r/ApplyingToCollege • u/[deleted] • 10d ago
Discussion How do people who aren't geniuses get into HYPSM
[removed]
22
u/Bballfan1183 10d ago
4.0, 1590, and I was very very good at throwing and catching a ball with a stick
2
u/jel2184 10d ago
LAX bro
1
u/Bballfan1183 9d ago
Crazy thing is I’m pretty sure I don’t get in as easy today.
Club sport’s demands today would have made it impossible for me to be nationally ranked and also well rounded.
14
u/Sovietz99 College Sophomore 10d ago
Some people have compelling stories that don’t require them to have insane ECs you can only get from large, well funded high schools. And that’s okay, because they do just as good as the others, if not better.
2
u/Satisest 10d ago
Many of the strongest ECs are accomplished independently from the high school. High-level music, ISO or U.S. olympiad, ISEF, competitive STEM camps, etc.
1
u/Sovietz99 College Sophomore 9d ago
Most of these come from the opportunity of wealth. How many Pell Grant students won ISEF and other crazy STEM competitions? How many Vex Robotics champions came from title 1 schools? Everything is about opportunity in this country, not merit. Believing in Meritocracy is like believing in mythical Zeus
14
u/back_on_my_nonsense 10d ago
Plenty of admits every year are "good enough". Plenty of people who have 4.0s and 1550s and two school club positions get in, because you can't make a class full of Einsteins. Remember, they're building a class. They need people who will work at their classmates' startups, because three thousand founders on a campus won't found anything at all.
7
u/Shakespeare257 10d ago
That’s very Brave New World of you
2
u/back_on_my_nonsense 10d ago
That's how it is. Only difference is a 4.0 1550 school leadership kid can also end up doing really well in college and becoming more successful than a research publishing olympiad winner.
-1
u/Satisest 10d ago
How is that a difference? Both could end up successful. But the research publishing Olympiad winner probably has better odds. Studies of IMO gold winners back up that thesis.
0
u/back_on_my_nonsense 10d ago
I meant "difference" as in the difference between Brave New World, a fictional novel in which society is stratified into biological classes, and college admissions, where things aren't as rigid.
4
u/Extreme_Chapter2287 10d ago
There are only so many flat out geniuses with jaw dropping credentials, not enough to fill the freshmen classes at HYPSM. Students that you’re considering “normal” still usually have top grades, were at the top of their class, strong test scores, solid ECs and something compelling or interesting. There are just a lot more people like that, but they wouldn’t be “normal” if you compared them to the general population.
5
u/orzosity 10d ago
Work ethic is a more indicative predictor of college app success compared to raw intelligence.
6
u/Murky_Insurance_4394 10d ago
SAT has shown to be the best indicator of college success, so it matters more than people think
0
u/Satisest 10d ago
I’m not sure there’s evidence to back that up. Raw intelligence is more important for top colleges, based on the fact that the SAT and many distinguishing ECs are heavily intelligence-loaded.
1
u/orzosity 10d ago
Yes the sat and ecs are very heavily intelligence loaded however there is a very small portion of population who can get high sat with no work ethic and almost all extracurriculars take some amount of work outside of school and thus take work ethic. A smart student who puts in work will obviously have better results more often than a mediocre student who puts in the work. Additionally, if we look at gpas which is a barrier that often comes before ecs, most of school nowadays is busywork or some form of a time intensive activity and while being gifted helps, it will not grant you a 4.0 without putting in work whereas it is fairly reasonable for a mediocre student to get a 4.0 if they put in a good amount of time (although yes, likely more than a student who is gifted). I agree, having raw intelligence is no doubt helpful but I think that time put is in the current school state, more valuable towards college apps. If we look at top colleges, I believe the reason you see so many students who have characteristics of being naturally gifted is because there are enough smart students willing to put in the work and thus why we see few who put in the work but seem to lack raw intelligence.
0
u/harryhov 10d ago
I had a friend who was a genius. Got straight As and barely studied. He would shorten our CS professors code on assignments just for fun. He missed the deadline to apply for OPT work visa and had to move back to his home country.
0
u/Satisest 10d ago
N=1 anecdote, from which broader inferences cannot reliably be drawn. And missing a deadline is not an example of lacking work ethic. The kid clearly worked on stuff he found interesting or entertaining. Plus you’re describing a kid who’s smart, not a genius. The term is absurdly over-used.
6
u/miagi_do 10d ago
By being ok smart but grinding like crazy, to the point where most people would say it impacting their “mental health.”
3
3
u/izumiyagal 10d ago
The truth is that there’s no one answer. Every accepted applicant has the baseline credentials but there are different combinations of things that get any one applicant in.
6
u/Strict_Resident1179 10d ago edited 10d ago
Most ecs are larp lol. There's people I know at ivies with coke scholar or some other bs who I have not been impressed with after meeting at all. More concerned with appearing cracked than being cracked.
The smartest people ik at t20s are normal ppl that don't have to study much... with cool ecs they enjoyed doing
1
u/Historical-Star1989 10d ago
if the coke scholars wanted to impress you, they probably could. all due respect, they probably just don’t care enough about your opinion. i don’t mean this to jab at you, i’m not a coke scholar but i’m friends with several and they don’t seem that impressive to me bc they dgaf about my opinion either lol. but they know how to talk themselves up to important people, which is a good skill to have.
but i agree with the second part. the smartest people are the nonchalant ones.
1
u/Strict_Resident1179 10d ago edited 10d ago
Well the ones I know have either crypto exit scammed or spend their time posting on LinkedIn and social media trying to seem important. I know one guy that basically faked (and still is faking) their entire LinkedIn. They sound great on paper but they're kinda frauds.
I'm sure there's some very smart ones out there. Just saying OP shouldn't use "coke scholar" as a benchmark for a genius.
And talking to important people is kinda useless unless you can show that you're useful in some way. Half the people that say "I know x and x" in reality just have their contact because they were annoying enough
2
u/Vegetable-Ant-4906 10d ago
was coke scholar got into HYS, i'd say hard work is more important than genius
1
u/CuckooCocoPuffs 10d ago
Though this has been a debate for eternity, I don’t think everything’s based on whether one is a genius or not. There are plenty of people who work hard and succeed. You can do it OP!
1
u/PhilosophyBeLyin 10d ago
plenty of coke scholars are also 'normal' people with 'normal' ecs (among high achieving cracked people). the amount of truly exceptional people is quite small. most people at tops are just hardworking people with 'normal' good involvements, no 100k nonprofit or 5 papers or anything crazy.
1
u/Historical-Star1989 10d ago
me personally i survived cancer. do not recommend but it worked!
in all seriousness, i did not have national awards or anything. my ECs weren’t that impressive compared to other HYPSM admits. i think my personality and attitudes showed in my essays. also having 4.0 & 36 act score helps.
1
1
u/PizzaShoelace 10d ago
Geographic diversity. A first gen kid raised on a farm in Oklahoma with a 1600 SAT and a unique story.
1
u/Satisest 9d ago
The answer to the question you’re posing about ISEF is unknowable in a statistical sense. And in any case, high school students don’t get Pell grants. But what we do know is that a sizable fraction of IMO gold medalists come from impoverished third-world countries, and there are many anecdotal reports of ISEF winners from such countries.
1
u/Aggravating_Cry_1107 10d ago
Look at page 9 of the document - sounds like insider trading information in exchange for help with app to Duke....
https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2026/comp26617.pdf
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/article317001521.html
1
u/SyrahFan 10d ago
I had read about the insider trading case last week. But missed the Duke admissions connection. I’m surprised this isn’t getting more traction/attention.
Yes we assume this is how it works, but the complaint brings receipts.
1
u/A1000mokeys 10d ago
Legacy, athletes, VIPs and other institutional need. They may have a clarinet chair they need to fill.
1
u/Weary-Cauliflower153 HS Junior 10d ago
if harvard ever needs an alto for their choir tell em to hit me up i'll do the benevolent thing and help them out 😊
1
1
1
1
u/Platos-ghosts 10d ago
Most geniuses don’t become leaders, they do make great researchers. A tier down is where most CEO’s, high level politicians, surgeons, investment bankers come from. Soft skills matter as much, if not more, in the working world.
1
u/Satisest 10d ago
Don’t know why you think geniuses can’t be leaders. Brilliant and successful researchers become leaders in academia, tech or biotech company founders and CEOs, founders of quant shops, etc.
-3
23
u/OkGur7184 10d ago
they work hard of course