[stupac2]

Good points, stupac2, but if we are primarily an academic institution, should we not give additional consideration to applicants who might become serioulsy good academics, over people who are not quite as smart but much more clubbable?

I don't know, it really depends on what you think the point of the institution should be. It's not like Stanford is full of academic lightweights, as Mick pointed out that SAT score isn't even particularly high for Stanford. But if you want to get into Stanford by being an excellent student and only an excellent student, you're going to have to be ridiculously excellent. And I don't think I knew a single person who got in that way, everyone had other things that they did to make them stand out.

I think of it this way, if you admit people are solely focused on academics then you'll basically get some kind of monastery. I don't think anyone wants that (at least any more, it's entirely possible that there are members of this board old enough to remember when that would've been more-or-less the goal, though I think that had died out even in the 50's). So you want people who try and excel in other things to foster a more interesting institution.

PS--I wasn't talking about Berkeley in my previous post, but Pasadena (CalTech).

This is why I fucking hate the autocorrect. I couldn't see past "Low APR U" to the Tech and missed your point entirely.

[stupac2]

Good points, stupac2, but if we are primarily an academic institution, should we not give additional consideration to applicants who might become serioulsy good academics, over people who are not quite as smart but much more clubbable?

I don't know, it really depends on what you think the point of the institution should be. It's not like Stanford is full of academic lightweights, as Mick pointed out that SAT score isn't even particularly high for Stanford. But if you want to get into Stanford by being an excellent student and only an excellent student, you're going to have to be ridiculously excellent. And I don't think I knew a single person who got in that way, everyone had other things that they did to make them stand out.

I think of it this way, if you admit people are solely focused on academics then you'll basically get some kind of monastery. I don't think anyone wants that (at least any more, it's entirely possible that there are members of this board old enough to remember when that would've been more-or-less the goal, though I think that had died out even in the 50's). So you want people who try and excel in other things to foster a more interesting institution.

PS--I wasn't talking about Berkeley in my previous post, but Pasadena (CalTech).

This is why I fucking hate the autocorrect. I couldn't see past "Low APR U" to the Tech and missed your point entirely.