No, it’s Princeton
No, it’s Princeton
The schools set the lowest standard for minorities so it really is weighted toward democrats who get in without meeting what should be the minimum criteria. Also, most of the ultra wealthy are democrats.
I attended Stanford as an undergrad and had a good friend who became an admissions officer, so I think I have a pretty good sense of what admissions looks for in an applicant.
What many people fail to understand is the limited role test scores play in the admittance process. Like the high school kid (smart lad, he’ll do fine, wherever he winds up) said earlier, +/- 1500 SAT gets you in the pool to be selected, nothing more. Extraordinary ability or accomplishment, the in-person interview, essay, recommendations, and a dose of luck determine who gets the fat envelope.
A couple of my close friends had somewhat checkered HS academic records but were truly original thinkers who wrote brilliantly and aced the interview. There’s no shortage of smart kids, enough to fill the freshman class many times over, who have mastered the academic game but really don’t have much to say for themselves beyond that.
Some of the best minds in math and science can’t communicate very well. John Nash would never be accepted to Stanford or Princeton if he was a HS senior. It’s idiotic that the schools have their liberal ideals of getting the ultra wealthy in to pay the bills and the minorities to ease their consciences. Test scores tell you how you will get the next great minds, not the next great debater.
Thinkers not talkers wrote:
Some of the best minds in math and science can’t communicate very well. John Nash would never be accepted to Stanford or Princeton if he was a HS senior. It’s idiotic that the schools have their liberal ideals of getting the ultra wealthy in to pay the bills and the minorities to ease their consciences. Test scores tell you how you will get the next great minds, not the next great debater.
Excepting the minorities that are Asian and male.
Not even Asian wrote:
Thinkers not talkers wrote:
Some of the best minds in math and science can’t communicate very well. John Nash would never be accepted to Stanford or Princeton if he was a HS senior. It’s idiotic that the schools have their liberal ideals of getting the ultra wealthy in to pay the bills and the minorities to ease their consciences. Test scores tell you how you will get the next great minds, not the next great debater.
Excepting the minorities that are Asian and male.
Correction: Excepting Asians or males, either of which are minorities.
You have no idea what you’re talking about. John Nash is an example of someone demonstrating extraordinary ability who would be admittted on that basis alone. Similarly, there was a bona fide math genius in my freshman dorm who who could barely string together a coherent sentence and scored 400-something on his English SAT to go along with his 800 math score. He’s now a leading scientist at government agency.
Must be an ivy leaguer who doesn’t understand except from accept. Asians are not minorties, they are foreigners just like Brits or Germans. Asian Americans are minorities. You don’t read or write well.
White male. He could not communicate and would have never made it through an interview. The only thing he would have had going for him today would be good math and science scores which everyone is saying would put him DOA.
Spell much wrote:
Must be an ivy leaguer who doesn’t understand except from accept. Asians are not minorties, they are foreigners just like Brits or Germans. Asian Americans are minorities. You don’t read or write well.
Ummm, (1) you should rethink what you wrote regarding except and accept. (2) I think the discrimination applies to Asian Americans as well as to Asians in general. Finally, (3) if you deign to snootily correct someone, wouldn't it be less embarrassing (for you) to spell minorities correctly even if, as you have, bungle the substance of your arguments? You've taken three swings and struck out. That's quite efficient (for me).
OK, I'm now circling the drain with my critic. Here's my amended version:
Ummm, (1) you should rethink what you wrote regarding except and accept. (2) I think the discrimination applies to Asian Americans as well as to Asians in general. Finally, (3) if you deign to snootily correct someone, wouldn't it be less embarrassing (for you) to spell minorities correctly even if you have bungled, as you have, the substance of your arguments? You've taken three swings and struck out. That's quite efficient (for me).
Never ever wrote:
White male. He could not communicate and would have never made it through an interview. The only thing he would have had going for him today would be good math and science scores which everyone is saying would put him DOA.
Oh FFS, I just gave you an example of a white male with lousy communication skills who was accepted. 38% of the Stanford student body is Caucasian, +/-50% male.
You have no clue how this actually works.
Suppose his recommendations say, “This is the most gifted math student I’ve ever encountered, with 4 sigma ability.” He’s in.
No, number one is THE Ohio State University. Stanford is a distant second.
One example is great. Thousands of people can attest that they were rejected even though they had perfect SATs and ACTs and were winning national math competitions and national orchestra competitions and were class presidents and editors of their school paper and were class president and that they were Asian. Do you not realize that the acceptance rates for blacks and Hispanics are significantly high than the rate for Asians even though there scores are significantly lower?
Parent Rep wrote:
One example is great. Thousands of people can attest that they were rejected even though they had perfect SATs and ACTs and were winning national math competitions and national orchestra competitions and were class presidents and editors of their school paper and were class president and that they were Asian. Do you not realize that the acceptance rates for blacks and Hispanics are significantly high than the rate for Asians even though there scores are significantly lower?
1. You don't have access to acceptance rates by race for Stanford, so how would you know? Those figures are not made public.
2. If you were in a position to have access to this info, you would probably know the difference between 'their' and 'there'.
So your spot wasn't taken by some low-scoring minority - you're just dumb.
Want to get into a top school?
1) Do well academically
2) Excel in one area (the "spike")
3) Crush the essay
https://www.star-telegram.com/living/family/moms/article3834821.html
The majority of the indicted are Stanford and Ivy grads.
Hornsby Bruce wrote:
Son scored 1540 on the SAT and 35 on the ACT's...didn't get in but was told he would. 15:31 5k best, not great I know---but we thought with those scores he'd get in on academics. If you're Katie Couric's daughter yes, but not my son. It's just the way it is and yes it's both tough and who you know.
Why would you think that colleges would want to admit people with 1540 test scores and 15:31 5Ks more than people who are good at chess and write poetry, or people who know how to fix bicycles and have great comedic timing?
If you were black, you would have been in with a 1440. Your 1540 doesn't cut it. Read the Harvard article. Stanford is even more extreme.