[#permalink]
11 Oct 2004, 13:43
Well put, Hjort! You make a very convincing argument.
It only makes sense to apply to schools that you would be willing to attend. As such, it appears to be increasingly important to be able to determine, with a fair degree of accuracy, the class of schools you will have the best chance of being accepted to, given your educational profile (GMAT, GPA, SOP, etc...).
In the case of Law, Medical or MBA programs this is fairly simple. If your statistics meet some minimum threshold for a particular tier of schools, you need only apply to enough of those schools and you will have a strong chance of being accepted to at least one. This is much more difficult in the case of PhD programs. While it is safe to say that there is a minimum acceptable threshold that must be met in order for a student to be considered for admission, simply meeting this threshold provides no guarantee of acceptance, regardless of the number of programs you apply to. There simply aren't enough spots to accommodate all of the students that are "qualified". Ultimately, it seems like the process is driven by more idiosyncratic factors.
We all know that Adcomms want applicants with high test scores, strong academic records, exposure to academic research, etc... Are there other, non-traditional, factors exist that may have the ability to distinguish an applicant? If so, are there any thoughts as to what these factors may be?