Comments about "Early apps suffer slight decline"
<< Back to Early apps suffer slight decline
13 Comments on this article:
Yeah,but how many more well qualified applicants were deferred by the gimmicks in the system? (you know what they are)
Are recruited athletes admitted by Early Action? If so, what percentage of those admitted do they constitute?
Not every recruited athlete is early action. Also, I highly doubt that 350 of these early admits were athletes. Considering Stanford Admission does not bow to the athletic dept very much, they probably leave lots of the athlete acceptances to the spring, freeing up space for "normal" candidates to receive EA decisions (but the athletes may know much earlier than April that they'll be getting in).
Ethnicity,Celebrity,Legacy,Major doner.......................Hmmmmmm,where'd those come from?
hey 409 - what do you mean when you mention ethnicity, celeb, legacy, and donor status? if you're saying that less-qualified people with such things got accepted over the heads of better students, that's not always the case. i should know; i'm a deferral with the latter two connections.
and if that's not what you're saying, forgive me. i then have a vested interest in any information you possess.
409: i'm sorry if you were rejected/deferred but please don't be bitter. it's what happens when nearly 5000 of the best and brightest apply for the same spots.
you can call it whatever you want "gimmicks of the system," but that's just what happens when applications are read by people-- it's relatively subjective and involves a bit of luck too!
i think people are too quick to blame ethnicity/celebrity/legacy/donor for their disappointment.
referring to the article, though, you can't deny that the class of 2012 is obviously extremely academically talented. the numbers speak for themselves.

SMS
RSS feeds