Why Stanford REJECTED me, the "perfect" student

Summary

In this candid reflection, Amy discusses her Stanford rejection despite having a stellar academic record, including a 4.8 GPA and a 35 ACT score. She identifies three main reasons for the rejection: lack of entrepreneurial initiative, being too unfocused with her extracurriculars, and failing to effectively convey her personal values in her essays. Amy also touches on the possibility of ethnicity playing a role in her rejection. Ultimately, she advises future applicants to demonstrate passion through depth, entrepreneurial spirit, and a clear narrative that ties their personal experiences to their academic and career goals.

Takeaways

• 😀 Despite a stellar academic record (4.8 GPA, 35 ACT, 11 AP exam fives), the speaker was rejected from Stanford University.
• 😀 The speaker reflects on the possibility that Stanford may have valued entrepreneurial spirit more than academic excellence alone.
• 😀 The speaker identifies three key reasons for the rejection: lack of entrepreneurial initiative, being too unfocused, and a weak personal narrative.
• 😀 The speaker's application, despite strong achievements, lacked entrepreneurial ventures like creating apps or startups that Stanford might have valued.
• 😀 The speaker's activities, while extensive, lacked depth in any single area, which may have conveyed a lack of focus or commitment.
• 😀 Although the speaker excelled in a variety of activities (math, sports, community service), there was no clear overarching passion or focus.
• 😀 The personal essays didn’t convey strong personal values or a compelling narrative about why the speaker wanted to make a difference in the world.
• 😀 The speaker believes their essays could have been stronger if they had shared personal stories of overcoming challenges to demonstrate resilience and purpose.
• 😀 There is a sense of racial profiling at play, with the speaker reflecting on the stereotype of the high-achieving Asian student potentially working against them.
• 😀 Stanford’s focus on fostering future innovators and leaders may have led them to pass on candidates who appeared too academically conventional without an entrepreneurial mindset.
• 😀 The speaker ultimately feels that the rejection was part of a broader context of competitive college admissions, where even highly qualified applicants may face rejection for reasons beyond academic achievement.

Q & A

What were the applicant's academic achievements highlighted in the video?

The applicant highlighted a 4.8 GPA (weighted), a composite ACT score of 35, and fives on 11 AP exams. They were also valedictorian and a national merit semifinalist, showcasing strong academic performance.

How did the applicant's extracurricular activities contribute to their application?

The applicant was involved in various leadership roles, including being president of Mu Alpha Theta, captain of the varsity tennis team, and a member of the National Honor Society. They also volunteered and participated in math and science competitions, indicating strong engagement outside academics.

What was the applicant's approach to their personal essay and short answer questions?

In the personal essay, the applicant discussed their passion for discovery and technological advances, linking these values to their interest in STEM. They also tried to provide unique and creative answers to the short answer questions, though they reflected on whether they could have presented a clearer picture of their true self.

Why does the applicant believe they were not admitted to Stanford?

The applicant identifies three main reasons: a lack of entrepreneurial spirit, being unfocused with their activities and interests, and insufficiently showcasing strong personal values in their essays.

What does the applicant mean by 'not entrepreneurial enough'?

The applicant feels they did not demonstrate enough entrepreneurial initiative throughout high school. While they created a math tutoring program in their senior year, they believe it was not early or sustained enough to convey the kind of entrepreneurial spirit that Stanford values.

What did the applicant feel was lacking in their extracurricular activities?

The applicant felt that while they had a broad range of activities, they lacked deep commitment to any one area. Their involvement in tennis, key clubs, and math, among others, appeared unfocused and did not highlight a singular passion or long-term commitment.

How did the applicant describe their leadership roles?

The applicant held several leadership positions, such as being president of Mu Alpha Theta and captain of the varsity tennis team. However, they noted that many of these roles were within established organizations, which might have lacked the entrepreneurial edge that Stanford looks for.

How did the applicant's essays impact their Stanford application?

The applicant acknowledges that their essays did not adequately highlight their personal values and character. They mentioned that their essay focused on their passion for math and STEM but did not explicitly connect these passions to their desire to create meaningful change.

What personal challenge did the applicant identify in the video that could have helped their application?

The applicant mentioned that their personal struggles in the first few years of life could have made their application more compelling, as it would have helped contextualize their desire to help others and create positive change through STEM.

What does the applicant speculate about the role of ethnicity in their rejection?

The applicant speculates that their ethnicity, being Asian, might have played a role in the rejection due to the stereotype of Asian applicants being academically focused without much extracurricular or entrepreneurial initiative. They reference a documentary discussing racial profiling in college admissions but emphasize that this is just one of several factors.