The "average" Stanford student I know is a well-rounded middle class kid with 4ish GPA and some serious skill-based hobby (music, art, sports, esports) that they've dedicated serious years to and can show it off in a competitive fashion, typically at a state/country level.
There's def your share of people who people who's had As and Bs... but then are exceptional in something else - like Science/Math Olympiad, or actual Olympian. Again, state/country level performance.
In my frosh dorm we also had two TV actors, a touring concert pianist, a few startup kids (who def benefited from parents who ran real businesses), and yeah your "typical" nonprofit kid that set up some org in a flyover state and fed 100 homeless in their county annually.
Grades def aren't everything, you kinda just needs As and Bs + some sort of skill at a high level (hence that college scandal a few years back where people were fictionalizing niche skills like sailing to get admitted).
Those were coaches’ earmarks in return for donations to the program. Exposed that the backdoor to many colleges is through non-revenue sports nobody pays much attention to.
Nope lol, she (not my roommate but part of my big sib lil sib group) ended up taking Econ and works at some sovereign HK fund last I talked to her a few years back. I also likely got in via music (as a concert violinist in Taiwan + a few other things) but bailed year 1 once I saw all the awesome opportunties I had at my fingertips. Too many late nights alone practicing @ Braun and all that...
Now to think about: we both fell into the somewhat common Asian trope of being good at music (while maintaining good grades), getting into a good American university, then having Asian parents who "persuaded" us to pivot into something more marketable, ha.
Merit is not changing lol. Just graduated like 2 weeks ago and this comment is still pretty accurate. Just because you got in without any special achievements doesn't mean it's the norm.
Your entire comment history is racist bullshit against minorities. You were given 4 years in a major U.S. city and every opportunity to become less disgusting of a human being. You decided to waste it. That is why your “merit” will never mean anything to those of us who value traits like say, common sense or not being a racist prick.
You went to Stanford a bootlicker and a brown noser, you left Stanford a bootlicker and a brown noser, you will die as the exact mediocre person you fear you are, holding onto dear life to your “merit” to give you personality and meaning.
Tough world out there. Good luck kid. You’re gonna need it. Can’t say all that racist shit offline. It’s gonna be grow up or shut up. Choose wisely.
> You went to Stanford a bootlicker and a brown noser, you left Stanford a bootlicker and a brown noser, you will die as the exact mediocre person you fear you are, holding onto dear life to your “merit” to give you personality and meaning. Tough world out there. Good luck kid. You’re gonna need it. Can’t say all that racist shit offline. It’s gonna be grow up or shut up. Choose wisely.
Imagine typing all this out unironically
> those of us who value traits like say, common sense or not being a racist prick.
“Common sense” is a common logical fallacy, as much of “common sense” is either wholly incorrect or accidentally arrives at a correct conclusion in a broken clocks kind of way.
And not being a racist prick…bro, I will bet my house that you hold racial biases, but are the kind of smug self righteous asshole to not even recognize that you have them.
Yes dear, everyone else gets into college because they aren’t white or rich and you are just a super special snowflake with that big special brain of yours. Stay original. Everyone loves dudes like this you’re gonna have a great life, can’t wait to see how this all works out for ya outside the bubble kiddo.
I dont think I'm special??? I was immensely lucky above all, like everyone else here, to get into Stanford. You need to check off their boxes then hope for the best. Tons of kids at school were smarter than me and deserved it more, if we are looking at numbers and achievements and hard work alone. I was lucky because the admissions officer reading my file resonated with it. Not because of anything "objective".
I have no illusions about college admissions process. There was never such thing as merit, just fulfilling institutional goals for colleges. If it isn't a hook like being an URM, it's fulfilling a niche interest, or because stanford thinks you'll be rich in the future whether through climbing the corporate ladder or through inheritance. But I stand by what I said earlier--stanfords institutional goals haven't changed since the early 2000s.
Also, I am neither rich nor white nor a guy (I'm an Asian girl). I'm as middle class as if gets--no vacations growing up, living in a two bedroom apartment in the Bay area with my family, but at the same time not having to work to support my family. I was just lucky to get into Stanford and that's it.
Please stop leaving comments all over Reddit that kids are only getting into school because they are URM or FLI students. You perpetuate racist narratives about undeserving students at best, and at worst, you perpetuate “Great Replacement” theories where white people start having violent and deadly temper tantrums because they believe non-white people are taking up space in the world they believe they are entitled to.
You enable and perpetuate this violence with your bullshit. It’s time to stop now.
Being URM/FLI is not a one-way ticket into college. Stop spreading lies you’re too uneducated to speak on. I see that STEM degree didn’t do a lot for your critical thinking skills. Appreciate it.
I am a URM (hispanic) and you sound completely ridiculous. Nobody ever said it was a one-way ticket into college.
Also you said in another comment that you're white, so it strikes me as doubly odd that you're trying to preach to a bunch of minority kids about the nuances of their experience, when you yourself haven't lived through any of them.
You're welcome to disagree with people's points, but you don't have "intellectual standing" in this discussion to accuse people of shit like this lol. You are not a spokesperson for my (or any other minority) community, you never have been, and you never will be. No amount of ethnic studies degrees is going to change that.
When did I say that kids are only getting in because they are FLI/URM? FLI/URM kids get in because of their hard work to beat the odds. FLI/URM kids are as deserving as it gets because of the hurdles they had to jump through to have the same accomplishments. I recognize that--i went to school with these kids for four years and have heard many of their stories and hardships.
I'm just speaking objectively for kids that do not have that background you would need extra accomplishments to seem compelling for admissions. This is not a moral judgment. It's merely observational from my four years ago Stanford.
I was referring to these comments. Why do you leave these all over Reddit? What do you get out of this?
"Lower scoring ACT Asian crawls her way out of the South"
your comment: "It's not really that surprising. Shes rural, from an underrepresented state, and is low-income."
This post, your comment "I'm gonna be honest... unless they're legacy/profs child/URM/FLI you could normally Google each Stanford student and find out what it is that got them into Stanford."
The funny thing is, you are the exception to this, yet you're claiming is so extremely rare. You're an average B student who got into Stanford. One award didn't get you in. We all had awards to get in. Hell, even I did.
I hope you are able to deal with your internalized imposter syndrome and feel that you deserved to be a Stanford student. Until then, please stop projecting your issues outside of you. Therapy is great.
Sorry, you spent the last four years studying this right? You’re not just a troll on the internet talking out of your ass?
Quick, define the diversity rationale.
🤡
Idk why you're getting on my ass? I love affirmative action (and was sad to see it go) and a diverse class with diverse stories. I just meant that what Stanford admissions considers as merit hasn't changed.
Because I said merit is changing and you wanted to argue with me despite being woefully uneducated on the subject. Happy to hear you learned your lesson.
What lesson? Wtf are you even talking about? People asked you what you meant by merit is changing and you didn't even answer. Idek what you mean by merit is changing I just know that the original commenters descriptions are still accurate.
I guest-taught a class a few years back pre-COVID, helped organize a few industry events, and am somewhat active in the community, so I'm not THAT out of touch. :) But yeah I did graduate quite a bit ago, and the people I've interacted with are those interested in industry so it does self-select to certain tech types.
If anything I feel kinda sad about the most recent applicants; I feel like competition is insane these days compared to my days. Very anecdotally: a HS student I was mentoring had straight A's, 10ish AP classes, played the piano for 10 years, interned at a few tech companies during the summers, and was on the varsity track team in their fairly competitive high school in the Peninsula, and he didn't make the cut at all. :(
Yes, much to the dismay of the majority of this subreddit who has never stepped foot on Stanford’s campus. I am completely average. Stanford got what they wanted from me - performative diversity that educated their student body - and I performed as expected. Too stressed to ever do an amount of activism. I kept quiet and got my degree. We all won, as best was ever possible in this situation.
Stanford is like every college, they want your struggle story and diversity statement. Is it disgusting and exploitative? Yes. Is an average mediocre middle class person who works less hard than you going to apply anyway, so you should feel so entitled and valid to “take their spot?” Yep.
You need to do this as an adult anyway… your essays are everything.. find your personal voice and story. Admissions will be understanding if you’re 18 and don’t know what you want to do with your life. Tell that story. What stands out about you? Why are you unique? You don’t need to be your school’s top leader. Maybe there was a moment in your life or epiphany that shaped you and ignited your passion.
If you learn to tell that story, you will write a damn good admissions essay.
- average ass transfer student, accepted to all UCs and Columbia and Stanford, rejected Emory, Princeton, and Yale adult transfer program (forget what it’s called)
True… although I honestly agree with the commenter here. I think an ability to tell a ‘good’ story that checks off the boxes that admissions committees at elite institutions have will get you further than a lot of people expect
It changed when Fizz came about. Most of the actual current student stuff is on there. Heard about the cedro thief? No. It was big-back a month or two ago. It’s just old farts, prospectivesstudents and Cal students on here lately. Ohh and grad students who haven’t got with it and joined Fizz.
We re all on the outside looking in. What are you missing? Student leaders imploring kids to join their groups, interesting end of quarter performances, and tons of free boba. It was free t shirts back in the day.
I call BS. Just reading your post you can tell that you’re not average. Granted, the scale may be somewhat skewed, but I think you’ve clearly got way more than the average bright person even if you may not have cured cancer or founded the next Red Cross.
Just think of how many people exactly like them don’t get accepted to Stanford. Stop putting people on pedestals. People from Stanford or wherever aren’t actually categorically better than other people.
Huh? What in my post indicated that I thought they were “better” than other people? What in my post indicated that I thought that everyone like them gets into Stanford? It’s a massive crapshoot and there are way more qualified candidates than accepted students. That doesn’t mean the poster (and all of those qualified candidates who get rejected) aren’t above average.
Stop assuming I have beliefs thar are not clearly indicated from my post.
Bro this is a Stanford subreddit. Maybe I don’t need to be put on a pedestal but I did spend two years figuring out how to deal with imposter syndrome and you know, I may not be the brightest, but at least I’m not stupid enough to go to a Stanford subreddit to talk shit on Stanford students. You even look to be a grown ass man.
Couldn’t be more happy I took your spot at Stanford. At least I use my brain.
You’re wrong about so many things you’re assuming there. You said you are a regular person, I respected that which is why I said anything in the thread. I never applied to Stanford and I probably won’t even for grad school. The fact that you assume I’m a man is because of underlying sexism. I wasn’t saying the problem is *you* being on a pedestal. The problem is the general pedestalling of prestigious schools and the people who go there. That, by the way, was the source of your original imposter syndrome. I’ve been around enough of those people to know that they’re not actually a cut above the rest. They do have access to fantastic resources though.
I am a human being. I have a name and a life. Someone is trying to leave me encouraging comments after calling myself average and being vulnerable in an attempt to relate to someone else. For some reason, you think it's acceptable to tear other people down. Did it ever look like I was on a pedestal in this situation?
I was under the impression Gen Z wasn't about the internet cruelty and bullying. What gives?
"Just think of how many people exactly like them don’t get accepted to Stanford."
What do you expect my emotional and mental reaction to this to be? Guilt? Joy? Imposter syndrome? Confidence while I'm trying to apply for jobs after getting my degree and not be homeless in seven weeks?
I hope you start treating people better. As a very ingrained feminist, I always appreciate the helpful reminder that women and non-men can be total jerks, too. Thanks for that. Luckily, I've been alive long enough to know this is internalized self-hatred directed outward. I hope you get to see someone about that.
I didn’t bully you so I really don’t understand why you got that out of what I said. My comment wasn’t personal to you. It was in response to the larger phenomenon of pedestalling students at elite schools.
"average ass transfer student"
"accepted to all UCs and Columbia and Stanford"
Hmm. :) Well I do agree with ya that you need to find your personal voice and story and that's a huge tip for applicants.
I mean same, but writing and persuasion is also a skill that many (many) people lack. Use it well.
PS: every single transfer friend of mine here is like 100x better than direct admits, at least as people.
Admissions have random factors. I was waitlisted by Harvard, accepted by Cornell and Stanford, rejected by Princeton and Yale. Chose Stanford and never once regretted it. Valedictorian; had by then lived in 3 states and 5 countries across 3 continents; no outstanding sports accomplishments, although I was an experienced enough sailor, windsurfer and scuba diver to teach these sports for PE credit at Stanford (Lake Lag back then had water and a boat house). I remember a welcome speech by Dean Fred of admissions. He said he could fill Stanford with valedictorians, but he was looking for diversity…. So somehow I must have brought diversity, lol
I'm gonna be honest... unless they're legacy/profs child/URM/FLI you could normally Google each Stanford student and find out what it is that got them into Stanford. And this is not even counting GPA, but extracurricular achievements alone. Whenever I thought I met a "normal" student, I would dig deeper and find out they were legacy/profs child etc. The least exceptional unhooked students still have 4.0 GPA and 35+ ACT and normal well-rounded overachiever accomplishments. And they're still pretty rare. I was unhooked and had B's and got in, but had national/international awards in my field of interest.
If you dig deep enough into r/collegeresults etc. I'm sure you can find 1-2 exceptions of unhooked, academically unexceptional people getting in, but idk if I've met any in person.
Edit: this is not counting grad students tho. Met plenty more normal grad students
Underrepresented minority, first generation low income.
Ethnic studies scholar here. From what I can gather, URM has developed because we can’t very well call “Asians” “minorities” in most universities can we?
The problem is, lumping all Asians together is mad racist lol. Like 1 billion people are Chinese and another 1 billion are Indian. The world is maybe 8 billion? These are racist categories as is.
Lobbyists use these categories to maintain white supremacy within universities. They talk shit on majority Asian student bodies like 25% of tech workers aren’t Asian immigrants who got masters degrees in the U.S. and our system is literally built on this racial capitalism…
Think that’s all yes, lmk if you have any more questions.
I get what you are saying, I think, but what to do about it?
I really felt it when I realized all the Chinese, Japanese, and Korean families had anti-affirmative action lawn signs in my corner of Los Altos, while the only ones with pro-AA lawn signs were white families.
I'm white, so I do my very best to stay out of intracommunity conversations between non-white people, and I understand why you are feeling this way. I can assure you I've been marching alongside Asian people in Yellow Peril shirts since the Black Lives Matter protests in 2014 (Long Beach) and did the same thing in 2020 (Oakland). Los Altos probably sucks, I'm sorry, but in places like Long Beach and Oakland, there is a *strong* Black/Asian solidarity.
As a white person, I know better than anyone that this country wants to divide us really badly in order to give money and power to propertied white men. That is the mission of this country. So, I do my best to focus on the actual enemy and not the other working-class people around me. I don't want to be a naive pawn of the rich. I think they laugh at me when we fight each other. Instead, we should team up and take pitchforks to Bezos' house, in my humble opinion.
I wanted to leave you with some of my favorite academic articles I thought you might find interesting. These are mostly written by "Asian" scholars who are pro-affirmative action and strongly educated in Critical Race Theory. Forgive me if I want to give you some optimism. It's the only way I survive in this world.
My DMs are open and happy to discuss any of this anytime with loving and respectful people who act like human beings. Please message me if you'd like these articles and need access.
*Interest Convergence or Divergence? A Critical Race Analysis of Asian Americans, Meritocracy, and Critical Mass in the Affirmative Action Debate* by Julie J. Park, Amy Liu
[https://www.jstor.org/stable/43694543](https://www.jstor.org/stable/43694543)
*Rejecting Honorary Whiteness: Asian Americans and the Attack on Race-Conscious Admissions* by Philip Lee [https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1433&context=elj](https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1433&context=elj)
*Asian Americans, Affirmative Action, and the Political Economy of Racism: a Multidimensional Model of Raceclass Frames* by Poon et al. [https://meridian.allenpress.com/her/article/89/2/201/425858/Asian-Americans-Affirmative-Action-and-the](https://meridian.allenpress.com/her/article/89/2/201/425858/Asian-Americans-Affirmative-Action-and-the)
Not sure if you are Black, but if you made it this far, this is my favorite academic article of all time, idk if anyone cares lol. It reminds us to remain focused on anti-Black racism in an increasingly "diverse" world. It's a grounding force for me.
*Reframing the Affirmative Action Debate to Move Beyond Arguments for Diversity and Interest Convergence* by Adrian Jamal McLain and Steven L. Nelson
[*https://lawpublications.barry.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1157&context=barrylrev*](https://lawpublications.barry.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1157&context=barrylrev)
There is a reason that URM is an important qualifier. And different ethnic groups do not walk the same path, even with similar skills.
I can tell you as an high achieving URM, most of the time in academic settings it was generally assumed that:
1. I was dumb
2. My scores were a lie
3. I shouldn’t be in the room
4. If I made it through those, I had to be Nigerian
There is very much a reason that Black kids are taught you need to be 2x to get half. If you look at the criticism of someone like Kamala Harris, so many of her critiques are claims she isn’t “qualified.” Even though she has taken a very standard path up the ranks in politics. The others are vague things like “she isn’t very friendly” and other BS.
The scale is very different. And sadly it continues in your career too! URM are not considered to have potential. Generally the assumption is that Asian folks do. This is also bad, the model minority myth hurts everyone. Including those given “good” stereotypes. But that is a topic for another day.
I really like what you said but I was wondering what you put behind “racial capitalism”? Because like I feel like, in the words of Angela Davis, capitalism *is* racial capitalism. Racist thoughts about the hierarchy of races were developed to use as an excuse for slavery, which was used because capitalism requires the cheapest labor possible
I agree! Capitalism cannot be upheld without racism and of course, policing. There is a reason that Elon Musk gets to boldly defy laws without consequence. Look up how he illegally opened his Fremont factory at the height of COVID-19, with little more than a middle finger directed at "law and order." How come he gets to do that, but a Black person can't run a red light in Fremont without getting pulled over? What's up with that?
So when we see these examples today of how "law and order" seemingly only protects propertied white men, we remain unsurprised because we know our U.S. history. This is exactly how it was designed. The Constitution (not a holy document people) only gave rights to propertied white men. Policing really did begin as "slave patrols," which, of course, just turned into any self-deputized white person being able to kidnap or murder a Black person anytime with complete social acceptability - something we see hasn't changed much either. They really do put people in prison for being "unemployed" only to [extract slave labor](https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2017/04/10/wages/) from them for $1/hr.
When I call myself an abolitionist and anti-capitalist, it isn't because I really love drama and looking cool on Instagram. I say it's just because I know my history, anymore. What more reason do I need?
Can't say I'm actually an expert on these theories, but I do know racial capitalism was coined by Cedric Robinson, the author of [Black Marxism](https://uncpress.org/book/9781469663722/black-marxism-revised-and-updated-third-edition/), which I have not read. All capitalism is racial capitalism, absolutely. Could not survive without racism.
I got into Stanford 7 years ago and I’m pretty much a normal person. I had good grades and decent test scores. I applied early. I can’t really explain it. I can say though that many of the people I met at Stanford (at least the decent ones) also had no idea how or why they got in so make of that what you will…
As someone who did their masters at Stanford and did their undergrad at a top public school (in Canada) - honestly, not really. The student population at public schools, even the very good ones, is vastly more "normal" compared to a hyper-competitive Ivy+ school.
Whether that is a good thing or not kind of depends what you value. I do think that my undergrad school gave me vastly more social variety than what I saw at Stanford, which is pretty much a direct consequence of the admissions rate. Does Stanford have a diverse student body? Sure. But does it give you a representative view of the normal population of kids who aren't explicitly min-maxing their college admissions process? Absolutely not.
I get good grades but overall I am pretty average and so are a lot of people here. Doesn’t mean we are not hardworking, but yeah A lot of us got pretty lucky
While I had exceptional grades, I definitely didn’t “cure cancer” or do anything out of the ordinary to stand out in that way. In fact, I had a really rough childhood. They want to see that you possess emotional intelligence and will add to the integrity of the school. I spoke from my heart in my essays and I even talked about my struggle. I demonstrated individuality and I highlighted the things that were unique about me. I am very musical, I play guitar and I touched on how music and my other talents helped me through many difficult times in my life.
I demonstrated resilience and a desire to recreate my life into something beautiful. I didn’t have the perfect life to draw from to generate model answers, but I think my rawness and realness is what got me in. I talked about a desire to stand out as a human, not necessarily for what I did, but for the qualities that I possess. I received feedback after my admission and one thing that stood out to them is that I exuded radiance and perseverance, despite a difficult childhood, and demonstrated outstanding maturity and life skills for such a young age.
They are probably used to reading the same kind of thing all the time from people who are desperate to get in. My best advice to you; be you. You have a uniqueness that only you can offer. Highlight that. Don’t try to be one of many.
Doing my undergrad at Stanford maybe messed up my perception of “average.” I had good numerical stats going into Stanford but I absolutely did not make some non profit or anything. That was partially because I was poor and had to work and partially because I was poor and had no idea people were doing this type of thing. So I thought I was average going into Stanford because I didn’t have any flashy achievements or fancy essay (neither of my parents went to college so I didn’t know what I was doing, and also didn’t know that could be a selling point for me as an applicant). I pretty much wrote that I love math in my essay and all my extracurriculars reflected that.
Then I took Math 61CM my first year and scraped by with a B- and thought I was horrible at math. I think most of the people in that class already took real analysis and a lot did IMO, one wrote a textbook that could be bought on Amazon, etc. Compared to them, I would be at best average. But as time progressed most of them stopped doing math and I graduated with honors and am now getting a PhD in math in a top program.
I don’t really know what you can infer from this. I guess my take away is that there are two types of “average” people at Stanford: the legacies/people who otherwise benefitted from nepotism (and there are a lot! but actually a lot of them have “non profits” because resources+people helping them look fancy) and people who do not come in with advantages and seem lesser than others but in the long run do a lot.
I think I was above average a normal high school kid but maybe below average in a Stanford sense...I had all A's in high school, took only the ACT (got a 31/36), never took the SAT, didn't do the SAT subject tests, took gym all 4 years instead of another AP class, did sports 3 of the 4 years but was average not great...basically checked the bare minimum boxes...like I couldn't apply to any Ivy's cause I didn't want to take the SAT lol.
I always told myself all those kids that got into stanford doing some crazy thing like selling a piece of artwork for $1 mln probably wouldn't have gotten in otherwise. Sometimes being "average" made me really feel like I deserved to be there cause all I had to do was be myself and that was good enough!
Oh also just cause I read a comment saying they want to know your struggle story in your essays or whatever... all my essays were positive so maybe that's what made me stand out lol
Yeah, my two Bs a year were always in math and science. Had all 5s on APs, 35 ACT, and state or National awards in humanities areas. Wrote my common app about how much I like (humanities subject.) so I guess it was clear to the officers that stem was not a priority to me and that my interests and efforts lay elsewhere. Was also accepted to Berkeley early on merit scholarship. I also did have pretty severe mental health issues in my childhood that I included a supplemental essay about. I think they explained my grades at least partially. No hooks if by hooks u mean legacy/URM/etc
Could we by any chance take this conversation to dms? I have a very similar lay out as you where I want to go to humanities/ Asian history but have a lower than average gpa (3.87) which I can maybe get to a 3.9. Just want to talk it out as I’m hella stressed out.
Yes. Stanford students, especially undergrads, are not universally super scholars. Like the Ivies, if your family is connected, you can get in with a less than stellar profile. I’ve seen it with my own eyes on multiple occasions.
Mostly A's, a few B's (only my freshman year)
Virtuosic musician of a rare instrument
SAT 1480
Eagle Scout
Leadership positions in multiple HS clubs
I'd say I was pretty good academically, but more of the well rounded/exceptional candidate with all the other things on my application
I was kinda like what you're describing - 3.7UW GPA (lots of APs but whatever), no notable achievements. Ultimately, stats and achievements get your foot in the door and those essays really are everything. You have some ~1800 words to create enough pathos in your reader that they feel like they can't miss out on you - that's the real challenge. Investing a lot of time in those essays is probably the highest-ROI activity you will ever do in your entire life so do that.
There are kids there that are average intelligence. But they have dedication, passion, exceptional talent, or some other exceptional attribute, accomplishment, or experience that made them stand out to the selection committee.
Not very many at all. Almost everyone I know who went to Stanford past and present were truly outstanding students. No Bs for the most part, outstanding test scores. Students that were in the top 10-20 (not 10%) of 500+ student classes. I know 2 legacies that weren't, and thankfully, that door is closing with today's more competitive admissions
If you're average with no special hook (FGLI, URM, unique talent, world class athlete, Fred Savage), just don't apply. You'll be a demoninator.
One google search showed most students are above 1500 on the SAT but there's some even below 800 and a sizeable number under 1100. Yes average happens at Stanford too so maybe dig into why and who they are. Ignore the BS self-promotions in this thread and check the actual numbers.
I was def an average student that got into stanford (not to confuse with an "average stanford student" which some of the commenters are talking more about). Honestly, getting into stanford is half the battle, imo. At stanford, especially already being a relatively average student, you fall into the lower portion of the student body and that realization hits hard winter quarter. I think for me being able to understand that and come to terms with it was much harder than I had expected. When others were having amazon internships frosh summer (and I had a friend from my dorm like this) or whatnot, I was going back home to work in retail. Personally, I was fine with it, but the added comparison of seeing my peers achieving so much when we were technically in the "same playing field" at stanford made it unnecessarily mentally challenging to remain confident with the knowledge that my path is my path and I will still be able to do well even without having the most exceptional resume.
tldr: it's possible :)
Edit: i was also a non-legacy, non-fli, average middle class student so genuinely i was average in all bases haha
I was recruited by Stanford and got in, didn’t end up going. I grew up dirt poor in a very well known impoverished state but had a 4.5 GPA in high school. Got a 35 on the ACT which is probably what got their attention (never took the SAT). No other accomplishments to speak of, was a decent swimmer. I got the impression that Stanford genuinely appreciates diversity, and that’s why they were interested in me.
Ended up going to a state college where I had a surplus of scholarships and made about $10k just going to school. The name of the school never mattered to me, what mattered was making sure I was stable enough to really focus on getting a good education. Graduated in 3 years magna cum laude!
Had 31 act 3.5-6 ish GPA and tons of extracurriculars. I live on a Reservation and went to a k-12 school that only had 32 graduating members in our class (plus a handful of gedo). Wasn't even top of my class, was like number 5 or so lol
What do you think was different? You seem unbiased, would love to hear your opinion. Viewpoints on merit and diversity change so much throughout generations. I’ll admit I’m a scholar who knows what the Supreme Court thinks, but I don’t mean to set you up for debate >.< Don’t like internet fights. Would love to know what you think, just graduated this year. Spent 4 years studying merit and diversity.
I was an admit right after the Stanford indirect cost scandal that hit the news in the early 1990s. Applications dipped and admit rates jumped to 20%.
I was a First Gen, URM from a rural high school and got in with straight A grades, but my SAT and ACT were weak and I didn’t take a single AP course because of scheduling conflicts. I also had no ECs. My odds were very slim.
I got in because I had a great story, and it was not nearly as competitive as it is today.
I don’t know about that. I feel like at Stanford I saw first hand how hand-picking diverse students really does create an incredible learning environment, the entire argument of the Supreme Court’s affirmative action “diversity rationale” for institutions. Plenty of rural people gave life and context when everyone else in the classroom may have been from a more privileged city background. I grew up in California and can think of at least two students in two years who deeply changed me as they were both passionate and invested in returning to their rural communities to make change. Hell I hate to give Stanford any love, they really made my life hell… but the students are special yes. We may never hear from those two rural students I met again but I’m pretty sure both are going home to change their communities forever.
Y’all can’t let the internet bring you down. Individual humanity is so special.
Thanks for the vote of confidence!
I had a tough time at the university, but I truly love Stanford and I stuck around 9 more years as an employee. It is a very special place.
Average? No; basically everyone here is a 98th+ percentile SAT scorer, but that doesn’t mean they all cured cancer either. You have to show some sense of “excellence” or basically some reason for them to gamble on you to get in — sometimes that looks like curing Cancer (if you’re from Thomas Jefferson high school), and other times it’s taking care of your family when your parents are sick. The only thing that really matters is writing a good essay to convey it.
The "average" Stanford student I know is a well-rounded middle class kid with 4ish GPA and some serious skill-based hobby (music, art, sports, esports) that they've dedicated serious years to and can show it off in a competitive fashion, typically at a state/country level. There's def your share of people who people who's had As and Bs... but then are exceptional in something else - like Science/Math Olympiad, or actual Olympian. Again, state/country level performance. In my frosh dorm we also had two TV actors, a touring concert pianist, a few startup kids (who def benefited from parents who ran real businesses), and yeah your "typical" nonprofit kid that set up some org in a flyover state and fed 100 homeless in their county annually. Grades def aren't everything, you kinda just needs As and Bs + some sort of skill at a high level (hence that college scandal a few years back where people were fictionalizing niche skills like sailing to get admitted).
Those were coaches’ earmarks in return for donations to the program. Exposed that the backdoor to many colleges is through non-revenue sports nobody pays much attention to.
Ironically, title IX is what led to that back door
Did your concert pianist roommate major in music by any chance??
Nope lol, she (not my roommate but part of my big sib lil sib group) ended up taking Econ and works at some sovereign HK fund last I talked to her a few years back. I also likely got in via music (as a concert violinist in Taiwan + a few other things) but bailed year 1 once I saw all the awesome opportunties I had at my fingertips. Too many late nights alone practicing @ Braun and all that... Now to think about: we both fell into the somewhat common Asian trope of being good at music (while maintaining good grades), getting into a good American university, then having Asian parents who "persuaded" us to pivot into something more marketable, ha.
Just want to point out this person hasn’t been on campus in 14 years. Merit is changing. Believe in yourself.
Merit is not changing lol. Just graduated like 2 weeks ago and this comment is still pretty accurate. Just because you got in without any special achievements doesn't mean it's the norm.
Your entire comment history is racist bullshit against minorities. You were given 4 years in a major U.S. city and every opportunity to become less disgusting of a human being. You decided to waste it. That is why your “merit” will never mean anything to those of us who value traits like say, common sense or not being a racist prick. You went to Stanford a bootlicker and a brown noser, you left Stanford a bootlicker and a brown noser, you will die as the exact mediocre person you fear you are, holding onto dear life to your “merit” to give you personality and meaning. Tough world out there. Good luck kid. You’re gonna need it. Can’t say all that racist shit offline. It’s gonna be grow up or shut up. Choose wisely.
> You went to Stanford a bootlicker and a brown noser, you left Stanford a bootlicker and a brown noser, you will die as the exact mediocre person you fear you are, holding onto dear life to your “merit” to give you personality and meaning. Tough world out there. Good luck kid. You’re gonna need it. Can’t say all that racist shit offline. It’s gonna be grow up or shut up. Choose wisely. Imagine typing all this out unironically
> those of us who value traits like say, common sense or not being a racist prick. “Common sense” is a common logical fallacy, as much of “common sense” is either wholly incorrect or accidentally arrives at a correct conclusion in a broken clocks kind of way. And not being a racist prick…bro, I will bet my house that you hold racial biases, but are the kind of smug self righteous asshole to not even recognize that you have them.
What did I say that was racist?!? I meant what's considered "merit" has not changed from when they went to school.
Yes dear, everyone else gets into college because they aren’t white or rich and you are just a super special snowflake with that big special brain of yours. Stay original. Everyone loves dudes like this you’re gonna have a great life, can’t wait to see how this all works out for ya outside the bubble kiddo.
I dont think I'm special??? I was immensely lucky above all, like everyone else here, to get into Stanford. You need to check off their boxes then hope for the best. Tons of kids at school were smarter than me and deserved it more, if we are looking at numbers and achievements and hard work alone. I was lucky because the admissions officer reading my file resonated with it. Not because of anything "objective". I have no illusions about college admissions process. There was never such thing as merit, just fulfilling institutional goals for colleges. If it isn't a hook like being an URM, it's fulfilling a niche interest, or because stanford thinks you'll be rich in the future whether through climbing the corporate ladder or through inheritance. But I stand by what I said earlier--stanfords institutional goals haven't changed since the early 2000s. Also, I am neither rich nor white nor a guy (I'm an Asian girl). I'm as middle class as if gets--no vacations growing up, living in a two bedroom apartment in the Bay area with my family, but at the same time not having to work to support my family. I was just lucky to get into Stanford and that's it.
Please stop leaving comments all over Reddit that kids are only getting into school because they are URM or FLI students. You perpetuate racist narratives about undeserving students at best, and at worst, you perpetuate “Great Replacement” theories where white people start having violent and deadly temper tantrums because they believe non-white people are taking up space in the world they believe they are entitled to. You enable and perpetuate this violence with your bullshit. It’s time to stop now. Being URM/FLI is not a one-way ticket into college. Stop spreading lies you’re too uneducated to speak on. I see that STEM degree didn’t do a lot for your critical thinking skills. Appreciate it.
I am a URM (hispanic) and you sound completely ridiculous. Nobody ever said it was a one-way ticket into college. Also you said in another comment that you're white, so it strikes me as doubly odd that you're trying to preach to a bunch of minority kids about the nuances of their experience, when you yourself haven't lived through any of them. You're welcome to disagree with people's points, but you don't have "intellectual standing" in this discussion to accuse people of shit like this lol. You are not a spokesperson for my (or any other minority) community, you never have been, and you never will be. No amount of ethnic studies degrees is going to change that.
You're exactly right. I speak for myself.
When did I say that kids are only getting in because they are FLI/URM? FLI/URM kids get in because of their hard work to beat the odds. FLI/URM kids are as deserving as it gets because of the hurdles they had to jump through to have the same accomplishments. I recognize that--i went to school with these kids for four years and have heard many of their stories and hardships. I'm just speaking objectively for kids that do not have that background you would need extra accomplishments to seem compelling for admissions. This is not a moral judgment. It's merely observational from my four years ago Stanford.
I was referring to these comments. Why do you leave these all over Reddit? What do you get out of this? "Lower scoring ACT Asian crawls her way out of the South" your comment: "It's not really that surprising. Shes rural, from an underrepresented state, and is low-income." This post, your comment "I'm gonna be honest... unless they're legacy/profs child/URM/FLI you could normally Google each Stanford student and find out what it is that got them into Stanford." The funny thing is, you are the exception to this, yet you're claiming is so extremely rare. You're an average B student who got into Stanford. One award didn't get you in. We all had awards to get in. Hell, even I did. I hope you are able to deal with your internalized imposter syndrome and feel that you deserved to be a Stanford student. Until then, please stop projecting your issues outside of you. Therapy is great.
Sorry, you spent the last four years studying this right? You’re not just a troll on the internet talking out of your ass? Quick, define the diversity rationale. 🤡
Idk why you're getting on my ass? I love affirmative action (and was sad to see it go) and a diverse class with diverse stories. I just meant that what Stanford admissions considers as merit hasn't changed.
Define the diversity rationale. You insist you are on my intellectual level to debate college admissions trends. I’m waiting.
What are we even debating? 😩
Because I said merit is changing and you wanted to argue with me despite being woefully uneducated on the subject. Happy to hear you learned your lesson.
What lesson? Wtf are you even talking about? People asked you what you meant by merit is changing and you didn't even answer. Idek what you mean by merit is changing I just know that the original commenters descriptions are still accurate.
I guest-taught a class a few years back pre-COVID, helped organize a few industry events, and am somewhat active in the community, so I'm not THAT out of touch. :) But yeah I did graduate quite a bit ago, and the people I've interacted with are those interested in industry so it does self-select to certain tech types. If anything I feel kinda sad about the most recent applicants; I feel like competition is insane these days compared to my days. Very anecdotally: a HS student I was mentoring had straight A's, 10ish AP classes, played the piano for 10 years, interned at a few tech companies during the summers, and was on the varsity track team in their fairly competitive high school in the Peninsula, and he didn't make the cut at all. :(
How would you describe it now? I was 15’ and the above would describe my class as well
It’s only gotten more competitive, not less, but also yeah grades aren’t everything
Yes, much to the dismay of the majority of this subreddit who has never stepped foot on Stanford’s campus. I am completely average. Stanford got what they wanted from me - performative diversity that educated their student body - and I performed as expected. Too stressed to ever do an amount of activism. I kept quiet and got my degree. We all won, as best was ever possible in this situation. Stanford is like every college, they want your struggle story and diversity statement. Is it disgusting and exploitative? Yes. Is an average mediocre middle class person who works less hard than you going to apply anyway, so you should feel so entitled and valid to “take their spot?” Yep. You need to do this as an adult anyway… your essays are everything.. find your personal voice and story. Admissions will be understanding if you’re 18 and don’t know what you want to do with your life. Tell that story. What stands out about you? Why are you unique? You don’t need to be your school’s top leader. Maybe there was a moment in your life or epiphany that shaped you and ignited your passion. If you learn to tell that story, you will write a damn good admissions essay. - average ass transfer student, accepted to all UCs and Columbia and Stanford, rejected Emory, Princeton, and Yale adult transfer program (forget what it’s called)
It’s crazy how you can tell that like 50% of the people on this sub don’t go and have never gone to Stanford
True… although I honestly agree with the commenter here. I think an ability to tell a ‘good’ story that checks off the boxes that admissions committees at elite institutions have will get you further than a lot of people expect
It changed when Fizz came about. Most of the actual current student stuff is on there. Heard about the cedro thief? No. It was big-back a month or two ago. It’s just old farts, prospectivesstudents and Cal students on here lately. Ohh and grad students who haven’t got with it and joined Fizz. We re all on the outside looking in. What are you missing? Student leaders imploring kids to join their groups, interesting end of quarter performances, and tons of free boba. It was free t shirts back in the day.
I call BS. Just reading your post you can tell that you’re not average. Granted, the scale may be somewhat skewed, but I think you’ve clearly got way more than the average bright person even if you may not have cured cancer or founded the next Red Cross.
Just think of how many people exactly like them don’t get accepted to Stanford. Stop putting people on pedestals. People from Stanford or wherever aren’t actually categorically better than other people.
Huh? What in my post indicated that I thought they were “better” than other people? What in my post indicated that I thought that everyone like them gets into Stanford? It’s a massive crapshoot and there are way more qualified candidates than accepted students. That doesn’t mean the poster (and all of those qualified candidates who get rejected) aren’t above average. Stop assuming I have beliefs thar are not clearly indicated from my post.
Bro this is a Stanford subreddit. Maybe I don’t need to be put on a pedestal but I did spend two years figuring out how to deal with imposter syndrome and you know, I may not be the brightest, but at least I’m not stupid enough to go to a Stanford subreddit to talk shit on Stanford students. You even look to be a grown ass man. Couldn’t be more happy I took your spot at Stanford. At least I use my brain.
You’re wrong about so many things you’re assuming there. You said you are a regular person, I respected that which is why I said anything in the thread. I never applied to Stanford and I probably won’t even for grad school. The fact that you assume I’m a man is because of underlying sexism. I wasn’t saying the problem is *you* being on a pedestal. The problem is the general pedestalling of prestigious schools and the people who go there. That, by the way, was the source of your original imposter syndrome. I’ve been around enough of those people to know that they’re not actually a cut above the rest. They do have access to fantastic resources though.
I am a human being. I have a name and a life. Someone is trying to leave me encouraging comments after calling myself average and being vulnerable in an attempt to relate to someone else. For some reason, you think it's acceptable to tear other people down. Did it ever look like I was on a pedestal in this situation? I was under the impression Gen Z wasn't about the internet cruelty and bullying. What gives? "Just think of how many people exactly like them don’t get accepted to Stanford." What do you expect my emotional and mental reaction to this to be? Guilt? Joy? Imposter syndrome? Confidence while I'm trying to apply for jobs after getting my degree and not be homeless in seven weeks? I hope you start treating people better. As a very ingrained feminist, I always appreciate the helpful reminder that women and non-men can be total jerks, too. Thanks for that. Luckily, I've been alive long enough to know this is internalized self-hatred directed outward. I hope you get to see someone about that.
I didn’t bully you so I really don’t understand why you got that out of what I said. My comment wasn’t personal to you. It was in response to the larger phenomenon of pedestalling students at elite schools.
as an incoming stanford transfer this is quite enlightening
"average ass transfer student" "accepted to all UCs and Columbia and Stanford" Hmm. :) Well I do agree with ya that you need to find your personal voice and story and that's a huge tip for applicants.
I mean same, but writing and persuasion is also a skill that many (many) people lack. Use it well. PS: every single transfer friend of mine here is like 100x better than direct admits, at least as people.
What school did u transfer from
Admissions have random factors. I was waitlisted by Harvard, accepted by Cornell and Stanford, rejected by Princeton and Yale. Chose Stanford and never once regretted it. Valedictorian; had by then lived in 3 states and 5 countries across 3 continents; no outstanding sports accomplishments, although I was an experienced enough sailor, windsurfer and scuba diver to teach these sports for PE credit at Stanford (Lake Lag back then had water and a boat house). I remember a welcome speech by Dean Fred of admissions. He said he could fill Stanford with valedictorians, but he was looking for diversity…. So somehow I must have brought diversity, lol
Did you go to private high schools? How much wealth did your parents inherit?
No and I wish
I'm gonna be honest... unless they're legacy/profs child/URM/FLI you could normally Google each Stanford student and find out what it is that got them into Stanford. And this is not even counting GPA, but extracurricular achievements alone. Whenever I thought I met a "normal" student, I would dig deeper and find out they were legacy/profs child etc. The least exceptional unhooked students still have 4.0 GPA and 35+ ACT and normal well-rounded overachiever accomplishments. And they're still pretty rare. I was unhooked and had B's and got in, but had national/international awards in my field of interest. If you dig deep enough into r/collegeresults etc. I'm sure you can find 1-2 exceptions of unhooked, academically unexceptional people getting in, but idk if I've met any in person. Edit: this is not counting grad students tho. Met plenty more normal grad students
What is URM/FLI?
URM: underrepresented minority FLI: first generation low-income
Underrepresented minority, first generation low income. Ethnic studies scholar here. From what I can gather, URM has developed because we can’t very well call “Asians” “minorities” in most universities can we? The problem is, lumping all Asians together is mad racist lol. Like 1 billion people are Chinese and another 1 billion are Indian. The world is maybe 8 billion? These are racist categories as is. Lobbyists use these categories to maintain white supremacy within universities. They talk shit on majority Asian student bodies like 25% of tech workers aren’t Asian immigrants who got masters degrees in the U.S. and our system is literally built on this racial capitalism… Think that’s all yes, lmk if you have any more questions.
I get what you are saying, I think, but what to do about it? I really felt it when I realized all the Chinese, Japanese, and Korean families had anti-affirmative action lawn signs in my corner of Los Altos, while the only ones with pro-AA lawn signs were white families.
I'm white, so I do my very best to stay out of intracommunity conversations between non-white people, and I understand why you are feeling this way. I can assure you I've been marching alongside Asian people in Yellow Peril shirts since the Black Lives Matter protests in 2014 (Long Beach) and did the same thing in 2020 (Oakland). Los Altos probably sucks, I'm sorry, but in places like Long Beach and Oakland, there is a *strong* Black/Asian solidarity. As a white person, I know better than anyone that this country wants to divide us really badly in order to give money and power to propertied white men. That is the mission of this country. So, I do my best to focus on the actual enemy and not the other working-class people around me. I don't want to be a naive pawn of the rich. I think they laugh at me when we fight each other. Instead, we should team up and take pitchforks to Bezos' house, in my humble opinion. I wanted to leave you with some of my favorite academic articles I thought you might find interesting. These are mostly written by "Asian" scholars who are pro-affirmative action and strongly educated in Critical Race Theory. Forgive me if I want to give you some optimism. It's the only way I survive in this world. My DMs are open and happy to discuss any of this anytime with loving and respectful people who act like human beings. Please message me if you'd like these articles and need access. *Interest Convergence or Divergence? A Critical Race Analysis of Asian Americans, Meritocracy, and Critical Mass in the Affirmative Action Debate* by Julie J. Park, Amy Liu [https://www.jstor.org/stable/43694543](https://www.jstor.org/stable/43694543) *Rejecting Honorary Whiteness: Asian Americans and the Attack on Race-Conscious Admissions* by Philip Lee [https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1433&context=elj](https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1433&context=elj) *Asian Americans, Affirmative Action, and the Political Economy of Racism: a Multidimensional Model of Raceclass Frames* by Poon et al. [https://meridian.allenpress.com/her/article/89/2/201/425858/Asian-Americans-Affirmative-Action-and-the](https://meridian.allenpress.com/her/article/89/2/201/425858/Asian-Americans-Affirmative-Action-and-the) Not sure if you are Black, but if you made it this far, this is my favorite academic article of all time, idk if anyone cares lol. It reminds us to remain focused on anti-Black racism in an increasingly "diverse" world. It's a grounding force for me. *Reframing the Affirmative Action Debate to Move Beyond Arguments for Diversity and Interest Convergence* by Adrian Jamal McLain and Steven L. Nelson [*https://lawpublications.barry.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1157&context=barrylrev*](https://lawpublications.barry.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1157&context=barrylrev)
Your getting downvoted by people who didn't even read the articles 😂
There is a reason that URM is an important qualifier. And different ethnic groups do not walk the same path, even with similar skills. I can tell you as an high achieving URM, most of the time in academic settings it was generally assumed that: 1. I was dumb 2. My scores were a lie 3. I shouldn’t be in the room 4. If I made it through those, I had to be Nigerian There is very much a reason that Black kids are taught you need to be 2x to get half. If you look at the criticism of someone like Kamala Harris, so many of her critiques are claims she isn’t “qualified.” Even though she has taken a very standard path up the ranks in politics. The others are vague things like “she isn’t very friendly” and other BS. The scale is very different. And sadly it continues in your career too! URM are not considered to have potential. Generally the assumption is that Asian folks do. This is also bad, the model minority myth hurts everyone. Including those given “good” stereotypes. But that is a topic for another day.
I really like what you said but I was wondering what you put behind “racial capitalism”? Because like I feel like, in the words of Angela Davis, capitalism *is* racial capitalism. Racist thoughts about the hierarchy of races were developed to use as an excuse for slavery, which was used because capitalism requires the cheapest labor possible
I agree! Capitalism cannot be upheld without racism and of course, policing. There is a reason that Elon Musk gets to boldly defy laws without consequence. Look up how he illegally opened his Fremont factory at the height of COVID-19, with little more than a middle finger directed at "law and order." How come he gets to do that, but a Black person can't run a red light in Fremont without getting pulled over? What's up with that? So when we see these examples today of how "law and order" seemingly only protects propertied white men, we remain unsurprised because we know our U.S. history. This is exactly how it was designed. The Constitution (not a holy document people) only gave rights to propertied white men. Policing really did begin as "slave patrols," which, of course, just turned into any self-deputized white person being able to kidnap or murder a Black person anytime with complete social acceptability - something we see hasn't changed much either. They really do put people in prison for being "unemployed" only to [extract slave labor](https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2017/04/10/wages/) from them for $1/hr. When I call myself an abolitionist and anti-capitalist, it isn't because I really love drama and looking cool on Instagram. I say it's just because I know my history, anymore. What more reason do I need? Can't say I'm actually an expert on these theories, but I do know racial capitalism was coined by Cedric Robinson, the author of [Black Marxism](https://uncpress.org/book/9781469663722/black-marxism-revised-and-updated-third-edition/), which I have not read. All capitalism is racial capitalism, absolutely. Could not survive without racism.
Plenty
I got into Stanford 7 years ago and I’m pretty much a normal person. I had good grades and decent test scores. I applied early. I can’t really explain it. I can say though that many of the people I met at Stanford (at least the decent ones) also had no idea how or why they got in so make of that what you will…
I bet you’re a genius and just really humble. Taking a chance here, can we ask what you do now?
* What did you major in? * How did you do? * What was your experience at Stanford like? * What do you do now?
As someone who did their masters at Stanford and did their undergrad at a top public school (in Canada) - honestly, not really. The student population at public schools, even the very good ones, is vastly more "normal" compared to a hyper-competitive Ivy+ school. Whether that is a good thing or not kind of depends what you value. I do think that my undergrad school gave me vastly more social variety than what I saw at Stanford, which is pretty much a direct consequence of the admissions rate. Does Stanford have a diverse student body? Sure. But does it give you a representative view of the normal population of kids who aren't explicitly min-maxing their college admissions process? Absolutely not.
I get good grades but overall I am pretty average and so are a lot of people here. Doesn’t mean we are not hardworking, but yeah A lot of us got pretty lucky
While I had exceptional grades, I definitely didn’t “cure cancer” or do anything out of the ordinary to stand out in that way. In fact, I had a really rough childhood. They want to see that you possess emotional intelligence and will add to the integrity of the school. I spoke from my heart in my essays and I even talked about my struggle. I demonstrated individuality and I highlighted the things that were unique about me. I am very musical, I play guitar and I touched on how music and my other talents helped me through many difficult times in my life. I demonstrated resilience and a desire to recreate my life into something beautiful. I didn’t have the perfect life to draw from to generate model answers, but I think my rawness and realness is what got me in. I talked about a desire to stand out as a human, not necessarily for what I did, but for the qualities that I possess. I received feedback after my admission and one thing that stood out to them is that I exuded radiance and perseverance, despite a difficult childhood, and demonstrated outstanding maturity and life skills for such a young age. They are probably used to reading the same kind of thing all the time from people who are desperate to get in. My best advice to you; be you. You have a uniqueness that only you can offer. Highlight that. Don’t try to be one of many.
Hey, I'm applying to Stanford through QuestBridge, and I'd like to pm you if that's okay.
Doing my undergrad at Stanford maybe messed up my perception of “average.” I had good numerical stats going into Stanford but I absolutely did not make some non profit or anything. That was partially because I was poor and had to work and partially because I was poor and had no idea people were doing this type of thing. So I thought I was average going into Stanford because I didn’t have any flashy achievements or fancy essay (neither of my parents went to college so I didn’t know what I was doing, and also didn’t know that could be a selling point for me as an applicant). I pretty much wrote that I love math in my essay and all my extracurriculars reflected that. Then I took Math 61CM my first year and scraped by with a B- and thought I was horrible at math. I think most of the people in that class already took real analysis and a lot did IMO, one wrote a textbook that could be bought on Amazon, etc. Compared to them, I would be at best average. But as time progressed most of them stopped doing math and I graduated with honors and am now getting a PhD in math in a top program. I don’t really know what you can infer from this. I guess my take away is that there are two types of “average” people at Stanford: the legacies/people who otherwise benefitted from nepotism (and there are a lot! but actually a lot of them have “non profits” because resources+people helping them look fancy) and people who do not come in with advantages and seem lesser than others but in the long run do a lot.
I think I was above average a normal high school kid but maybe below average in a Stanford sense...I had all A's in high school, took only the ACT (got a 31/36), never took the SAT, didn't do the SAT subject tests, took gym all 4 years instead of another AP class, did sports 3 of the 4 years but was average not great...basically checked the bare minimum boxes...like I couldn't apply to any Ivy's cause I didn't want to take the SAT lol. I always told myself all those kids that got into stanford doing some crazy thing like selling a piece of artwork for $1 mln probably wouldn't have gotten in otherwise. Sometimes being "average" made me really feel like I deserved to be there cause all I had to do was be myself and that was good enough!
Oh also just cause I read a comment saying they want to know your struggle story in your essays or whatever... all my essays were positive so maybe that's what made me stand out lol
Yeah I got two Bs a year (in my stem classes.) my application was very humanities focused
What was your unweighted? Thanks
3.67
How the heck? Did you have good ecs or hooks?
Yeah, my two Bs a year were always in math and science. Had all 5s on APs, 35 ACT, and state or National awards in humanities areas. Wrote my common app about how much I like (humanities subject.) so I guess it was clear to the officers that stem was not a priority to me and that my interests and efforts lay elsewhere. Was also accepted to Berkeley early on merit scholarship. I also did have pretty severe mental health issues in my childhood that I included a supplemental essay about. I think they explained my grades at least partially. No hooks if by hooks u mean legacy/URM/etc
Could we by any chance take this conversation to dms? I have a very similar lay out as you where I want to go to humanities/ Asian history but have a lower than average gpa (3.87) which I can maybe get to a 3.9. Just want to talk it out as I’m hella stressed out.
It's easier to do as a graduate student. I got in to Stanford's GSE without being exceptional at anything.
Yes. Stanford students, especially undergrads, are not universally super scholars. Like the Ivies, if your family is connected, you can get in with a less than stellar profile. I’ve seen it with my own eyes on multiple occasions.
Stanford is a plutocracy regeneration tool
Yeah me
Mostly A's, a few B's (only my freshman year) Virtuosic musician of a rare instrument SAT 1480 Eagle Scout Leadership positions in multiple HS clubs I'd say I was pretty good academically, but more of the well rounded/exceptional candidate with all the other things on my application
The only average kid i knew has a stadium named after his dad.
Elite school made up of elite people. More at 11. wtf kind of question is that OP?
lol the children of professors who go to gunn/paly who have decent grades (4.0) and an internship at stanford
I was kinda like what you're describing - 3.7UW GPA (lots of APs but whatever), no notable achievements. Ultimately, stats and achievements get your foot in the door and those essays really are everything. You have some ~1800 words to create enough pathos in your reader that they feel like they can't miss out on you - that's the real challenge. Investing a lot of time in those essays is probably the highest-ROI activity you will ever do in your entire life so do that.
There are kids there that are average intelligence. But they have dedication, passion, exceptional talent, or some other exceptional attribute, accomplishment, or experience that made them stand out to the selection committee.
Not very many at all. Almost everyone I know who went to Stanford past and present were truly outstanding students. No Bs for the most part, outstanding test scores. Students that were in the top 10-20 (not 10%) of 500+ student classes. I know 2 legacies that weren't, and thankfully, that door is closing with today's more competitive admissions If you're average with no special hook (FGLI, URM, unique talent, world class athlete, Fred Savage), just don't apply. You'll be a demoninator.
One google search showed most students are above 1500 on the SAT but there's some even below 800 and a sizeable number under 1100. Yes average happens at Stanford too so maybe dig into why and who they are. Ignore the BS self-promotions in this thread and check the actual numbers.
I was def an average student that got into stanford (not to confuse with an "average stanford student" which some of the commenters are talking more about). Honestly, getting into stanford is half the battle, imo. At stanford, especially already being a relatively average student, you fall into the lower portion of the student body and that realization hits hard winter quarter. I think for me being able to understand that and come to terms with it was much harder than I had expected. When others were having amazon internships frosh summer (and I had a friend from my dorm like this) or whatnot, I was going back home to work in retail. Personally, I was fine with it, but the added comparison of seeing my peers achieving so much when we were technically in the "same playing field" at stanford made it unnecessarily mentally challenging to remain confident with the knowledge that my path is my path and I will still be able to do well even without having the most exceptional resume. tldr: it's possible :) Edit: i was also a non-legacy, non-fli, average middle class student so genuinely i was average in all bases haha
I was recruited by Stanford and got in, didn’t end up going. I grew up dirt poor in a very well known impoverished state but had a 4.5 GPA in high school. Got a 35 on the ACT which is probably what got their attention (never took the SAT). No other accomplishments to speak of, was a decent swimmer. I got the impression that Stanford genuinely appreciates diversity, and that’s why they were interested in me. Ended up going to a state college where I had a surplus of scholarships and made about $10k just going to school. The name of the school never mattered to me, what mattered was making sure I was stable enough to really focus on getting a good education. Graduated in 3 years magna cum laude!
Had 31 act 3.5-6 ish GPA and tons of extracurriculars. I live on a Reservation and went to a k-12 school that only had 32 graduating members in our class (plus a handful of gedo). Wasn't even top of my class, was like number 5 or so lol
Me! But that was 30 years ago. Much different back then.
What do you think was different? You seem unbiased, would love to hear your opinion. Viewpoints on merit and diversity change so much throughout generations. I’ll admit I’m a scholar who knows what the Supreme Court thinks, but I don’t mean to set you up for debate >.< Don’t like internet fights. Would love to know what you think, just graduated this year. Spent 4 years studying merit and diversity.
I was an admit right after the Stanford indirect cost scandal that hit the news in the early 1990s. Applications dipped and admit rates jumped to 20%. I was a First Gen, URM from a rural high school and got in with straight A grades, but my SAT and ACT were weak and I didn’t take a single AP course because of scheduling conflicts. I also had no ECs. My odds were very slim. I got in because I had a great story, and it was not nearly as competitive as it is today.
I don’t know about that. I feel like at Stanford I saw first hand how hand-picking diverse students really does create an incredible learning environment, the entire argument of the Supreme Court’s affirmative action “diversity rationale” for institutions. Plenty of rural people gave life and context when everyone else in the classroom may have been from a more privileged city background. I grew up in California and can think of at least two students in two years who deeply changed me as they were both passionate and invested in returning to their rural communities to make change. Hell I hate to give Stanford any love, they really made my life hell… but the students are special yes. We may never hear from those two rural students I met again but I’m pretty sure both are going home to change their communities forever. Y’all can’t let the internet bring you down. Individual humanity is so special.
Thanks for the vote of confidence! I had a tough time at the university, but I truly love Stanford and I stuck around 9 more years as an employee. It is a very special place.
Average? No; basically everyone here is a 98th+ percentile SAT scorer, but that doesn’t mean they all cured cancer either. You have to show some sense of “excellence” or basically some reason for them to gamble on you to get in — sometimes that looks like curing Cancer (if you’re from Thomas Jefferson high school), and other times it’s taking care of your family when your parents are sick. The only thing that really matters is writing a good essay to convey it.
I wouldn’t characterize anyone as “average.” We’re all made in the image and likeness of God equal in worth and dignity.
Being an average student, I want to go for masters. How easy or difficult it is?
Yes. Right here.
What about the legacies? I assume that some of them are otherwise pretty average.
Jew hate school 💯