去年EA Harvard AO 打分 overall 2分

forestbamboo · 2023-11-24 12:42:21Z

去年EA Harvard AO 打分 overall 2分簡介

來源: forestbamboo 於 2023-11-24 12:42:21 [檔案] [舊帖] [給我悄悄話] 本文已被閱讀：次 (15495 bytes)

本文內容已被 [ forestbamboo ] 在 2023-11-24 12:47:37 編輯過。如有問題，請報告版主或論壇管理刪除.

Academic Rating： 2+

Extracurricular Rating： 2

Athletic Rating： 4

Personal Rating： 2

Overall: 2　（假設第一個最大格子是　overall score)

校友 interview 2+ (校友EC 打分是 1-）

校友ｉｎｔｅｒｖｉｅｗ　之後有一框，打分是　２＋。　不知道是什麽。

其它還有幾個打分，不知道是什麽意思。 也都是２　（２＋　ｏｒ　２－）.

兩個 AO 看起來基本一致。 評語很積極。但是 AO highlighted 的地方和我們原來想的（本壇排名）並非一致。有些差別。　甚至同一類EC，　AO　highlighted　的是低一級別的成績。

有些縮寫看不懂，　比如　AIV, FH?

打分和我們原來想的有些不一樣。比如EC部分，我們認為會比2高，　應該　１－　ｏｒ　至少２＋．　看起來這個一分大刺二分刺也不好區分。　Personal Rating 2　這個有點超出預期。因為一般都說亞裔這這個方麵很容易被壓分。

總分２，四大類裏３個２分，　一個４分。　大數據說是　４３－８０％　錄取率。

看起來大學申請，家長和孩子的預判和實際都會有出入。 運氣成分很重要。 我們是運氣好，personal 部分也拿到2分，幸運地被錄取了。要不然兩個 2分估計錄取就懸了　

對打分分析

First, a breakdown of how Harvard's 4 main factors are assessed on a scale of 1-6 (1 being the best):

Academic Rating (0.5% of applicants get a 1, 42.3% of applicants get a 2):

Summa potential. Genuine scholar; near-perfect scores and grades (in most cases) combined with unusual creativity and possible evidence of original scholarship.
Magna potential: Excellent student with superb grades and mid-to-high-700 scores (33+ ACT).
Cum laude potential: Very good student with excellent grades and mid-600 to low-700 scores (29 to 32 ACT).
Adequate preparation. Respectable grades and low-to-mid-600 scores (26 to 29) ACT).
Marginal potential. Modest grades and 500 scores (25 and below ACT).
Achievement or motivation marginal or worse.

Difference between 1 and 2: You need to show academic excellence outside of just your grades and test scores in order to get a 1, most often through very prestigious academic competitions/awards and/or published research with a professor.

Extracurricular Rating (0.3% of applicants get a 1, 23.8% of applicants get a 2):

Unusual strength in one or more areas. Possible national-level achievement or professional experience. A potential major contributor at Harvard. Truly unusual achievement.
Strong secondary school contribution in one or more areas such as class president, newspaper editor, etc. Local or regional recognition; major accomplishment(s).[in another filing]: "Significant school, and possibly regional accomplishments: for example, an applicant who was the student body president or captain of the debate team and the leader of multiple additional clubs."
Solid participation but without special distinction. (Upgrade 3+ to 2- in some cases if the e/c is particularly extensive and substantive.)
Little or no participation.
Substantial activity outside of conventional EC participation such as family commitments or term-time work (could be included with other e/c to boost the rating or left as a "5" if it is more representative of the student's commitment).
Special circumstances limit or prevent participation (e.g. a physical condition).

Difference between 1 and 2: You have to achieve at a national/professional level in your activities in order to get a 1, simply being elite at a school or state level will not get you over a 2 in this category.

Athletic Rating (0.9% of applicants get a 1, 9.2% of applicants get a 2):

Unusually strong prospect for varsity sports at Harvard, desired by Harvard coaches.
Strong secondary school contribution in one or more areas; possible leadership role(s).
Active participation.
Little or no interest.
Substantial activity outside of conventional EC participation such as family commitments or term-time work (could be included with other e/c to boost the rating or left as a "5" if it is more representative of the student's commitment).
Physical condition prevents significant activity.

Difference between 1 and 2: Being recruited for a sport will get you a 1 here, but you can still help out your case a lot by being a strong non-recruited high school athlete and qualifying for a 2.

Personal Rating (0.0% of applicants -- or below 50 total every year -- get a 1, 20.8% of applicants get a 2):

Outstanding
Very Strong
Generally Positive
Bland or somewhat negative or immature
Questionable personal qualities
Worrisome personal qualities

Difference between 1 and 2: Way too vague to tell for sure, but some traits I often heard from Harvard alumni interviewers for students that received a 1 are "seemed like they would be amazing friends for their classmates", "didn't appear to treat college like a competition for grades", "wouldn't be intimidated by other bright and active people", and "memorable even 20-30 years later." Essentially, you must stand out as a person everyone wants to be around (which is highly subjective)... how you do that is really a unique thing for everyone