Any Current Mids/Recent Appointees Willing to Share?

U

USNA17

5-Year Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2010
Messages
11
Hello all, I know the Naval Academy provides a class profile for every incoming class, but I was wondering if any current mids or recent appointees would be willing to share just their basic stats, like gpa/sat's/significant ec's/leadership positions? I am not even sure if the moderators would allow for this, but I am sure that the cold hard stats of those that were offered appointments would be a great deal of help for those candidates/future candidates looking for ways to improve. Also, if any you would be willing to share some of the other top schools they were offered admission too with the ROTC option would be so helpful.
Thanks in advance,
Matt
 
I'll jump in here USNA 17......If you peruse these forums or search "SAT," etc, you will find some stats. However, I don't think that will really be all that useful. There is a lot to your application package that cannot be expressed by "stats."

I have seen kids on here with 34 ACT, Eagle Scout, walks on water and no appointment. Conversely, kids with 27 ACT, Eagle Scout, etc.......and scored an appointment.

The teacher recs, BGO interview, extracurriculars, leadership.......those very important things are not described in the stats you seek. Not to mention that some areas of the country are naturally more competitive than others.

If you are applying for class of 2017, the class profile numbers are plenty of information for you. Those cold, hard stats are only a part of the package.

And, ALWAYS, the answer to "should I retake the SAT, ACT, CFA, etc" is "IT DEPENDS"......do you think you can improve? Keep in mind that two candidates with identical packages, great scores, etc.....but one of them decides to re-take CFA, ACT, whatever and improves. Guess who will score the appt?

Put together your best application possible. If you are below the posted class profiles in the "stats", you know you have work to do. If you are well above, well, then you are within range FOR THAT PART OF THE APPLICATION.
No guaranteed appt with off the chart "stats." Not at all.
 
I see, thank you for the clarification. You are totally right about the things you talked about, and thus I will just work on creating a full package complete with all the things you discussed. Thank you!
 
Search around on these forums for this information. There are many appointment, LOA, and nomination threads where candidates/appointees willingly stated their resumes.
 
As a BGO, I have to agree with JennyP above. I could quote you stats of candidates who were NOT admitted that would set you back on your heels. Conversely, candidates with "lesser" stats are right now doing very well at USNA.

Stats are part of the process but not the only part.
 
1985's and jenny's observation is valuable insight, and implicitly lends direction to what candidates can be doing early and often to enhance their possibilities of landing an appointment.

And what it also says beyond the reality that candidates with lesser stats can succeed is the implication there that there are many, make that MANY who are worthy candidates and do not receive appointments, who would undoubtedly do equally well or even perform better, who never get there. Some for reasons beyond their control, some for failing to do those things they might have in timely ways.

One specific thought that can be a make/break contributor and that may or may not be w/in the purview of candidates.


Teacher recommendations. This is tough because the Academy directs the specific teachers in math and English who should provide these. There may be and are exceptions, but generally not. And this is confounded because a great many teachers, even good ones, have neither the understanding of the potential importance and weight of their role, the knowledge and/or writing skills to provide a substantive letter of specific, insightful, and indepth letter of recommendation, nor maybe the time or commitment to learning and considering the strengths and capabilities of the candidate and putting it down on paper.

So there's the potential problem/issue that may or may not be a game-breaker/maker. What to do? That's a situation specific issue, but really merits some time, attention, providing a thorough briefing, request, and information starting with a very well done resume. Do not assume they know. Either about the importance and that this is not the same as writing that letter to Michigan or Bowling Green or Slippery Rock. And it's not. But many fail to even get this foundational point.

My point in mentioning this specific is that I'm convinced it's often not given its due, and has the potential to really bring a candidate to life and light for USNA admission officers and boards. And with some genuine effort, thought, and attention, may make a big diff.
 
Stats does not maketh a MID

The statistics on the appointment process is akin to trying to predict the next winning lottery numbers by knowing the previous winning numbers. Although given enough data and the Bell Curve eventually forms, as my previous fellow posters have reiterated, rarely predicts the outcome of this process.

Or maybe with the help of Professor Eppes (Numb3rs) he can factor in the time of day, phase of the moon, tides, alignment of the planets, etc., etc., etc. IOW...stick to what you have...review it...improve it...and when you think it is perfect...go look at it again. Never be satisfied if at all possible and stop comparing yourself to others. You do not decide who goes in or out so why bother comparing. However you decide when enough is enough...

A great man once said...If you can do something about it, why worry? If you cannot do something about it, why worry?:cool:

GO NAVY! BEAT ARMY!
 
Worry is perfect ...for those who CAN do something about it, and don't. And they know they didn't.

So in a weird sort of way, an Acadamy education is simply about developing non-worrying leaders who know when to worry-in-advance of when they might otherwise be worried. That their troops won't have to worry.

No, the stats will not dictate one single assurance of either heads or tails. But it will be able to enlighten and guide toward knowing how many flips are necessary toward raising the odds and betting with confidence on the outcomes.
 
Maybe the most useful conclusion candidates or future candidates can gain from the stats comes in the situation where they find themselves somewhat below the averages, successful, etc. Then, with time (which USNA17 may well have if I have assumed correctly....) they may be sufficiently motivated to get their own "stats" up.......other than that, as I stated before, knowing successful candidates stats provides absolutely no reassurance to would be candidates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top