6 ms·

> Baseline requirements: near 1600 SAT and near 4.0 unweighted GPA taking the hardest classes. And there you have it. If you have to have perfect grades you ca

by rb808 10y ago

> Baseline requirements: near 1600 SAT and near 4.0 unweighted GPA taking the hardest classes. And there you have it. If you have to have perfect grades you can't experiment or take any risks. A hardcore science student for whom math is easy could never study a language, or work on something they're not as good at.

comicjk 10y ago
Don't you think high school course grades are pretty well correlated with each other? I don't think it takes language talent to get As in a high school language class, just good study skills and memory, like all the other classes.
fny 10y ago
> could never study a language, or work on something they're not as good at. Foreign language and writing skills are a requirement. Assuming a school has non-STEM class like history, its expected that they'll take those classes too. Admissions doesn't penalize a student for getting a B in a "risk" class like music theory. Remember its near 4.0. I also think you're missing the point. In great part, schools deny a student for his own good. They feel that student should go to a less demanding school so he can nurse his academic skills instead of drinking from a firehose. For most of the students top schools admit, 1600 and 4.0 unweighted isn't a particularly difficult achievement.
- jschwartzi 10y ago
  You don't get penalized for getting a single B on a single risk class, but what about two? Three? Can you quantify the level of ambitious-ness the admissions process actually allows you to have before you're no longer up for consideration? What if you're well-rounded enough not to have spent 20 hours a week studying Greek and Latin tenses for the SAT, so you only got a 1300? "It's for your own good" is a pretty arrogant attitude. There are tons of people who are capable of drinking from the firehose who don't excel in High School. Why not just admit that your selectiveness is a form of risk-aversion on your part, as in you'd rather not take a chance on a B-student.
  - csa 10y ago
    I get the sense that you and 'fny are talking past each other. You both have some strong points, and you both have some weak points. - If a smart student has strong learning strategies, high school classes as a general rule should not be difficult to get good grades in. There are exceptions for demonstrably capricious teachers --these teachers should definitely be avoided and are generally not difficult to identify except in one's first year of high school (even then...). If a student struggles in a class or in a certain discipline (e.g., math or foreign languages) in high school, then I humbly suggest that they are either not that smart, have significant gaps in their learning strategies, or have some sort of learning block. IMHO, all of these things if they persist throughout high school are potentially valid reasons to reject a person from an elite university since they will cause much bigger problems later. - Contrary to what 'fny says, you can actually get quite a few Bs in high school and still get accepted to an elite school. Ditto with an SAT score that is not close to 1600. The catch is that the applicant needs to make up for it elsewhere in the application. Really interesting candidates don't have problem with this. - If you think studying Greek and Latin tenses for 20 hours a week is the key to getting a high SAT verbal score, then I think you have been grossly misled. For smart kids, just regularly reading and understanding "high brow" magazines like The Atlantic Monthly, The Economist, Foreign Affairs, The Weekly Standard, The New Yorker, etc. is more than enough to build a very healthy SAT-ready vocabulary as well as high level reading comprehension skills. If you mention the idea of Greek and Latin roots to smart kids, they will be able to figure out what a lot of the core ones are based on their reading. Note that this type of reading will also give them good schemata for higher level writing. - The "it's for your own good" comment definitely seems arrogant, and it kind of is. That said, it's kind of right, too. It's rough to see a smart kid struggle at an elite school because they lack some fundamentals that a lot of the entering class comes in with (e.g., study strategies, writing skills, background knowledge, etc.). That said, the ones who can "drink from the firehouse" despite mediocre grades are usually obvious to admissions committees since they excel to a phenomenal level on some other vector (e.g., international science fair winner, amazing inventor, etc.). - You are half right with your comment on risk aversion and taking a risk on a B-student. Without any other evidence that this hypothetical B-student will fit in and/or excel, they are likely to be unhappy as well as be a minor or negative contributor to their peer groups (i.e., they will have to be "carried" in group work and/or they will set the team back by not being able to do adequate work). One of the things that makes elite schools amazing (as well as some honors programs at 2nd tier schools) is that you can learn a lot from your peers. - Note that I think 'fny is largely talking about the standards for Caucasian and Asian non-athlete non-diversity applicants from the NE corridor and the west coast. There are a metric shit ton of B-students (and worse!) at elite schools. They tend to be recruited athletes (esp. in football and basketball, but in other sports as well), diversity candidates (note that this is not just racial diversity, but also geographical diversity), z-listers, or people coming in with a lot of social capital. There are also vastly different standards for applicants at universities like Penn where they apply to a school within the university. For example, the average profiles for Wharton students and Nursing students are quite different, and this difference can sometimes be magnified by other factors like geographical preference (e.g., a nursing student from rural PA might have an application that would shock a few HNers). This is a pet topic of mine. If you have any more questions, I will be happy to answer.
taneq 10y ago
I think the idea is that they want people who can maintain that level of performance while taking risks.
- jcims 10y ago
  So they are picking folks that either didn't take real risks or just got lucky.
  - taneq 10y ago
    Or are just that good? They're rare, but I'd believe that kids that age could be that good in relation to the challenges they face, much more than I'd believe that a CEO on a multi-million dollar salary actually has crystal-ball-reading skills rather than just having flipped 'heads' an unusual number of times in a row. And plenty of people seem to prepared to believe that said CEOs are smart rather than lucky.

by rb808 10y ago

comicjk 10y ago

Don't you think high school course grades are pretty well correlated with each other? I don't think it takes language talent to get As in a high school language class, just good study skills and memory, like all the other classes.

fny 10y ago

> could never study a language, or work on something they're not as good at. Foreign language and writing skills are a requirement. Assuming a school has non-STEM class like history, its expected that they'll take those classes too. Admissions doesn't penalize a student for getting a B in a "risk" class like music theory. Remember its near 4.0. I also think you're missing the point. In great part, schools deny a student for his own good. They feel that student should go to a less demanding school so he can nurse his academic skills instead of drinking from a firehose. For most of the students top schools admit, 1600 and 4.0 unweighted isn't a particularly difficult achievement.

jschwartzi 10y ago
You don't get penalized for getting a single B on a single risk class, but what about two? Three? Can you quantify the level of ambitious-ness the admissions process actually allows you to have before you're no longer up for consideration? What if you're well-rounded enough not to have spent 20 hours a week studying Greek and Latin tenses for the SAT, so you only got a 1300? "It's for your own good" is a pretty arrogant attitude. There are tons of people who are capable of drinking from the firehose who don't excel in High School. Why not just admit that your selectiveness is a form of risk-aversion on your part, as in you'd rather not take a chance on a B-student.
- csa 10y ago
  I get the sense that you and 'fny are talking past each other. You both have some strong points, and you both have some weak points. - If a smart student has strong learning strategies, high school classes as a general rule should not be difficult to get good grades in. There are exceptions for demonstrably capricious teachers --these teachers should definitely be avoided and are generally not difficult to identify except in one's first year of high school (even then...). If a student struggles in a class or in a certain discipline (e.g., math or foreign languages) in high school, then I humbly suggest that they are either not that smart, have significant gaps in their learning strategies, or have some sort of learning block. IMHO, all of these things if they persist throughout high school are potentially valid reasons to reject a person from an elite university since they will cause much bigger problems later. - Contrary to what 'fny says, you can actually get quite a few Bs in high school and still get accepted to an elite school. Ditto with an SAT score that is not close to 1600. The catch is that the applicant needs to make up for it elsewhere in the application. Really interesting candidates don't have problem with this. - If you think studying Greek and Latin tenses for 20 hours a week is the key to getting a high SAT verbal score, then I think you have been grossly misled. For smart kids, just regularly reading and understanding "high brow" magazines like The Atlantic Monthly, The Economist, Foreign Affairs, The Weekly Standard, The New Yorker, etc. is more than enough to build a very healthy SAT-ready vocabulary as well as high level reading comprehension skills. If you mention the idea of Greek and Latin roots to smart kids, they will be able to figure out what a lot of the core ones are based on their reading. Note that this type of reading will also give them good schemata for higher level writing. - The "it's for your own good" comment definitely seems arrogant, and it kind of is. That said, it's kind of right, too. It's rough to see a smart kid struggle at an elite school because they lack some fundamentals that a lot of the entering class comes in with (e.g., study strategies, writing skills, background knowledge, etc.). That said, the ones who can "drink from the firehouse" despite mediocre grades are usually obvious to admissions committees since they excel to a phenomenal level on some other vector (e.g., international science fair winner, amazing inventor, etc.). - You are half right with your comment on risk aversion and taking a risk on a B-student. Without any other evidence that this hypothetical B-student will fit in and/or excel, they are likely to be unhappy as well as be a minor or negative contributor to their peer groups (i.e., they will have to be "carried" in group work and/or they will set the team back by not being able to do adequate work). One of the things that makes elite schools amazing (as well as some honors programs at 2nd tier schools) is that you can learn a lot from your peers. - Note that I think 'fny is largely talking about the standards for Caucasian and Asian non-athlete non-diversity applicants from the NE corridor and the west coast. There are a metric shit ton of B-students (and worse!) at elite schools. They tend to be recruited athletes (esp. in football and basketball, but in other sports as well), diversity candidates (note that this is not just racial diversity, but also geographical diversity), z-listers, or people coming in with a lot of social capital. There are also vastly different standards for applicants at universities like Penn where they apply to a school within the university. For example, the average profiles for Wharton students and Nursing students are quite different, and this difference can sometimes be magnified by other factors like geographical preference (e.g., a nursing student from rural PA might have an application that would shock a few HNers). This is a pet topic of mine. If you have any more questions, I will be happy to answer.

taneq 10y ago

I think the idea is that they want people who can maintain that level of performance while taking risks.

jcims 10y ago
So they are picking folks that either didn't take real risks or just got lucky.
- taneq 10y ago
  Or are just that good? They're rare, but I'd believe that kids that age could be that good in relation to the challenges they face, much more than I'd believe that a CEO on a multi-million dollar salary actually has crystal-ball-reading skills rather than just having flipped 'heads' an unusual number of times in a row. And plenty of people seem to prepared to believe that said CEOs are smart rather than lucky.