keg411 wrote:Wholigan wrote:Ty Webb wrote:Wholigan wrote:I apologize if this was already asked, but what can you say about the undergrad prestige of your transfer class? I am getting the sense that transfer applications are much more "holistic" than the regular application cycle and I wonder how much stock they put into having attended an elite undergrad?
I'm not sure any of this is true.
Maybe... but how else would you explain the seemingly well-documented "randomness" of the transfer cycle, e.g. people regularly getting accepted at higher ranked schools and rejected at lower ones? Don't you think they are putting more emphasis on softs than we are used to with the regular cycle? Or are they just throwing darts?
I think these are the primary reasons based on things I've read in the past:
1) Raw GPA's. Some people are in the top 5% with a 3.5 and some people are in the top 10% with a 3.8. There seems to be a pure advantage to have a high numerical GPA, especially when a number of schools don't really rank or have confusing ranking systems or cut-offs.
2) Location. T14's have certain "feeder" schools and are more likely to take someone from the area then outside of the area. Also, if a school has taken other transfers from your school, it's usually a plus.
3) The PS sales job. They don't just want to know why you want to go to transfer, they want to know why you specifically want to transfer to their school, and moreso, what can you bring that they don't already have.
4) When you apply. Like in the regular application cycle, the earlier, the better.
I'm guessing they put very little emphasis on UG, WE, etc.
Interesting. I haven't seen the raw GPA theory before, but it seems reasonable. Vanwinkle strongly believes H is looking for WE in their transfers, and I'm sure I have seen some banter somewhere about the same for NU, just like with their first year cycle. I was hoping that would help me elsewhere, since one of those I'm not too interested in and the other is an extraordinary reach.