觉得很有启发。总结一下就是：单个人优秀还不行， 尤其是那种高度同质化的优秀，什么学习好， 钢琴好，运动好之类的。 Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extracurriculars (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? Originally Answered: Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extra curriculares (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? I’ve been on the admissions committee of a top ten university (not Stanford but one of its major “competitors”) for over 20 years and on the committee deciding finalists for the most prestigious scholarship at arguably the top public university in the country. I can tell you with great certainty that there is absolutely no way to say whether you will be admitted to Stanford or any other top school, even if you have an unweighted 4.0, perfect SATs and ACTs, lots of 5’s on AP tests, several patents, are a nationally known musician or athlete, and are perfect on paper in every way. The reason is that the very top schools could fill ten classes with qualified applicants from each year’s pool, so to get it down to the number for acceptance in a single year means making judgment calls about making a great CLASS, not just a bunch of great individuals. We want every class to have musicians, inventors, politicos, scientists, policymakers, writers, philosophers, religious and atheist, from all over the world who have demonstrated a love of learning, of new experiences, of challenging themselves in every way. You undoubtedly fit that model, so you certainly have a chance of being admitted; however, it depends on who all of the other applicants are and how Stanford (or Harvard or Princeton or Duke or MIT …..) sees you as fitting into the class they are creating. I remember vividly an amazing girl who applied to my university a few years ago - she had an unweighted 4.0 at one of the most difficult private schools in the Washington, DC area; she was class president, a star athlete and captain in 2 sports, a published author, 2nd runner-up at a major international science competition, and had emigrated with her family from Nigeria at age 10 so she had a fascinating life story. I interviewed her in person and she was amazing. However, she did not get in (she ended up at Princeton, so she’s fine), while other students who may not have looked as impressive on paper were admitted. She was a very strong candidate and made it to the “final round” of discussion, but the admissions committee ended up taking other applicants with different talents and experiences because, among other reasons, it had already admitted, on Early Decision, several students with credentials similar to hers. My best advice would be to apply Early Decision to your #1 choice school. It is easier to get in on Early Decision because (1) there isn’t as much competition, and (2) the school knows that you will come there if admitted, making their yield numbers higher. Second, spend a lot of time on your essay — it is very important at the top schools. They look for creativity, deep self-examination, critical thinking (including about one’s self and one’s beliefs), and of course, excellent writing skills. Take care with those you choose to write your recommendations; a great rec from your chem teacher is more valuable than a merely good rec from a Nobel Prize laureate or a famous person who doesn’t know you as well as your teacher does. Geographic location makes a difference, too; all things being equal, a 4.0 student from Montana probably has a better chance of admission than a 4.0 student from New York City. It’s also really important to keep your mind open to other great schools with similar qualities to Stanford. What is it you love about Stanford — the entrepreneurial culture, the weather, the campus, the alumni? Or is it just the name/brand of Stanford that attracts you? More than one school exists at which you would be very happy and successful, so please try not to be so focused on just one. Admissions officers can spot the applicants who are only drawn by the brand very quickly.
觉得很有启发。总结一下就是：单个人优秀还不行， 尤其是那种高度同质化的优秀，什么学习好， 钢琴好，运动好之类的。 Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extracurriculars (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? Originally Answered: Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extra curriculares (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? I’ve been on the admissions committee of a top ten university (not Stanford but one of its major “competitors”) for over 20 years and on the committee deciding finalists for the most prestigious scholarship at arguably the top public university in the country. I can tell you with great certainty that there is absolutely no way to say whether you will be admitted to Stanford or any other top school, even if you have an unweighted 4.0, perfect SATs and ACTs, lots of 5’s on AP tests, several patents, are a nationally known musician or athlete, and are perfect on paper in every way. The reason is that the very top schools could fill ten classes with qualified applicants from each year’s pool, so to get it down to the number for acceptance in a single year means making judgment calls about making a great CLASS, not just a bunch of great individuals. We want every class to have musicians, inventors, politicos, scientists, policymakers, writers, philosophers, religious and atheist, from all over the world who have demonstrated a love of learning, of new experiences, of challenging themselves in every way. You undoubtedly fit that model, so you certainly have a chance of being admitted; however, it depends on who all of the other applicants are and how Stanford (or Harvard or Princeton or Duke or MIT …..) sees you as fitting into the class they are creating. I remember vividly an amazing girl who applied to my university a few years ago - she had an unweighted 4.0 at one of the most difficult private schools in the Washington, DC area; she was class president, a star athlete and captain in 2 sports, a published author, 2nd runner-up at a major international science competition, and had emigrated with her family from Nigeria at age 10 so she had a fascinating life story. I interviewed her in person and she was amazing. However, she did not get in (she ended up at Princeton, so she’s fine), while other students who may not have looked as impressive on paper were admitted. She was a very strong candidate and made it to the “final round” of discussion, but the admissions committee ended up taking other applicants with different talents and experiences because, among other reasons, it had already admitted, on Early Decision, several students with credentials similar to hers. My best advice would be to apply Early Decision to your #1 choice school. It is easier to get in on Early Decision because (1) there isn’t as much competition, and (2) the school knows that you will come there if admitted, making their yield numbers higher. Second, spend a lot of time on your essay — it is very important at the top schools. They look for creativity, deep self-examination, critical thinking (including about one’s self and one’s beliefs), and of course, excellent writing skills. Take care with those you choose to write your recommendations; a great rec from your chem teacher is more valuable than a merely good rec from a Nobel Prize laureate or a famous person who doesn’t know you as well as your teacher does. Geographic location makes a difference, too; all things being equal, a 4.0 student from Montana probably has a better chance of admission than a 4.0 student from New York City. It’s also really important to keep your mind open to other great schools with similar qualities to Stanford. What is it you love about Stanford — the entrepreneurial culture, the weather, the campus, the alumni? Or is it just the name/brand of Stanford that attracts you? More than one school exists at which you would be very happy and successful, so please try not to be so focused on just one. Admissions officers can spot the applicants who are only drawn by the brand very quickly.
觉得很有启发。总结一下就是：单个人优秀还不行， 尤其是那种高度同质化的优秀，什么学习好， 钢琴好，运动好之类的。 Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extracurriculars (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? Originally Answered: Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extra curriculares (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? I’ve been on the admissions committee of a top ten university (not Stanford but one of its major “competitors”) for over 20 years and on the committee deciding finalists for the most prestigious scholarship at arguably the top public university in the country. I can tell you with great certainty that there is absolutely no way to say whether you will be admitted to Stanford or any other top school, even if you have an unweighted 4.0, perfect SATs and ACTs, lots of 5’s on AP tests, several patents, are a nationally known musician or athlete, and are perfect on paper in every way. The reason is that the very top schools could fill ten classes with qualified applicants from each year’s pool, so to get it down to the number for acceptance in a single year means making judgment calls about making a great CLASS, not just a bunch of great individuals. We want every class to have musicians, inventors, politicos, scientists, policymakers, writers, philosophers, religious and atheist, from all over the world who have demonstrated a love of learning, of new experiences, of challenging themselves in every way. You undoubtedly fit that model, so you certainly have a chance of being admitted; however, it depends on who all of the other applicants are and how Stanford (or Harvard or Princeton or Duke or MIT …..) sees you as fitting into the class they are creating. I remember vividly an amazing girl who applied to my university a few years ago - she had an unweighted 4.0 at one of the most difficult private schools in the Washington, DC area; she was class president, a star athlete and captain in 2 sports, a published author, 2nd runner-up at a major international science competition, and had emigrated with her family from Nigeria at age 10 so she had a fascinating life story. I interviewed her in person and she was amazing. However, she did not get in (she ended up at Princeton, so she’s fine), while other students who may not have looked as impressive on paper were admitted. She was a very strong candidate and made it to the “final round” of discussion, but the admissions committee ended up taking other applicants with different talents and experiences because, among other reasons, it had already admitted, on Early Decision, several students with credentials similar to hers. My best advice would be to apply Early Decision to your #1 choice school. It is easier to get in on Early Decision because (1) there isn’t as much competition, and (2) the school knows that you will come there if admitted, making their yield numbers higher. Second, spend a lot of time on your essay — it is very important at the top schools. They look for creativity, deep self-examination, critical thinking (including about one’s self and one’s beliefs), and of course, excellent writing skills. Take care with those you choose to write your recommendations; a great rec from your chem teacher is more valuable than a merely good rec from a Nobel Prize laureate or a famous person who doesn’t know you as well as your teacher does. Geographic location makes a difference, too; all things being equal, a 4.0 student from Montana probably has a better chance of admission than a 4.0 student from New York City. It’s also really important to keep your mind open to other great schools with similar qualities to Stanford. What is it you love about Stanford — the entrepreneurial culture, the weather, the campus, the alumni? Or is it just the name/brand of Stanford that attracts you? More than one school exists at which you would be very happy and successful, so please try not to be so focused on just one. Admissions officers can spot the applicants who are only drawn by the brand very quickly.
回复 1楼pearlgirl的帖子 这些admission officers基本上都是losers with capital L。他们工资普遍不高，一般能找到其他工作的不愿意做下去，人员流动性很大。培养孩子的问题上听他们的真的不如听华人大妈的。 从另一个角度说，中国的高科技企业家都是死读书出来的，没看出来他们比美国高科技企业家差在哪里。像张一鸣这样的，只是因为他在中国，美国没什么人吹他而已。现在美国大学录取的这些东西基本都是胡扯。
觉得很有启发。总结一下就是：单个人优秀还不行， 尤其是那种高度同质化的优秀，什么学习好， 钢琴好，运动好之类的。 Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extracurriculars (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? Originally Answered: Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extra curriculares (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? I’ve been on the admissions committee of a top ten university (not Stanford but one of its major “competitors”) for over 20 years and on the committee deciding finalists for the most prestigious scholarship at arguably the top public university in the country. I can tell you with great certainty that there is absolutely no way to say whether you will be admitted to Stanford or any other top school, even if you have an unweighted 4.0, perfect SATs and ACTs, lots of 5’s on AP tests, several patents, are a nationally known musician or athlete, and are perfect on paper in every way. The reason is that the very top schools could fill ten classes with qualified applicants from each year’s pool, so to get it down to the number for acceptance in a single year means making judgment calls about making a great CLASS, not just a bunch of great individuals. We want every class to have musicians, inventors, politicos, scientists, policymakers, writers, philosophers, religious and atheist, from all over the world who have demonstrated a love of learning, of new experiences, of challenging themselves in every way. You undoubtedly fit that model, so you certainly have a chance of being admitted; however, it depends on who all of the other applicants are and how Stanford (or Harvard or Princeton or Duke or MIT …..) sees you as fitting into the class they are creating. I remember vividly an amazing girl who applied to my university a few years ago - she had an unweighted 4.0 at one of the most difficult private schools in the Washington, DC area; she was class president, a star athlete and captain in 2 sports, a published author, 2nd runner-up at a major international science competition, and had emigrated with her family from Nigeria at age 10 so she had a fascinating life story. I interviewed her in person and she was amazing. However, she did not get in (she ended up at Princeton, so she’s fine), while other students who may not have looked as impressive on paper were admitted. She was a very strong candidate and made it to the “final round” of discussion, but the admissions committee ended up taking other applicants with different talents and experiences because, among other reasons, it had already admitted, on Early Decision, several students with credentials similar to hers. My best advice would be to apply Early Decision to your #1 choice school. It is easier to get in on Early Decision because (1) there isn’t as much competition, and (2) the school knows that you will come there if admitted, making their yield numbers higher. Second, spend a lot of time on your essay — it is very important at the top schools. They look for creativity, deep self-examination, critical thinking (including about one’s self and one’s beliefs), and of course, excellent writing skills. Take care with those you choose to write your recommendations; a great rec from your chem teacher is more valuable than a merely good rec from a Nobel Prize laureate or a famous person who doesn’t know you as well as your teacher does. Geographic location makes a difference, too; all things being equal, a 4.0 student from Montana probably has a better chance of admission than a 4.0 student from New York City. It’s also really important to keep your mind open to other great schools with similar qualities to Stanford. What is it you love about Stanford — the entrepreneurial culture, the weather, the campus, the alumni? Or is it just the name/brand of Stanford that attracts you? More than one school exists at which you would be very happy and successful, so please try not to be so focused on just one. Admissions officers can spot the applicants who are only drawn by the brand very quickly.
觉得很有启发。总结一下就是：单个人优秀还不行， 尤其是那种高度同质化的优秀，什么学习好， 钢琴好，运动好之类的。 Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extracurriculars (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? Originally Answered: Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extra curriculares (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? I’ve been on the admissions committee of a top ten university (not Stanford but one of its major “competitors”) for over 20 years and on the committee deciding finalists for the most prestigious scholarship at arguably the top public university in the country. I can tell you with great certainty that there is absolutely no way to say whether you will be admitted to Stanford or any other top school, even if you have an unweighted 4.0, perfect SATs and ACTs, lots of 5’s on AP tests, several patents, are a nationally known musician or athlete, and are perfect on paper in every way. The reason is that the very top schools could fill ten classes with qualified applicants from each year’s pool, so to get it down to the number for acceptance in a single year means making judgment calls about making a great CLASS, not just a bunch of great individuals. We want every class to have musicians, inventors, politicos, scientists, policymakers, writers, philosophers, religious and atheist, from all over the world who have demonstrated a love of learning, of new experiences, of challenging themselves in every way. You undoubtedly fit that model, so you certainly have a chance of being admitted; however, it depends on who all of the other applicants are and how Stanford (or Harvard or Princeton or Duke or MIT …..) sees you as fitting into the class they are creating. I remember vividly an amazing girl who applied to my university a few years ago - she had an unweighted 4.0 at one of the most difficult private schools in the Washington, DC area; she was class president, a star athlete and captain in 2 sports, a published author, 2nd runner-up at a major international science competition, and had emigrated with her family from Nigeria at age 10 so she had a fascinating life story. I interviewed her in person and she was amazing. However, she did not get in (she ended up at Princeton, so she’s fine), while other students who may not have looked as impressive on paper were admitted. She was a very strong candidate and made it to the “final round” of discussion, but the admissions committee ended up taking other applicants with different talents and experiences because, among other reasons, it had already admitted, on Early Decision, several students with credentials similar to hers. My best advice would be to apply Early Decision to your #1 choice school. It is easier to get in on Early Decision because (1) there isn’t as much competition, and (2) the school knows that you will come there if admitted, making their yield numbers higher. Second, spend a lot of time on your essay — it is very important at the top schools. They look for creativity, deep self-examination, critical thinking (including about one’s self and one’s beliefs), and of course, excellent writing skills. Take care with those you choose to write your recommendations; a great rec from your chem teacher is more valuable than a merely good rec from a Nobel Prize laureate or a famous person who doesn’t know you as well as your teacher does. Geographic location makes a difference, too; all things being equal, a 4.0 student from Montana probably has a better chance of admission than a 4.0 student from New York City. It’s also really important to keep your mind open to other great schools with similar qualities to Stanford. What is it you love about Stanford — the entrepreneurial culture, the weather, the campus, the alumni? Or is it just the name/brand of Stanford that attracts you? More than one school exists at which you would be very happy and successful, so please try not to be so focused on just one. Admissions officers can spot the applicants who are only drawn by the brand very quickly.
觉得很有启发。总结一下就是：单个人优秀还不行， 尤其是那种高度同质化的优秀，什么学习好， 钢琴好，运动好之类的。 Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extracurriculars (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? Originally Answered: Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extra curriculares (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? I’ve been on the admissions committee of a top ten university (not Stanford but one of its major “competitors”) for over 20 years and on the committee deciding finalists for the most prestigious scholarship at arguably the top public university in the country. I can tell you with great certainty that there is absolutely no way to say whether you will be admitted to Stanford or any other top school, even if you have an unweighted 4.0, perfect SATs and ACTs, lots of 5’s on AP tests, several patents, are a nationally known musician or athlete, and are perfect on paper in every way. The reason is that the very top schools could fill ten classes with qualified applicants from each year’s pool, so to get it down to the number for acceptance in a single year means making judgment calls about making a great CLASS, not just a bunch of great individuals. We want every class to have musicians, inventors, politicos, scientists, policymakers, writers, philosophers, religious and atheist, from all over the world who have demonstrated a love of learning, of new experiences, of challenging themselves in every way. You undoubtedly fit that model, so you certainly have a chance of being admitted; however, it depends on who all of the other applicants are and how Stanford (or Harvard or Princeton or Duke or MIT …..) sees you as fitting into the class they are creating. I remember vividly an amazing girl who applied to my university a few years ago - she had an unweighted 4.0 at one of the most difficult private schools in the Washington, DC area; she was class president, a star athlete and captain in 2 sports, a published author, 2nd runner-up at a major international science competition, and had emigrated with her family from Nigeria at age 10 so she had a fascinating life story. I interviewed her in person and she was amazing. However, she did not get in (she ended up at Princeton, so she’s fine), while other students who may not have looked as impressive on paper were admitted. She was a very strong candidate and made it to the “final round” of discussion, but the admissions committee ended up taking other applicants with different talents and experiences because, among other reasons, it had already admitted, on Early Decision, several students with credentials similar to hers. My best advice would be to apply Early Decision to your #1 choice school. It is easier to get in on Early Decision because (1) there isn’t as much competition, and (2) the school knows that you will come there if admitted, making their yield numbers higher. Second, spend a lot of time on your essay — it is very important at the top schools. They look for creativity, deep self-examination, critical thinking (including about one’s self and one’s beliefs), and of course, excellent writing skills. Take care with those you choose to write your recommendations; a great rec from your chem teacher is more valuable than a merely good rec from a Nobel Prize laureate or a famous person who doesn’t know you as well as your teacher does. Geographic location makes a difference, too; all things being equal, a 4.0 student from Montana probably has a better chance of admission than a 4.0 student from New York City. It’s also really important to keep your mind open to other great schools with similar qualities to Stanford. What is it you love about Stanford — the entrepreneurial culture, the weather, the campus, the alumni? Or is it just the name/brand of Stanford that attracts you? More than one school exists at which you would be very happy and successful, so please try not to be so focused on just one. Admissions officers can spot the applicants who are only drawn by the brand very quickly.
Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extracurriculars (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? Originally Answered: Will a SAT score of 1450/1600 with a 4.0 unweighted and really good extra curriculares (Eagle Scout, Tennis, etc.) get me into Stanford? I’ve been on the admissions committee of a top ten university (not Stanford but one of its major “competitors”) for over 20 years and on the committee deciding finalists for the most prestigious scholarship at arguably the top public university in the country. I can tell you with great certainty that there is absolutely no way to say whether you will be admitted to Stanford or any other top school, even if you have an unweighted 4.0, perfect SATs and ACTs, lots of 5’s on AP tests, several patents, are a nationally known musician or athlete, and are perfect on paper in every way. The reason is that the very top schools could fill ten classes with qualified applicants from each year’s pool, so to get it down to the number for acceptance in a single year means making judgment calls about making a great CLASS, not just a bunch of great individuals. We want every class to have musicians, inventors, politicos, scientists, policymakers, writers, philosophers, religious and atheist, from all over the world who have demonstrated a love of learning, of new experiences, of challenging themselves in every way. You undoubtedly fit that model, so you certainly have a chance of being admitted; however, it depends on who all of the other applicants are and how Stanford (or Harvard or Princeton or Duke or MIT …..) sees you as fitting into the class they are creating. I remember vividly an amazing girl who applied to my university a few years ago - she had an unweighted 4.0 at one of the most difficult private schools in the Washington, DC area; she was class president, a star athlete and captain in 2 sports, a published author, 2nd runner-up at a major international science competition, and had emigrated with her family from Nigeria at age 10 so she had a fascinating life story. I interviewed her in person and she was amazing. However, she did not get in (she ended up at Princeton, so she’s fine), while other students who may not have looked as impressive on paper were admitted. She was a very strong candidate and made it to the “final round” of discussion, but the admissions committee ended up taking other applicants with different talents and experiences because, among other reasons, it had already admitted, on Early Decision, several students with credentials similar to hers. My best advice would be to apply Early Decision to your #1 choice school. It is easier to get in on Early Decision because (1) there isn’t as much competition, and (2) the school knows that you will come there if admitted, making their yield numbers higher. Second, spend a lot of time on your essay — it is very important at the top schools. They look for creativity, deep self-examination, critical thinking (including about one’s self and one’s beliefs), and of course, excellent writing skills. Take care with those you choose to write your recommendations; a great rec from your chem teacher is more valuable than a merely good rec from a Nobel Prize laureate or a famous person who doesn’t know you as well as your teacher does. Geographic location makes a difference, too; all things being equal, a 4.0 student from Montana probably has a better chance of admission than a 4.0 student from New York City. It’s also really important to keep your mind open to other great schools with similar qualities to Stanford. What is it you love about Stanford — the entrepreneurial culture, the weather, the campus, the alumni? Or is it just the name/brand of Stanford that attracts you? More than one school exists at which you would be very happy and successful, so please try not to be so focused on just one. Admissions officers can spot the applicants who are only drawn by the brand very quickly.
🔥 最新回帖
说的好！越来越看不惯白人的夸夸其谈，从小就是如此，正经学习不愿意花时间，整天搞小团体
因为国内没有学微积分啊，以后国内高中也要学微积分了 我娃不是理科娃，学AP微积分bc和AP物理c，A和五分应该没问题
同意。这边物理不说别的，教材都非常好，认真学了以后比较容易明白，理解也更透彻。当然也看学校和老师，很多地方也是混混而已
🛋️ 沙发板凳
一个再低微的人，当他能决定别人命运的时候，会莫名感觉自己厉害了。power真是能改变一个人的思维
他文章里的那个没录取的女生是黑人吧，immigrated from Nigeria.
其实美国top学校选拔的不是现在最优秀的学生，而是在选拔将来最可能优秀的学生。按这个逻辑就明白了。这种成绩好，钢琴好，竞赛好，按部就班优秀的学生，将来会成为很不错的上中产，但很难成为未来社会的领导者。这些逆境出身或者豪门出身的学生，将来成功的可能性确实更大。
偏执狂的确是人类进步的主要动力
很有道理。
其实说的是大实话。我自己都不爱和书呆一起玩，无论这人学习又多牛。
我觉得要积极看待老师的评语，老师看到别的礼仪问题，不提醒，其实家长孩子没有改进的机会。可以跟老师发个信，问问具体什么样的情境，以及如何改进。这个世界上背后说人的太多了，当面质疑和理论的人太少，而这些才是很珍贵的让自己变得更好的机会
很好的总结，所以亚裔内卷的厉害。说白了，现在很多大学就是skin color diversity.
什么叫做低微的人？这个admission officer吗？他/她们是挣钱比你少呢还是学历比你低，就不配做这么重要的事情？
EA录取率高，这不是她定的，profile多样性，这也不是她定的。她就是个执行者，好心告诉你这些标准，居然觉得人家“低微”？就昨天，有楼主好心分享儿子stand out，还批的人一堆。。。。大家都这种profile，你不standout有个p用。
但有斯坦福放前面，我想绝大多数的人都还是想和这些变态极端偏执为伍的吧。
这些学校都是惯出来的毛病。如果绝大多数学业好的学生都不申请这些个破学校，看他们还拽不。
真没必要捧这个臭脚，上个州立，享受人生，对孩子身心都好。
自己国家连个合格螺丝钉都培养不出来，要靠大量移民。还指望什么领袖。多少科技新贵都是外来移民。当年美国和苏联冷战的时候，绝对是看重成绩的，现在被牛鬼蛇神搞坏了。
提醒一下美国就是一个移民国家，华人网上的绝大多数都是靠着科技新贵过来的。你也别嘲笑别人，别自己找工作，那可要中餐馆丰富回国直达的大城市，但又有几个肯为了娃搬家到蒙大拿。
这个可是个黑女啊
这位没进斯坦福的原因是斯坦福ED的时候这种人招太多了，人最后不也还是进了普林
说得有道理啊，不能一个班全是弹钢琴数学竞赛的，不能全班都是BLM，也不能全班都是来自纽约的。
你确定你没有被你娃忽悠吗 老师的评语和你娃说的是正好相反的两回事啊 老师的评语难道不是正是在说你娃有时学习不专心，讲不该讲的吗？
你这理解力，我嘲笑的是新贵吗？
玩，当然不能找书呆子，看病，你会找会玩的黑人墨西哥医生吗？
re 学校注重的是让每一个进来的人都感到舒服。 大家各有所长，相互学习，尽量不要一个全方位卷另一个。 至于没进来的，学校就不考虑了
透彻
这些admission officers基本上都是losers with capital L。他们工资普遍不高，一般能找到其他工作的不愿意做下去，人员流动性很大。培养孩子的问题上听他们的真的不如听华人大妈的。
从另一个角度说，中国的高科技企业家都是死读书出来的，没看出来他们比美国高科技企业家差在哪里。像张一鸣这样的，只是因为他在中国，美国没什么人吹他而已。现在美国大学录取的这些东西基本都是胡扯。
美国再这么瞎jb 搞下去，今后被中国爆菊是早晚的事。估计现在中国在偷着乐呢。
有点歧视的味 见不得人家娃好 鸡蛋里挑骨头
不能凡事都是华人自己的问题。如果全班华人小孩都是这种负面的评价，在职场上肯定就是歧视。跪太久了不知道怎么站起来也是个问题
我觉得她提这个例子是有用意的，而且特意提到小孩的母国，就是面对可能是质疑
上个大学而已，还不足以决定孩子的未来
差不多，我感觉就是先过滤出比较优秀的选手，再挑出长板分布在谱系各段的，最后生成一个尽可能多样化的群体。
多样化的群体对学生本身以及学校都是最有利的，对学生来说利于取长补短，对学校来说鸡蛋都分在不同的篮子里。我如果管招收也会秉承这样的思路。
Mark~~
确实是这样。家长应该反思一下。无则加勉，有则改之。老师告诉你是真的对你好，如果真看不上你人家不告诉你但推荐信写的差你也不知道。还有就是老中家庭出来的孩子在manners 方面是不太相同。这个好多大人自己意识不到。举个例子。几个孩子来我家玩，吃完东西五岁白人孩子坐在餐桌前吃，然后自己就把餐具收拾好放进水槽。11岁和9岁老中娃从来都是摊在那里不管的、还到处走着吃。这些是小事，但是从侧面说明白人家里从小规矩多。
移民靠的是人心，是believe 。当大家觉得这个系统有问题，不愿意来了，这个系统就崩溃了。满清的八旗子弟，从骁勇善战，到骄奢淫逸，也就两三百年的时间。
我家也是自己收拾， 并且她做的很多事去学校问一圈白人小孩都不自己做，真的不是规矩多， 单纯家长懒， 白人带孩子散养， 怎么自己方便就怎么来了。
谢谢分享，很有启发
以前读过点Excellent Sheep。上面说1960年以前的大藤基本上不看中学成绩。就是拼爹。哈佛1950年的录取率为10/13。每13个申请可以录取10个。哥伦比亚有犹太人quota，不能超过这个数。老百姓不是不知道大藤，只是都有自知之明，没有拼爹的实力都不去申请而已。
马丁路德金都说不要看种族，你们非要说种族重要。奥巴马女儿比你孩子需要种族优待吗？照顾底层家庭还算合理，看肤色纯属政治垃圾。
那是美国中小学教育太烂了。。
O8的女兒不需要靠膚色 她爸是美國總統 政治權力地位 白皮也會有特殊待遇
哪看你怎么理解这句话， 不看种族也可以理解成就是接受种族的diversity，
可以争取当然争取，这么说家长的大部分是要么没进入过名校，要么进入了名校也不懂用人脉资源的。出了学校当然也能攒人脉，但是难度可比学校大多了，在学校里不管出身如何，相对平等容易建立革命友情，在社会上的等级划分门槛高多了
不光是这样，对于接受高等教育的学生来说，在校期间跟diverse的人打交道，是enriched experience，益处远超过于homogeneous环境下的教育，这是有research supported的结论。 diversity本意在此。
文章里说的是ED的学校。RD阶段，看到这样条件的黑人女孩，明显会进大藤的，ED学校招了也不会来，不招这种是正常操作
绝大多数是学习牛的都不书呆，高中有两个书呆学习就是中上
从我个人经验来说，aa上来的学生，真的啥样的都有，带起来累，但有共同一点就是能成事。亚洲的孩子，苦出生的那是又聪明又能干。其他的中产娃儿，要学会做事，还有比较长的路要走。
抱抱 就是白渣挑刺儿 让孩子提前品尝了社会对ABC的打压 跟公司PUA华人，只能做技术不能升管理层，一个意思 既在人檐下不得不低头 你这个还能换老师，或者转学 以后走上社会，换啥公司都是乌鸦一般黑 歪楼叹个气
招生办的蛀虫，就是小人得志便猖狂的嘴脸 学费那么死贵，就是养了这帮欺负好学生的职工 故意不按成绩招生，这样给了他们放水招自己家白渣孩子的机会
ED不是招了必须去吗
你让他elaborate 他的comment, 你家娃到底哪里哪个行为显得manner 有问题，有具体得实例支持，我没意见，没有，那不能接受老师这样得主见，告诉他那是他的illusion
对，我家小姑子在哥大读书的时候走过招生办，听到里面说的就是这个意思，Top学校要培养的是未来的leader，不是读书机器。
她和我说：名校看重的是你学习的态度和学习某一专业的动机。你从学院的角度去考虑，他们要培养的是某一行业的leader。所以你一定要对某一专业有深度的理解才能打动他们。为什么我说GPA说得过去就可以了，因为这个东西是通过努力可以提高的。人家相信自己的教育水平，相信一个有潜力的人可以通过努力提高。所以GPA不是定生死的关键。
文章里说的已经是RD阶段，招了可以不去
里面举例的，就是一个黑人女孩，也没进
确实，然后这些拼爹的后来成就也很好。 著名的肯尼迪申请哈佛文书，充分说明啥essay 要求就是笑话。
不要把事情都对立起来，没那么悬乎， 亚裔孩子包括华裔二代上T20，T10，T5的孩子海了去了， 远远超过了亚裔在美国人口的比例
招生办说的都是台面上的官话
其实翻译成大白话就是
说你行，你就行，不行也行，
说你不行，你就不行，行也不行。
斯坦福没有ED
对， 就是刻意在招生过程中引入各种ambiguity, 这样有利于他们找借口拒绝各方面很优秀的亚裔孩子
有任何统计数据证明事业成功的leader们绝大多数都是从ivy league 本科毕业的学生吗？
暗地里的操作，普通人也没能力去搞啊。 父母捐款你能捐多少？社会名流吗？校友吗？或者暗箱操作搞体育特色？ 普通家长能做的就是吃透游戏规则，考出好成绩。
就是这个意思 华裔没有话语权，被歧视得最惨
这些说法都是bullshit。现在美国大学想学计算机的人很多，很大的比例（30%-50%）第一个学年就放弃转专业，因为数学和编程不行。这么多人drop off说明美国大学选人纯粹是瞎搞。Admission officers能看出passion/leadership绝对是笑话
有的时候变态偏执能给这些AO一个录取的理由，否则要这个AO有什么用处。AO也要有理由justify他自己的工作。AO可以把变态偏执解释成passion。lol
这个我觉得还好？毕竟老师也给了A的分数，并没有在record上面为难孩子。这个comment，对孩子总还是有建设性的作用。另外老师说的这些，如果是真的，那确实可以提高，并不是完全没事找事。
如果老师因为不喜欢小中，给了不公平的低分数，或者剥夺了孩子应得的机会，那肯定是不对的。这里我看到的不是这样。
这个回复居然高赞？没看到这个娃10岁跟家人从Nigeria移民来美的？
你这么想，还是没搞明白，啥是精英，社会为什么需要精英。孩子成绩好，就是一颗出色的螺丝钉，没有贬义，也能过上比较平稳的生活，但上限也很低。美国与中国完全不一样，中国要的是顺服的螺丝钉，美国要的是带领群力聚合力量一起去突破去创造的精英。所以，大方向来看，美国的未来还是会更强大，只要内部矛盾没有严重到分裂。
你不确定老师具体指什么，应该跟老师聊一下，不惹事不等于就是有好的manner，social 没问题，有些孩子问题家长自己没意识到，其他人指出是好事啊，当然不排除老师有针对性的可能，所以应该跟老师进一步沟通下.
照你这么说，为啥美国高科技公司高层这么多老印。老印可都是在印度死读书出来的。他们不算精英了吗，还是他们不是社会需要的精英？你说的美国本科和基础教育的优越性在哪里
好像是这样。他们要筛选出未来的领导者，而不是过去的优异者。
所以就是luck