Do I have a good chance to get into Stanford?

By the end of my senior year I had gotten a 33 act. A slight difference but I think it helped

comedyrelief wrote:

The elitist slant to Flagpole's post is what I found to be most ridiculous. My wife and I both went to state schools for undergrad and my wife went to state school for med school (I went to work as an engineer and got my PE). My brothers went the elite school route (MIT, Notre Dame and Vanderbilt). Financially, my wife and I are better off than my brother's families. Not that there is anything wrong with the private colleges, but they are better left for grad school rather than undergrad unless you can get it for free like the OP. Props to the OP for getting a full ride with a 31 ACT, I received no such offers with similar credentials.

Hyperleo7 wrote:

By the end of my senior year I had gotten a 33 act. A slight difference but I think it helped

comedyrelief wrote:

The elitist slant to Flagpole's post is what I found to be most ridiculous. My wife and I both went to state schools for undergrad and my wife went to state school for med school (I went to work as an engineer and got my PE). My brothers went the elite school route (MIT, Notre Dame and Vanderbilt). Financially, my wife and I are better off than my brother's families. Not that there is anything wrong with the private colleges, but they are better left for grad school rather than undergrad unless you can get it for free like the OP. Props to the OP for getting a full ride with a 31 ACT, I received no such offers with similar credentials.

What times did you run your senior year of high school?

Are you still planning on medical school?

Good luck.

jjhgh wrote:

What times did you run your senior year of high school?

Are you still planning on medical school?

Good luck.

He said he tore his hamstring, so he probably didn't run much his Senior year.

At any rate, congratulations! Hopkins is a great school, getting a free ride there is a fantastic achievement.

I actually didn't finish the year , but I opened with a 1:58. And I definitely want to go to medical school. I actually was gonna start a new thread about getting in there.

For the majority of intro classes and Stanford/Harvard/UCB/UCLA Professors teach the class and TAs teach smaller discussion/recitation sections. It is very fair to have the ONLY instruction be by a TA.

cali boy wrote:

[quote]

The problem with all three of these schools, but moreso with Cal and UCLA, for undergrad is that you'll end up with TAs basically teaching the introductory classes of 500+ kids, which can be an unpleasant experience. None of the three is a particularly undergrad focused school, but I think Stanford probably handles undergrads the best of the three. It's certainly a little harder to get lost in the mix at Stanford, but it's remarkably easy to do so at Cal or UCLA if you're not extremely proactive.

Hyperleo7 wrote:

I actually didn't finish the year , but I opened with a 1:58. And I definitely want to go to medical school. I actually was gonna start a new thread about getting in there.

This thread is a total mess like everything on here, but good for you for getting into a great school like Hopkins! My unsolicited advice to you: don't take summers off. Look for as many internships as possible and network, network, network. Try to picture your dream job and get an internship there, even if it's just menial stuff - it pays off, big time. Way too many kids, even from good schools, just assume that the degree will be all they need.

Stay safe too - that campus and the surrounding area can be dangerous.

The Reality.

We live in Indiana. My son ran sub 16, had an ACT of 33 and a 1510 SAT. We make $73,000 combined. Took every AP class offered and was ranked number 1 in his class, nailed every class but sacrificed a lot to do it.

Call me a liar, which many of you will, but he applied to Stanford and got denied. Zero, Nothing, Zilch, denied. What a lot of you are missing is it's a crapshoot. Who you know? Who will make a phone call for you? How many people apply and how many get turned down. Telling him that he'll probably get in is a guess at best.

And, this person "Eyes wide open" is correct. There are lots of smart, really smart kids who get denied from Stanford, whether the other poster wants to believe it or not. I forgot to tell you that my son was a National Merit Finalist (not semi-finalist) and never once received an A- in any class, ever. The program that he is in is one the toughest STEM programs in the country, yes, I said in the country. If the other poster doesn't believe that there are super bright kids who were denied, he's simply misguided or uneducated himself.

Congrats Hyperleo7. I didn't see this thread 2 years ago but started reading it today and thought "he could get in." Smart, diverse background, not upper income family (and pretty fast).

The full ride to Johns Hopkins proves it.

What's the point here? Lots of kids with a 33 ACT don't get into Stanford. And kids without a hook, lower than a 33 ACT do get in. I'm looking at my school's Naviance right now, and this past year, from a well regarded Chicago suburban public high school we had kids get in with a 32 ACT/3.71 GPA, 33/3.68, and a 36/3.95. None were athletes. The problem with the 35/4.0 is they all look the same and they don't do anything outside the box or present themselves any differently than the thousands of applicants just like them. They're boring, they add nothing to the makeup of the university. They could be picked off a conveyer belt that spits out the same thing. Admissions at Stanford knows that the 32 kid with a few B's here and there in tough courses is no less intelligent than the 36 with a 4.0, but he/she has got something unique to offer to the class.

And do you mean his high school has the best STEM program in the country? Because if you're in IN, the best STEM program isn't there, it's probably at TJ in Virginia.

Not sour grapes, but there's a lot of luck involved, period.

wejo wrote:

Congrats Hyperleo7. I didn't see this thread 2 years ago but started reading it today and thought "he could get in." Smart, diverse background, not upper income family (and pretty fast).

The full ride to Johns Hopkins proves it.

Congrats Hyperleo, that's a significant accomplishment. Sorry about your injury. I hope you are enjoying JHU.

PortlandXCGirl wrote:

LOL. This thread is a mess. Flagpole demonstrated his ignorance on how college admissions worked. Too funny.

Well, this thread was started in 2015, but I don't see any ignorance on my part of how college admissions work. You can specify if you like, but I know very well how college admissions work...with a daughter at an elite college right now and a son being recruited by several.

comedyrelief wrote:

The elitist slant to Flagpole's post is what I found to be most ridiculous. My wife and I both went to state schools for undergrad and my wife went to state school for med school (I went to work as an engineer and got my PE). My brothers went the elite school route (MIT, Notre Dame and Vanderbilt). Financially, my wife and I are better off than my brother's families. Not that there is anything wrong with the private colleges, but they are better left for grad school rather than undergrad unless you can get it for free like the OP. Props to the OP for getting a full ride with a 31 ACT, I received no such offers with similar credentials.

1) There is elitism in education. Sorry, but there is. HYPS and HYPSM are for elite students. The main argument here was that UCLA was being propped up as as good as Stanford and that their students were as smart as the ones at Stanford. Well, that is clearly not true as I pointed out earlier (Stanford's 25% range for ACT score is the same as UCLA's 75% range, so it's not even close).

2) Notre Dame and Vanderbilt are very good schools, but I wouldn't go shouting from the rooftops that they are elite as many would have an issue with that. MIT is elite.

3) Why are "private colleges" better for grad school? That's ridiculous. For one thing, a LOT of private colleges don't even have graduate programs.

4) I never said anything about equating going to Stanford or another elite college with potential income. I said simply that the students there are smarter -- and they are. Good for you that you are financially better off than your brothers' families. A lot of really smart people care only about doing work that is interesting or helpful and not whether it makes a lot of money. Also, sometimes a really smart person just isn't equipped to go out and make a lot of money. Again, I didn't equate elite colleges with potential income. Super smart people go to Stanford. Students who aren't quite as smart (on average) go to UCLA. Just a fact.

Hyperleo7 wrote:

No I didn't get into Stanford. Well to be exact I withdrew my application because I applied early decision to Johns Hopkins and got in with a full ride. My track career ended prematurely because of a grade 2 hamstring tear during my junior year. I pushed it too hard and could never bounce back. I'm majoring in chemistry now. So I would say my career path changed a bit but not much.

Johns Hopkins is an outstanding school. Congrats. Sorry to hear about your injury.

telling the truth on it wrote:

The Reality.

We live in Indiana. My son ran sub 16, had an ACT of 33 and a 1510 SAT. We make $73,000 combined. Took every AP class offered and was ranked number 1 in his class, nailed every class but sacrificed a lot to do it.

Call me a liar, which many of you will, but he applied to Stanford and got denied. Zero, Nothing, Zilch, denied. What a lot of you are missing is it's a crapshoot. Who you know? Who will make a phone call for you? How many people apply and how many get turned down. Telling him that he'll probably get in is a guess at best.

I completely believe you. Getting into Stanford is very difficult.

1) Breaking 16 minutes does nothing as far as getting recruited to run at Stanford, so that was no help.

2) Those ACT and SAT scores are great, but they are a dime a dozen compared to the students who apply at Stanford. Stanford turns down students with perfect ACT and SAT scores every year.

3) Who you know doesn't help the vast majority of the students who get in to Stanford...a handful each year, yes, but that's it. There are only so many spots, and so just because you are No. 1 in your class with great test scores and tons of AP classes, it just doesn't assure you of anything.

4) The fact is that getting into Stanford is a REACH for EVERYONE. Unless you are a recruited athlete or have some other amazing demonstrable talent, there just aren't any slam dunks there.

wejo wrote:

Congrats Hyperleo7. I didn't see this thread 2 years ago but started reading it today and thought "he could get in." Smart, diverse background, not upper income family (and pretty fast).

The full ride to Johns Hopkins proves it.

I agree that he had a chance to get in. It just wasn't a slam dunk...as it pretty much isn't for anyone (except recruited athletes and a handful of others) there.

Interesting thread, with of course a lot of misguided opinions. I did my undergrad at one of the UC schools (a great school in its own right) and finished my PhD from Stanford last year. To be fair, I could have done better grades wise in high school. I will say there were a lot of smart people at the UCs but I agree that the median at Stanford is better... similar to the running analogy, when you go from undergrad to grad school at a top university, you're dealing with the very top percentile. Also, you bring international students into the mix who do quite well on tests.

That being said, going to Stanford opened up a LOT of opportunities for me that I probably would not have otherwise had. I have a really good job now that came about partly because a friend at Stanford referred me (I still had to pass the interviews and everything) and top companies would come and recruit regularly. I don't forget my state school roots and I'm glad I went there for undergrad but I would definitely take Stanford for grad school for a number of reasons.

telling the truth on it wrote:

And, this person "Eyes wide open" is correct. There are lots of smart, really smart kids who get denied from Stanford, whether the other poster wants to believe it or not. I forgot to tell you that my son was a National Merit Finalist (not semi-finalist) and never once received an A- in any class, ever. The program that he is in is one the toughest STEM programs in the country, yes, I said in the country. If the other poster doesn't believe that there are super bright kids who were denied, he's simply misguided or uneducated himself.

I know a kid who was similar to your son...National Merit Finalist, all A's in high school with very tough AP classes, a 35 even on the ACT. He was involved in a few things in high school, but not an athlete. He not only was denied at Stanford but also at Washington University in St. Louis. I think his extracurriculars weren't too great. Fortunately he got a full-ride to another second-tier school.