT, as he's an aspiring engineer. He winged the sat and got around 2000 (studying for VCE, our high school cert), and was granted an interview later this year with an admissions officer. His VCE results are probably going to be ~94th percentile and he doesn't have heaps of extra curricular activity, but has what I would call a reasonable amount. So my question is this: Are academic results considered a hurdle of sorts, and will the interview probably play a larger role in selection or are they both equally important (In which case i'd imagine he's screwed lol).
|
On September 05 2010 12:16 Lurgee wrote: I have a friend who decided to apply to MIT, as he's an aspiring engineer. He winged the sat and got around 2000 (studying for VCE, our high school cert), and was granted an interview later this year with an admissions officer. His VCE results are probably going to be ~94th percentile and he doesn't have heaps of extra curricular activity, but has what I would call a reasonable amount. So my question is this: Are academic results considered a hurdle of sorts, and will the interview probably play a larger role in selection or are they both equally important (In which case i'd imagine he's screwed lol).
Just a few points to note:
1.) I don't think the interview was with an admissions officer but rather with a local alumni. Admissions officers don't fly out to give interviews, even for exceptional candidates. 2.) If you paid the money for the application, you will get this interview from MIT.
The interview is just another piece of the application. I think the best way to think of it is as a potential "trusted recommendation letter." If you nail the interview, the interviewer (who is assumed to be a reasonable successful product of the institution your friend is applying to) will convey his good impression to the admissions department. The admissions department, then, may find that the interviewer's evaluation corroborates your friend's otherwise excellent application.
The problem lies in the fact that most interviewers are just really nice people and they rarely say anything bad about anybody. Thus, if you "nail the interview" it won't be a particularly unique part of your application and it can't, alone, get you into the school of your choice.
|
On September 05 2010 12:16 Lurgee wrote: I have a friend who decided to apply to MIT, as he's an aspiring engineer. He winged the sat and got around 2000 (studying for VCE, our high school cert), and was granted an interview later this year with an admissions officer. His VCE results are probably going to be ~94th percentile and he doesn't have heaps of extra curricular activity, but has what I would call a reasonable amount. So my question is this: Are academic results considered a hurdle of sorts, and will the interview probably play a larger role in selection or are they both equally important (In which case i'd imagine he's screwed lol).
In addition to what love said...
For most people, interviews are a crapshoot to be honest, if you think it will help, do it. It certainly won't directly hurt you if you don't, but if someone else takes an interview who is around your level and does well, then you can be adversely affected. As an international student, I recommend it as long as the language isn't a barrier.
And no academics are not hurdles, I would say they are more requirements. If you want to think about it in an another way, you are scoring points on a bunch of criterion, some worth more than others, but all are important on some level. The more you score the better chance you stand to get into the school. The interview can help with the personal statement aspect if you suck at conveying you the person on paper; as in if your PS is average, but your interview was great, then college has a better feel for what kind of person you are if your interviewer didn't suck, but they can be not so good as love1another has pointed out.
So to answer your question, the interview can help in a limited aspect, but the academics are to clear the first big hurdle and certainly not to be undervalued even if your interview is great.
Word of advice on interviews with these schools, there's a chance that you'll run into someone who is fiercely loyal to their school. Like on my Yale interview with an alumnus, he was offended when I asked about the surrounding area and asked me why it would matter since Yale's campus is great. Except I knew that New Haven the city was shady as fuck with a ~10% crime rate. So tread carefully, what might be harmless can be insulting for some people.
|
On September 05 2010 12:36 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 12:16 Lurgee wrote: I have a friend who decided to apply to MIT, as he's an aspiring engineer. He winged the sat and got around 2000 (studying for VCE, our high school cert), and was granted an interview later this year with an admissions officer. His VCE results are probably going to be ~94th percentile and he doesn't have heaps of extra curricular activity, but has what I would call a reasonable amount. So my question is this: Are academic results considered a hurdle of sorts, and will the interview probably play a larger role in selection or are they both equally important (In which case i'd imagine he's screwed lol). In addition to what love said... For most people, interviews are a crapshoot to be honest, if you think it will help, do it. It certainly won't directly hurt you if you don't, but if someone else takes an interview who is around your level and does well, then you can be adversely affected. As an international student, I recommend it as long as the language isn't a barrier. And no academics are not hurdles, I would say they are more requirements. If you want to think about it in an another way, you are scoring points on a bunch of criterion, some worth more than others, but all are important on some level. The more you score the better chance you stand to get into the school. The interview can help with the personal statement aspect if you suck at conveying you the person on paper; as in if your PS is average, but your interview was great, then college has a better feel for what kind of person you are if your interviewer didn't suck, but they can be not so good as love1another has pointed out. So to answer your question, the interview can help in a limited aspect, but the academics are to clear the first big hurdle and certainly not to be undervalued even if your interview is great. Word of advice on interviews with these schools, there's a chance that you'll run into someone who is fiercely loyal to their school. Like on my Yale interview with an alumnus, he was offended when I asked about the surrounding area and asked me why it would matter since Yale's campus is great. Except I knew that New Haven the city was shady as fuck with a ~10% crime rate. So tread carefully, what might be harmless can be insulting for some people.
In fact, it is safe to assume that the interviewer will be fiercely loyal to his/her alma mater. Why else would he/she take time out of her day to interview little high school students? That being said, there are a lot of "no-talk" points you should know ahead of time. Yale's surroundings are definitely one of them. And Bush. Princeton's grade deflation/eating clubs also things you should not talk about. Harvard spending more time on grad students than undergrads. Yeah... don't needlessly provoke the interviewer's ire.
|
|
If, however, the things mentioned above are serious concerns of yours, there are ways to get the Interviewer's takes on these issues without pissing them off. Throw in some names, be positive. Also, make it a thinly veiled self-promotion attempt.
Examples:
Sketchy Yaletown: I've heard that the New Haven area has really experienced a [/b]renaissance[/b] in the past few years, and I've heard that Bruce Alexander has had a lot to do with it. Have you been their recently? What is the city like during the height of the school year? I'm really interested in city planning and worked on the Youth Commission of my City's parks and recreation department!
Harvard's Undergraduate: I've heard that Faust has really made it clear that Harvard is making a renewed commitment to the undergraduate programs. Does this mean that I'll be able to continue my passion for biochemistry and have the opportunity to do research with some of Harvard's top professors?
Princeton's Grade Deflation: Malkiel... Grades are a way to gauge progress rather than fluff on a resume. Appreciate honest assessment of my quality of work blah blah blah.
|
On September 05 2010 03:33 love1another wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 03:31 Bereft wrote:On September 05 2010 03:25 love1another wrote:On September 05 2010 03:18 Bereft wrote:On September 05 2010 02:04 love1another wrote:And yes, how many schools should I apply to? When I was applying, the general rule of thumb was 10. I know your circumstances are different, but even in my own circumstances, this was not a hard-and-fast rule. For example applications to the University of California college system were all on the same application so there was no reason not to submit the same application to 3 colleges instead of just one. (except like an extra $30 per college blehh...) Meanwhile, almost all the private schools I applied to, with the exception of MIT and Stanford(?), were on the Common App. I just submitted that (along with a 1-page supplement unique to each college), to 6 or so top-tier colleges (again paying an addition ~$100 fee for each one). The idea is really just one of insurance. At the end of the day there is a stochastic element from your perspective as to whether or not you get in, and thus the more places you apply to, the better off you are. This is completely different from, say, the Asian system where your test score determines 95% of whether you get into a college, and what college you put as your 1st, 2nd, 3rd choice actually matters. also... something that could make life easier is applying to a uni that you're keen on going to that has early action- then come regular application time, if you've been accepted to an EA school, you don't have to worry about applying to safety schools. While this is true, a lot of colleges start reading apps as soon as they start coming in. So especially if you're an under-represented minority, my gut-instinct says that you're better off submitting your application early (for regular decision) than waiting until you've heard back from your early decision. Realistically this only makes a difference at the most competitive schools. The following example is purely theorycraft of what could go wrong: If, say, your goal school is Harvard, but you already got into Yale early action, simply because Harvard doesn't have an early action option:It sucks to end up in a situation where the Harvard interviewer asks "so I assume you applied to Yale early action, did you get in?" At which point you have to either lie or say "yes." It's basically a lose-lose situation, if you're deadset on Harvard, since if you say "no..." the Harvard admissions officers might think "there must be some reason that Yale said no..." If you say yes, however, they'll think "ehh.... Yale early action has like a 90% matriculation rate... he's probably not gonna choose us anyway if we accept him... And we're not screwing him over anyway. Why bother to purposely degrade our admission stats?" if you were in that situation, couldn't you apply to yale EA and harvard ED? and in your experience, how often do you encounter in interviews that an interviewer asks you about whether you've been accepted to other schools? As of 2006, Harvard eliminated it's ED, so it only has a regular decision. (They say somewhere on their website though that they start reading apps in November? it's been a while... so correct me if I'm wrong.) When you're being interviewed by those top schools, it is almost going to come up 100%. That's not to say you won't get accepted anyway because you're just that amazing, but if your heart is really set on one school, and you'll live the rest of your life in regret if you don't get in, you might want to think a bit more carefully about applying early to another school. yeah... i have no idea whether harvard would have ED or not lol. and that's interesting that you bring that up as an issue. this was never a concern for the wanna-be ivy leaguers at my h.s., but i suppose that could be attributed to going to an international h.s. in asia, where interviews were few and done by whatever volunteer alumni-- rather than recruiters-- who were in the country.
|
I don't really see any questions in there...
(I agree with you on your comments about my post about the SAT, since I can't possibly know better anyway; that definitely wasn't sarcasm, I was just repeating things I had heard )
Anyway, I didn't have any questions because I stated that I'd come back when I had enough time to intelligently formulate some questions (i.e. I'll come back later when I come up with some questions worth asking, and after I have read through the thread).
However, I do have a quick question just for now: what should a sophomore do? I'm only a lowly little high school sophomore, and I really don't know much about anything...sure, good APs + SAT I and IIs + good GPA are good, but I truly know very little. At this point, what should I be doing to prepare for college? I do my work and I'm studying for the SAT in October, but have no idea what exactly I should be doing in preparation (I realize that this is a horribly general question, but I would greatly appreciate a few--or many hehe--guidelines about what I should be doing.
Also, not that I doubt you or anything like that, but out of my curiosity, what are your qualifications, so to speak? ^^ (you might have posted about them somewhere in the thread, but I'm short on time because I have a hefty load of work at the moment T.T)
Thanks for being so nice as to freely give out advice like this!
|
Well... as I said 2 posts earlier, even in the USA, interviews are conducted almost exclusively by volunteer alumni (it gets them class reunion credit, I think), not paid recruiters.
|
As a sophomore, maintain your GPA, start on your APs, get involved in clubs/volunteer activities. Maintain good relations with your teachers, my best teacher recs came from a teacher I had from my sophomore year, I was part of a club he ran so we were pretty cool with each other even two years later.
I do my work and I'm studying for the SAT in October, but have no idea what exactly I should be doing in preparation
That's a person dependent question, some people are just good at it with minimal studying, some (like me) need massive amounts of studying. Take a practice test, figure out where you are weak, then start doing practices for the sections you need help with. If you want to go hardcore about it, take a practice test per week (or whatever interval you are comfortable with) leading up to the test to gauge your progress and adjust your efforts accordingly. I personally find SAT classes to be a waste of money, but it does help for some people.
|
On September 05 2010 12:16 Lurgee wrote: I have a friend who decided to apply to MIT, as he's an aspiring engineer. He winged the sat and got around 2000 (studying for VCE, our high school cert), and was granted an interview later this year with an admissions officer. His VCE results are probably going to be ~94th percentile and he doesn't have heaps of extra curricular activity, but has what I would call a reasonable amount. So my question is this: Are academic results considered a hurdle of sorts, and will the interview probably play a larger role in selection or are they both equally important (In which case i'd imagine he's screwed lol).
Honestly, without stellar extracurriculars and/or advantageous demographics it would be a stretch to get into MIT. I don't know what his GPA is or how hard the VCE is, but as an asian or white male, a 2000 SAT and 94th percentile isn't cutting it at MIT. And as others have said, interviews probably have a pretty small impact overall. As a comparison, I had a 4.0 unweighted GPA, 2360 SAT, varsity and club swimming for 4 years (I swam on my college team as well and would have swam for MIT if I had gone there), band (including section leader for a couple of years), and a handful of honor societies with a couple positions. 9 AP tests all scoring a 5. And additional math past Calc BC, including Multivariate Calculus at the community college, and Differential Equations and Linear Algebra at the University of Virginia, all with A-/As. And I didn't get in. I am an asian male, but if you're white the odds won't be too much better.
On September 05 2010 13:24 Z3kk wrote:However, I do have a quick question just for now: what should a sophomore do? I'm only a lowly little high school sophomore, and I really don't know much about anything...sure, good APs + SAT I and IIs + good GPA are good, but I truly know very little. At this point, what should I be doing to prepare for college? I do my work and I'm studying for the SAT in October, but have no idea what exactly I should be doing in preparation (I realize that this is a horribly general question, but I would greatly appreciate a few--or many hehe--guidelines about what I should be doing. You're doing pretty much all you can. Don't stress out about it too much. Just good grades, get ready for the SAT, take the hardest classes you can, etc. I'd say the most out-of-school things to do are to try to find things that you love. If you love a particular subject, try to take additional classes in it or study on your own. If you love a sport or music or art, try to get as serious as you can in it. If you love any particular competition or activity, join a team or club. Also, aim for "leadership" positions in anything you do. And by that, I mean any title that sounds good and official. Most opportunities to start getting them will be at the end of soph/beginning of junior year, so get involved in any elections or anything in groups you're a part of.
On September 05 2010 13:25 love1another wrote: Well... as I said 2 posts earlier, even in the USA, interviews are conducted almost exclusively by volunteer alumni (it gets them class reunion credit, I think), not paid recruiters. While this is true, I do think that if you actually go to the school you can get interviews with people who work in the office. I have recently discovered, however, that most of these people are pretty low down on the ladder. As in their simply 3rd/4th years who happen to work in admissions doing tours or other gruntwork.
|
so uh, as a canadian, if i scored above the SAT score that you stated and i am involved in volunteering and such, would it be especially difficult to get into a top notch american university?
|
On September 05 2010 13:24 Z3kk wrote:(I agree with you on your comments about my post about the SAT, since I can't possibly know better anyway; that definitely wasn't sarcasm, I was just repeating things I had heard ) Anyway, I didn't have any questions because I stated that I'd come back when I had enough time to intelligently formulate some questions (i.e. I'll come back later when I come up with some questions worth asking, and after I have read through the thread). However, I do have a quick question just for now: what should a sophomore do? I'm only a lowly little high school sophomore, and I really don't know much about anything...sure, good APs + SAT I and IIs + good GPA are good, but I truly know very little. At this point, what should I be doing to prepare for college? I do my work and I'm studying for the SAT in October, but have no idea what exactly I should be doing in preparation (I realize that this is a horribly general question, but I would greatly appreciate a few--or many hehe--guidelines about what I should be doing. Also, not that I doubt you or anything like that, but out of my curiosity, what are your qualifications, so to speak? ^^ (you might have posted about them somewhere in the thread, but I'm short on time because I have a hefty load of work at the moment T.T) Thanks for being so nice as to freely give out advice like this!
Regarding your SAT in October, I wrote a guide just for you... http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=150377
<3 ~ Enjoii ~ <3
On September 05 2010 15:20 erektion wrote: so uh, as a canadian, if i scored above the SAT score that you stated and i am involved in volunteering and such, would it be especially difficult to get into a top notch american university?
If you want an answer to that, just check the corresponding collegeconfidential.com forum for the school you are interested in applying to. Check their decision threads and people post their detailed stats and their status (accepted/ rejected/waitlisted). Then see how you compare.
To answer your question indirectly as such is the easiest way without asking for the hundred other potentially private pieces of information that might be necessary to answering your question directly.
|
Lets say my GPA isn't the greatest in the world because im a slacking idiot. Roughly 3.0-3.1 but I still have 2 years to pull that up what would it take on the SAT to at least give me a change at an okay college / university. Do I even still have a chance at a University of California or did I slack to much?
|
This really cute girl I used to hang with totally screwed up her freshman year. She did a decent job her sophomore year, but totally screwed up her junior year again. That being said she aced the SAT and got a bunch of APs and extracurricular activities. And she was a phenomenal writer.
She's now starting her freshman year at UC Berkeley. So keep your chin up and keeping spending time on things you're passionate about. And try not to give up good grades if you can get them.
|
On September 05 2010 15:20 erektion wrote: so uh, as a canadian, if i scored above the SAT score that you stated and i am involved in volunteering and such, would it be especially difficult to get into a top notch american university? I'd say that as a general rule, you need a >2200/2250 SAT, >~3.8 GPA (some considerations for bad freshman years, they like improvement), and one of the harder schedules that your school offers, including at least a handful of 4-5 (or equivalent) scores on AP/IB tests to have a shot at a top (~top 20) school. Basically, that'll give you the academic requirements, beyond that you'll generally have to differentiate yourself further in some way, be that extracurriculars, competitions, essays, etc. You can get away with less than that academically, but you need something special, either a really phenomenal extracurricular or sometimes a really good life story.
But I'm I'm under the impression that top schools turn away a lot of 2250 SAT 3.8 GPA students, you need SOMETHING more than just meeting the minimum academic requirements.
|
On September 05 2010 16:36 theonemephisto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2010 15:20 erektion wrote: so uh, as a canadian, if i scored above the SAT score that you stated and i am involved in volunteering and such, would it be especially difficult to get into a top notch american university? I'd say that as a general rule, you need a >2200/2250 SAT, >~3.8 GPA (some considerations for bad freshman years, they like improvement), and one of the harder schedules that your school offers, including at least a handful of 4-5 (or equivalent) scores on AP/IB tests to have a shot at a top (~top 20) school. Basically, that'll give you the academic requirements, beyond that you'll generally have to differentiate yourself further in some way, be that extracurriculars, competitions, essays, etc. You can get away with less than that academically, but you need something special, either a really phenomenal extracurricular or sometimes a really good life story. But I'm I'm under the impression that top schools turn away a lot of 2250 SAT 3.8 GPA students, you need SOMETHING more than just meeting the minimum academic requirements.
This is absolutely correct. Again, if you want a more detailed picture, check college confidential.
|
|
You have a very particular situation that I have no experience with. I also don't really know how admissions officers will treat your situation, so thus I do not feel comfortable giving you any concrete advice. Sorry, and I hope things turn out okay!
|
|
So i grew up in korea and several other countries(usa,dubai,singapore and yemen) but the constant moving and my lack of interest in education left my highschool education in shambles(skipped freshman year,did sophmore year twice,dropped out of several schools,very little attendance records) and i dropped out of my final highschool this march and got a GED,I tried applying to korean colleges but they didn't like my transcript so I want to prepare myself for college for next year,I'd like to study art(fashion to be more precise) but most of all I would like to get out of korea and go to an american or canadian college. The thing is my parents are fed up with spending money on my education(can't blame them). What's the best move for me if i want to go to an american or canadian college with a full scholarship?
|
On September 05 2010 17:25 krndandaman wrote: im a korean-american senior (not fob)
freshman and soph year was pretty good. freshman year being near perfect for me 3 clubs, around 95-96 overall average in all honors, 100 on all regents, did 2 seasons of track&field. (yes i know track is pretty useless but w.e). also did science research but didnt win competition soph year it was pretty good as well, 92 overall average about. same 3 clubs. same 2seasons of track. barely missed being semi-finalist of psat, science research once again. only bad part was i did bad on chem regents (82). was horrified at that score... all honors, no AP started to volunteer at a program for kids with disability (did this for a year about) also received an award from there for longetivity and work
now this is when it starts to go down hill
junior year- added 4 ap's, dropped physics. blah blah doesnt count anyway
some personal shit happens with family and all and i missed alot of school. teacher recommended that i either erase this year from the records with medical reason saying im depressed (yea kind of fucked up, i just had to visit a counselor just 4 times or so even tho i wasn't really depressed) or get all flunking grades starting from quarter 2 for the year. i decided on the former. so basically, this year i pretty much got nothing done. this is when i gave up my dreams for nyu stern, berkeley, etc. randomly took SAT because i needed to have a backup just incase i do badly senior year.. got 1960 720 math 580 reading (i know.. shitty reading score. did worse than my reading score when I took SATs in 8th grade for CTY camp ROFL) 660 writing
senior year now... taking AP psych again because it didnt count on record. and everything else is easy classes because im definitely not ready for AP's after not studying/doing schoolwork for the past year.
so im kinda fucked for college.
1 AP at the moment no SAT2s limited community service... though I could get a shitload of hours because i went on 2 mission trips with church and did the disability camp thing (few days/night camp) as well as the 1year for the program itself. not like those are really impressive though. 1960 sat
does NOT look good. im also in arguably the 3rd best public school in new york state, top 50 in nation.
i really dont think i can cram this senior year, i just feel burned out. im looking to hopefully to take 2 sat2's this year and 1 retake of SAT although I doubt i'll do well since im so unconditioned in study/work.
what kind of college do you think i can make it to? i just dont want to go to a CUNY or anything... SUNY would be cool, what would be my reach? my backup? im pretty sure i could get into most SUNY's or perhaps a school like stonybrook or st. johns. my SAT is good enough for those and my first 2 years of highschool were decent.
sorry for the long post, just really anxious about this year. im in utter confusion If you have a legit reason for getting bad grades during a certain period in your high school, and can back it up with your counselor's and/or doctor's writing, you should be fine. just finish up your senior year with a good gpa and you should be fine. you really don't have to take sat2's or the sat again if you feel like you won't do well... there isn't really a point unless you're going for some harder-to-get-into schools, or maybe geneseo. right now, your current grades and scores can get you into some sunys, so you'll be fine. just apply to a whole bunch of them. go for binghamton, geneseo, buffalo, fredonia, stoneybrook and whatever other suny has the program you want to study.
i feel like the main reason why you posted this was because of nervousness. you just arent sure whether your scores and other stuff are good enough, and everyone goes through this. well, i can tell you now - you'll be fine. you're not 'kinda fucked for college.' my situation was so much worse than yours, and i got into American University's SIS for international relations with their highest merit scholarship. aka you can do same if you put good effort into your essays and gpa. also, work with your counselor to figure out how to best communicate your junior year situation to the colleges you're applying to.
|
I graduated high school last May as my class valedictorian with the highest available GPA of a 4.2, for some reason only the advanced science courses were weighted (extremely small school, my graduating class had ~100 students). I also scored a 31 on my ACT which isn't necessarily astounding but because of that I never attempted the SAT. I was accepted into multiple colleges for academics, including the University of Oklahoma which I decided was a good place to begin my college shenanigans. My question is concerning a major, and whether or not I should stay at OU for my remaining 7 semesters.
For this fall semester my schedule is entirely freshman basics that will transfer anywhere, with maybe the exception of an extremely difficult gym class that requires us to jog 15 WHOLE minutes a day with a final exam of completing a mile in ~10. We're only 3 weeks into class but so far everything is a joke, I'd like to think I'm succeeding fairly well at both the academic and social aspects of college thus far.. except maybe that I'm not having rampant sex with every girl in my residential hall because of this awful crutch of a girlfriend.
I've always been fascinated by the human body and it's related functions, so naturally I've only seriously considered medical careers. Anything from physical therapy, occupational, sports medicine, nursing, even massage therapy, but recently I've grown really attached to the idea of radiology. I've had multiple MRIs and other fun tests done on me for anything from sporting injuries to a collapsed lung, so I have a vague understanding of what it's like to do their job and the associated hospital-esque environment.
I was wondering what would be my best course of action to pursue this type of career. Should I continue attending this standard 4-year until I'm absolutely certain I want to commit to a specific field or immediately transfer to a more established specialized institute to begin working towards it?
Obviously anything relating to medicine will have a healthy outlook and job opportunities, is there a more stable industry though? My father has been trying to convince me to focus more on civil engineering using the argument that medicine isn't as reliable since bridges and other related structures are going to begin decaying once I've finished school, so there would be an immediate opening (he's been in construction since high school). My mother on the other hand has been trying to support me in whatever I choose (my parents haven't ever been very good at parenting or anything involving responsibility, unfortunately) although lately she's been giving me subtle hints to take up accounting after her. Would that necessarily be a bad decision considering the other two options of medicine and engineering? Which would be the best?
Also, could anybody working in the health industry give me any insight? Do you still support your decision to focus on medicine? Would you have done anything different if you could go back? Would you encourage more teenagers like myself to work towards related careers?
Writing obviously isn't my forte, I've always excelled at anything requiring intense logic, so science and mathematics. What other fields should I be considering? Pharmaceuticals is a pretty big one I've looked into, what're the major benefits of that compared to any of the others mentioned?
Thank you for reading and any additional input.
|
Is there any strategy for keeping a clear mind when writing the essays? I have something like 10-15 essays to write total. Once I get writer's block on one, then I simply despise everything that I type thereafter. As a result, my progress on my essays has been severely stunted, with only a few months to go (To juggle along with regular schoolwork). Is there some way of getting over that and writing clearly without losing your focus?
EDIT: Would anyone mind rating my chances based on my academics (Not enough time for all the extracurriculars)?
My middleschool/highschool GPA was pretty bad. Lots of Bs, a few Cs, and the rest As. I had a GPA of something like 3.2/3.3. I "bucked down" in junior year, giving me a 3.86 or a 3.92 (I never actually got my final report card. Either 4.0 or 3.86). Every class was an honors/advanced, and I took 3 APs that year, and got 5s on all of them (previous AP scores were a 4 and a 5), so weighted would be 4.86 or 4.92.
My simple question is, would I be considered in a same way as a 3.8 student, or would I be down to ~3.5 because of my history?
|
|
On September 05 2010 21:59 Archaic wrote: Is there any strategy for keeping a clear mind when writing the essays? I have something like 10-15 essays to write total. Once I get writer's block on one, then I simply despise everything that I type thereafter. As a result, my progress on my essays has been severely stunted, with only a few months to go (To juggle along with regular schoolwork). Is there some way of getting over that and writing clearly without losing your focus?
EDIT: Would anyone mind rating my chances based on my academics (Not enough time for all the extracurriculars)?
My middleschool/highschool GPA was pretty bad. Lots of Bs, a few Cs, and the rest As. I had a GPA of something like 3.2/3.3. I "bucked down" in junior year, giving me a 3.86 or a 3.92 (I never actually got my final report card. Either 4.0 or 3.86). Every class was an honors/advanced, and I took 3 APs that year, and got 5s on all of them (previous AP scores were a 4 and a 5), so weighted would be 4.86 or 4.92.
My simple question is, would I be considered in a same way as a 3.8 student, or would I be down to ~3.5 because of my history?
Since love1another has a nuke icon by his name for whatever reason "by request" means...
Your class ranking matters more in the end, I would try taking more APs your senior year and keep your schedule competitive so you can still show motivation and improvement. But essentially, it's up to the college to treat you as a 3.5 or 3.8, my guess is that they would just take a look at your class rank as the predominant factor.
As for your essay, what I do when I review people's stuff is that I generally treat it as if I have no prior knowledge of the person, then ask if I know that person like I would know a friend at the end of their personal statement. Do I know more about you as a person, is essentially the question I try to answer, if no, then it needs work.
Don't despise whatever you wrote, give it to someone to look over and ask them if there are good points to expound on. So just write a draft about anything (for those stuck, I usually tell them to write about their interests), it doesn't matter if it sucks or not, then read over it looking for some aspect to maybe dive deeply into. Since you have 10-15, look for some common factor among them and go write about that. Writer's block is normal and don't be frustrated, just write, fixing is the easy part in all honesty, finding the topic to write about is the hard part.
|
On September 05 2010 20:25 PattyJ wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I graduated high school last May as my class valedictorian with the highest available GPA of a 4.2, for some reason only the advanced science courses were weighted (extremely small school, my graduating class had ~100 students). I also scored a 31 on my ACT which isn't necessarily astounding but because of that I never attempted the SAT. I was accepted into multiple colleges for academics, including the University of Oklahoma which I decided was a good place to begin my college shenanigans. My question is concerning a major, and whether or not I should stay at OU for my remaining 7 semesters. For this fall semester my schedule is entirely freshman basics that will transfer anywhere, with maybe the exception of an extremely difficult gym class that requires us to jog 15 WHOLE minutes a day with a final exam of completing a mile in ~10. We're only 3 weeks into class but so far everything is a joke, I'd like to think I'm succeeding fairly well at both the academic and social aspects of college thus far.. except maybe that I'm not having rampant sex with every girl in my residential hall because of this awful crutch of a girlfriend. I've always been fascinated by the human body and it's related functions, so naturally I've only seriously considered medical careers. Anything from physical therapy, occupational, sports medicine, nursing, even massage therapy, but recently I've grown really attached to the idea of radiology. I've had multiple MRIs and other fun tests done on me for anything from sporting injuries to a collapsed lung, so I have a vague understanding of what it's like to do their job and the associated hospital-esque environment. I was wondering what would be my best course of action to pursue this type of career. Should I continue attending this standard 4-year until I'm absolutely certain I want to commit to a specific field or immediately transfer to a more established specialized institute to begin working towards it? Obviously anything relating to medicine will have a healthy outlook and job opportunities, is there a more stable industry though? My father has been trying to convince me to focus more on civil engineering using the argument that medicine isn't as reliable since bridges and other related structures are going to begin decaying once I've finished school, so there would be an immediate opening (he's been in construction since high school). My mother on the other hand has been trying to support me in whatever I choose (my parents haven't ever been very good at parenting or anything involving responsibility, unfortunately) although lately she's been giving me subtle hints to take up accounting after her. Would that necessarily be a bad decision considering the other two options of medicine and engineering? Which would be the best? Also, could anybody working in the health industry give me any insight? Do you still support your decision to focus on medicine? Would you have done anything different if you could go back? Would you encourage more teenagers like myself to work towards related careers? Writing obviously isn't my forte, I've always excelled at anything requiring intense logic, so science and mathematics. What other fields should I be considering? Pharmaceuticals is a pretty big one I've looked into, what're the major benefits of that compared to any of the others mentioned? Thank you for reading and any additional input.
This best move for you is to get involved in those fields during the summer through various programs and/or internships. Switching colleges doesn't mean much and that would thoroughly be a knee-jerk response which I don't recommend. As for the parents, it honestly sounds like because you don't have a clue what you really want, they're just giving you options.
|
So I don't think I'm going to try to rate people's chances, but I do suggest going to College Confidential. On each college's forums, there are a million "chance me" threads, and a lot more experienced people there checking it out.
In general, if you've had a legitimate situation that has severely affected your grades, and you can get proof of that from a legitimate source, you should be okay. Especially if you can show that you've worked hard to do everything that you can to come back from it. So work hard this yea, maybe take some extra classes or do outside of school work, and just show that you've bounced back. Just make sure that the admissions office knows. Also, there's the possibility of writing an essay about your experience. It can be dangerous, just because you run the risk of writing a sob story, but if you can make it work it also can be really good.
For grades, no one is going to consider a 3.5 like a 3.8 unless there are extenuating circumstances. Colleges in general like to see improvement, some problems freshman year can sometimes be overlooked. In my opinion, however, at a really elite college the effect is going to be extremely small, and you're probably going to not get a real chance simply because you won't get past the academic bar. Once you start looking at the second tier of college (say, top 40-50), that's where they might see a bad first-year but better 2-4th years and giving you more of a shot.
Also, I just want to say that this thread shouldn't be scaring anyone about colleges. My experience in the application process is almost entirely in top15 colleges. But that doesn't mean that those are the only colleges out there. That's the great thing about America, there are just so many places where you can get a good education. They may not have the same kind of name-brand as an Ivy League, but that doesn't mean that they can't have very good programs in the area you're looking at. Rankings I think have relatively little to do with what kind of education and experience you're going to get out of a college, you have to be willing to research that for yourself. If you have the grades and the money to go to a top-20 college, of course I think that you should go for it, because they do offer somethings that other schools can't. But your college career is not going to be a failure if you go to a smaller in-state school. Just make sure you find a school with a good program for what you want to do, and maybe put some more effort into finding opportunities for research/additional education/etc.
EDIT: Some more.
@PattyJ: Sounds like you should do Medicine, but ultimately it's your choice. Just keep in mind that to do premed, you generally have to start freshman year with the requirements, or at the LATEST sophomore. And it is not an easy path by any means, and you will not be getting paid for quite a long time. But when you do get paid, it's worth it. As for transferring, I have no idea, and it depends a lot on how much you want to change up your life. Transferring at the end of your first year or something to a school with a high record of success with premeds could be helpful, but not necessary. If you do think that you're simply going to be bored your entire time at your current school, and you can't find additional opportunities for research, then maybe.
@Essay writing: Writing good essays is mostly about being a good writer. You can't really fake that. The only advice I have is to have a lot of people read over them, and try to give them to the best writers you know. Different perspectives also help, my english teacher gave me much different advice than any of my classmates. And try to reuse essays, especially if you have to write that many. It's hard to adapt a different essay for a specific prompt, but for any general ones, reuse and reuse some more. Especially your best ones.
|
hey guys, this is probably a strange place to start but figured i had to start somewhere =p
i am an international student, currently enrolled at an american college intending to transfer to a US university, maintaining a 4.0 GPA and intending to complete an associate's degree before transferring. however my ECs and past academic grades are pretty messed up. i did my GCE "A" levels in 2005 and got a B average which means most of my extra curriculum done in school is currently 4 years old. so you must be wondering what did hell i was doing for the past 4 years? 2 years of national service and another 2 years of working at two government agencies back to back.
i do not foresee a slip in GPA but i would like some advice on getting my ECs together. my questions are
1) is it necessary to include my past ECs (would be 5 years old) when applying in a year's time? or should i focus entirely on my recent achievements?
2) will my work experience even be relevant in applying?
a little kind of irrelevant here, but considering i was accepted into a world ranked 30+ university (national university of singapore) in 2007, would it be reasonable to say i have a similar chance to those american universities ranked around it? e.g northwestern, / UOC LA / berkeley, NYU, UOB.
thanks guys.
|
im not prodigy and i have like 3.6 unweighted or so gpa with ~1800 sats. I have played ultimate frisbee for a year,volunteered during the summer for like 500 hours throughout highschool . im not expecting to get into any ivy league school. just a decent place where i can get a good degree and a college that isnt fucking terrible. place like UCs. what are my chances? can i do anything now as a senior? because my school is different, i have taken all the ap classes that are posssible in my school, as in every slot that i COULD get an AP class i would get it.
|
@Waffles For a decent state school, that should be enough to be honest. Fix your SATs to the 2000s and you'll be golden.
@wwiv Yes, work is relevant because that's EC stuff. Don't include 5 year old stuff.
For all those asking, go ask your high school counselors, go look up statistics on the incoming classes to your prospective schools, you'll get a good idea then.
|
On September 05 2010 18:10 hellohello wrote: So i grew up in korea and several other countries(usa,dubai,singapore and yemen) but the constant moving and my lack of interest in education left my highschool education in shambles(skipped freshman year,did sophmore year twice,dropped out of several schools,very little attendance records) and i dropped out of my final highschool this march and got a GED,I tried applying to korean colleges but they didn't like my transcript so I want to prepare myself for college for next year,I'd like to study art(fashion to be more precise) but most of all I would like to get out of korea and go to an american or canadian college. The thing is my parents are fed up with spending money on my education(can't blame them). What's the best move for me if i want to go to an american or canadian college with a full scholarship? don't ignore me
|
For chances or specific situations, you can't expect someone here to really know. I have a decent idea of what it takes to get into a top college, because that's what I dealt with and where most of my friends went. If you want your chances to be evaluated, I highly suggest College Confidential, they have a lot more people with a lot more experience there. Personally, I don't really have many credentials, besides talking with people and going through the experience myself, at CC there are a lot more resources.
@wwiv: I'd say go with your gut. Anything that you think still shows something relevant I would put on there, and I would lean towards putting a little too much on if you're really on the border.
@hello: I have little knowledge of how most schools do international applications. For a domestic student, if you really want a lot of money, you have to a) be incredibly smart or have done something amazing, b) be in a very bad financial situation, or c) settle for a significantly worse school. I have no idea how being an international student affects your financial aid decisions.
|
what university do you attend? and what major?
|
|
On September 06 2010 14:02 mardi wrote: what university do you attend? and what major? I'm just going to answer this question, as the OP is currently banned.
But I'm at the University of Chicago. Economics major, considering a minor in statistics.
|
What do I do if my test scores do not match my GPA? My school doesn't rank either...
|
On September 06 2010 15:21 krndandaman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 13:28 hellohello wrote:On September 05 2010 18:10 hellohello wrote: So i grew up in korea and several other countries(usa,dubai,singapore and yemen) but the constant moving and my lack of interest in education left my highschool education in shambles(skipped freshman year,did sophmore year twice,dropped out of several schools,very little attendance records) and i dropped out of my final highschool this march and got a GED,I tried applying to korean colleges but they didn't like my transcript so I want to prepare myself for college for next year,I'd like to study art(fashion to be more precise) but most of all I would like to get out of korea and go to an american or canadian college. The thing is my parents are fed up with spending money on my education(can't blame them). What's the best move for me if i want to go to an american or canadian college with a full scholarship? don't ignore me i think you'll have to go for a loan. full scholarships are extremely hard to come by...like the above poster said, you either have to be super super smart with amazing transcript, have done amazing like get 1st place in a prestigious national/international contest or be dirt poor with good transcript. alot of students take loans anyways, so you wont be alone if you do. loan as in from the korean gov?or would the american gov give me a loan if i went to a school in the states?
|
I'm actually only going into 9th grade next year, but being Asian I'm already worrying about college (hmm, parents >_>). What's most important to focus on? GPA, SAT, other academic programs, etc.? My parents always talk about kids who win these huge nationwide math or science competitions and get accepted by tons of top schools; it makes me feel like the odds of me getting accepted into MIT or Stanford really low without something so outstanding o_o.
And if it makes a difference, my school sucks. Every year like 1 or 2 people make it into Ivy Leagues, and the student expectations are pretty low; they also don't offer a lot of AP classes.
EDIT: I make it sound worse than it is, lol. They have some AP classes, just not as large of a selection as some other schools in NJ.
|
On September 07 2010 11:13 Jaso wrote: I'm actually only going into 9th grade next year, but being Asian I'm already worrying about college (hmm, parents >_>). What's most important to focus on? GPA, SAT, other academic programs, etc.? My parents always talk about kids who win these huge nationwide math or science competitions and get accepted by tons of top schools; it makes me feel like the odds of me getting accepted into MIT or Stanford really low without something so outstanding o_o.
And if it makes a difference, my school sucks. Every year like 1 or 2 people make it into Ivy Leagues, and the student expectations are pretty low; they also don't offer a lot of AP classes.
EDIT: I make it sound worse than it is, lol. They have some AP classes, just not as large of a selection as some other schools in NJ.
The people that I know personally that have been accepted to MIT/Stanford/Yale/etc. are all exceptional students, all of them have at least credentials on the regional level.
As for the quality of your school, it doesn't matter for the admissions process as long as you are 1 or 2, as in top 1 or 2 student, not top 1% or 2%, like top 5 students. Remember, schools don't care if you come from a shitty or great school, as long as you are the best of your situation, then you have a legit chance, because they reason that you are limited by your situation.
If you want to show initiative, go take college classes. ECs will help you here also, so get involved, start working/volunteering.
If you want good news, those competitions are good ways to improve your academic resume, but hardly the only way or a guaranteed way. I would you recommend that you find something that you enjoy and work the shit out of it, leadership positions, organizing events, whatever.
But there is no way around GPAs or SATs, gotta be tops on that.
|
|
Would you care telling us what college you are currently enrolled or have graduated from?
|
On September 07 2010 11:13 Jaso wrote: I'm actually only going into 9th grade next year, but being Asian I'm already worrying about college (hmm, parents >_>). What's most important to focus on? GPA, SAT, other academic programs, etc.? My parents always talk about kids who win these huge nationwide math or science competitions and get accepted by tons of top schools; it makes me feel like the odds of me getting accepted into MIT or Stanford really low without something so outstanding o_o.
And if it makes a difference, my school sucks. Every year like 1 or 2 people make it into Ivy Leagues, and the student expectations are pretty low; they also don't offer a lot of AP classes.
EDIT: I make it sound worse than it is, lol. They have some AP classes, just not as large of a selection as some other schools in NJ. Don't worry too much about SATs and stuff yet, it's not worth it. And don't worry too much about college in general, it's really too early to be doing that.
The things I think you should be doing, especially if you want to get into a MIT-like school: 1) Take the hardest classes your school offers and do well in them. 2) Have fun. Have a life. Do interesting things. DON'T become a cookie-cutter good-academics-but-not-much-else asian. Find stuff that you can be passionate about. Take extra classes, enter competitions, do research, volunteer, get on a team, play a sport/instrument, etc. 2a) Try to find things that you can excel at. Getting into an elite college isn't about doing a bunch of stuff. You really need to stand out in an area. If you really love Math, practice really hard for the AMC/AIME (If you aren't getting to the AIME, MIT honestly won't even care). Take extra classes, especially if there's a college/university nearby, and do really well in them. If you love music, really try to excel at it. If you love a sport, get really serious about it and train hard. The idea is that you don't want just a bunch of activities that you can put on a transcript, you want something really exceptional that you can show. An award, a championship, a piece of art or a musical recording, or something else that really shows how passionate you are about something.
And don't worry about college too much. As long as you work hard at school and find things to be passionate about, you can worry about college in junior year.
|
I took the SATs for the first time this Jan and got a 2250. Really wanna break ~2330. Do you have any specific strategies for those last 80 or so points? My biggest trouble is CR.
Thanks dude
|
On September 08 2010 12:31 SkyLegenD wrote: I took the SATs for the first time this Jan and got a 2250. Really wanna break ~2330. Do you have any specific strategies for those last 80 or so points? My biggest trouble is CR.
Thanks dude
Read a lot and often, so you'll increase your general reading speed. However, don't sacrifice understanding and comprehension of the text for increased speed.
Take notes by each paragraph, summarizing in about five words what it is about. It'll help your understanding, and also be a quick reference when you're looking back at the passage.
Read passage first, then questions later.
Get a bigger vocabulary. That is many vocab, yes?
Don't second guess your answers.
Of course, I don't know what your CR level is right now, so you might already be doing all of this stuff. In that case, just put in some more time, and hope for a good day? My CR was like 780, which admittedly was a lot higher than I expected it to be. I basically just did the stuff I listed above.
|
On September 06 2010 01:20 theonemephisto wrote: So I don't think I'm going to try to rate people's chances, but I do suggest going to College Confidential.
THIS.
There's absolutely no source like CC for the college admissions process. There is not a thing in the known universe remotely close to it.
|
On September 08 2010 12:31 SkyLegenD wrote: I took the SATs for the first time this Jan and got a 2250. Really wanna break ~2330. Do you have any specific strategies for those last 80 or so points? My biggest trouble is CR.
Thanks dude What were your composite scores?
But for me, the thing that helped the most was simply doing as many practice tests as I could. In particular, my routine was usually to pick a section or a subsection, for instance, math, or sentence completion, and simply do as many of those sections as I could. Get a book that has practice SAT tests, and do 10 sentence completions in a row, pausing after each to examine your mistakes and make sure you understand the grammar behind them. Repeat with math. Repeat with critical reading. Etc. Then take a full test or two and see how you do.
Of course, this also has the benefit of being able to be targeted very easily. If you rocked the math but sucked at writing, do all the grammar sections you can. Or whatever.
For vocab, all you can do is memorize a lot of words. If you have a significant amount of time (like, at least a couple months), Word Power Made Easy is an incredible book for learning more words/roots, but it does take a while to get through (we had to go through most of it sophomore year, and I saw many words from it I wouldn't have otherwise known). Word Power also is just a great book for life, it teaches you a lot.
|
On September 08 2010 16:47 theonemephisto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2010 12:31 SkyLegenD wrote: I took the SATs for the first time this Jan and got a 2250. Really wanna break ~2330. Do you have any specific strategies for those last 80 or so points? My biggest trouble is CR.
Thanks dude What were your composite scores? But for me, the thing that helped the most was simply doing as many practice tests as I could. In particular, my routine was usually to pick a section or a subsection, for instance, math, or sentence completion, and simply do as many of those sections as I could. Get a book that has practice SAT tests, and do 10 sentence completions in a row, pausing after each to examine your mistakes and make sure you understand the grammar behind them. Repeat with math. Repeat with critical reading. Etc. Then take a full test or two and see how you do. Of course, this also has the benefit of being able to be targeted very easily. If you rocked the math but sucked at writing, do all the grammar sections you can. Or whatever. For vocab, all you can do is memorize a lot of words. If you have a significant amount of time (like, at least a couple months), Word Power Made Easy is an incredible book for learning more words/roots, but it does take a while to get through (we had to go through most of it sophomore year, and I saw many words from it I wouldn't have otherwise known). Word Power also is just a great book for life, it teaches you a lot. M - 770 CR - 750 W - 730 (12 essay)
Been practicing Writing like crazy these days.
|
what if i can't find people for reccomendatoins?
|
|
|
|