How selective is AIM and what is a good GPA to apply with.

It’s certainly a great program and something you’d want to try to do, but anyone will tell you it has little bearing on actual academy acceptance. I think in a typical admissions cycle roughly 50-55% were AIM attendees. So that means roughly half were not.

You’ll hear just as many examples of kids who got into AIM and didn’t get appointments as kids who didn’t get into AIM and still got appointments. You’ll have a chance to do a PFE that you can choose to use on your application (or not). They also do an evaluation of each AIMster which will go in your admissions file. If you perform well, it certainly can’t hurt, but that’s one tiny piece.

The best part about AIM is it gives you the chance to see a small glimpse into what swab summer is actually like and for many it seals the deal on whether or not they want to pursue the CGA. It’s not as tough as swab summer, but fairly realistic. My daughter did it in 2022. Her platoon started with like 35 kids and by the end of the week there were only like 26 or 27 remaining. Several were already gone when they went out for formation in the morning after the first night. That’s definitely a better time to realize you don’t like it than actually going through the application/enrollment process!
 
It does not 'add' to your whole person score as you go through the application process. However, I tell my students that there are a number of advantages that an AIMster (and other summer seminar attendees) will have. First, you get to 'see' the place and gain a very good understanding of the life of a cadet. Meet the staff, eat in the dining hall, and stay in the dormitories. Second, in your application essays and potential interviews, you can note your experience and your confirmation of this path to commissioning and serving. All of the SAs want to confirm that a candidate 'truly' knows what s/he is getting into and the career s/he is choosing. Attending AIM will help with this confirmation. Third, you may take the PFE (or CFA for the other seminars, except AF) so that is one less item to accomplish if you arrive in good shape.

In your title, you asked about GPA. Answer is the higher, the better. For most students, all you can do is work to raise it over the next few quarters prior to sending your transcripts to the SA during the application process. You may find the incoming class statistics to help guide you.

I've had a number of students head to AIM -- all enjoyed it and worked very hard when they were there.

I see another response as I write this one, so I hope it is not too redundant! Best of luck with you AIM application.
 
Your title also asks about how selective AIM is. There are always way more qualified applicants than they can accept. However, if you aren't accepted for AIM, that does not automatically mean you wouldn't be selected to attend CGA. I don't know the specific selection process for AIM, but there are many people turned down for AIM (or who just don't apply or who couldn't attend) who get accepted to CGA.
 
ProudMom7 said:
Your title also asks about how selective AIM is. There are always way more qualified applicants than they can accept. However, if you aren't accepted for AIM, that does not automatically mean you wouldn't be selected to attend CGA. I don't know the specific selection process for AIM, but there are many people turned down for AIM (or who just don't apply or who couldn't attend) who get accepted to CGA.
Click to expand...
That seems counterintuitive from an outsider perspective. AIM acceptance is roughly double the academy rate. While a student could improve their application between AIM and full admissions deadlines it seems implausible that someone unable to stand out enough for a 30% acceptance rate could improve enough in under a year to stand out enough make the cut on a 15% acceptance rate to the same place.

If anyone can explain why that reasoning is wrong I'd love to hear it.

It makes total sense how those that never applied to AIM could still get in.
 
Northwoods said:
That seems counterintuitive from an outsider perspective. AIM acceptance is roughly double the academy rate. While a student could improve their application between AIM and full admissions deadlines it seems implausible that someone unable to stand out enough for a 30% acceptance rate could improve enough in under a year to stand out enough make the cut on a 15% acceptance rate to the same place.

If anyone can explain why that reasoning is wrong I'd love to hear it.

It makes total sense how those that never applied to AIM could still get in.
Click to expand...
Summer programs have a bit of a different intent than admissions round. They are mainly a marketing outreach tool....i.e. someone who has "always wanted to go to USCGA" and is going to apply regardless of AIM could conceivably not be accepted to AIM in lieu of someone from an underrepresented area of the country. Admissions is more about putting together a class of best available candidates (with geographic representation, etc).
 
Northwoods said:
That seems counterintuitive from an outsider perspective. AIM acceptance is roughly double the academy rate. While a student could improve their application between AIM and full admissions deadlines it seems implausible that someone unable to stand out enough for a 30% acceptance rate could improve enough in under a year to stand out enough make the cut on a 15% acceptance rate to the same place.

If anyone can explain why that reasoning is wrong I'd love to hear it.

It makes total sense how those that never applied to AIM could still get in.
Click to expand...
Geography. For some kids it is their one and only chance to see USCGA in person. Think West Coast, Midwest, Gulf. And USGCA wants cadets from those areas (all areas), as the Academy has a high percentage of cadets from the Northeast region. Regardless of whether they ever become swabs, they can pass the word to others in their area about their impressions.
 
Northwoods said:
That seems counterintuitive from an outsider perspective. AIM acceptance is roughly double the academy rate. While a student could improve their application between AIM and full admissions deadlines it seems implausible that someone unable to stand out enough for a 30% acceptance rate could improve enough in under a year to stand out enough make the cut on a 15% acceptance rate to the same place.

If anyone can explain why that reasoning is wrong I'd love to hear it.

It makes total sense how those that never applied to AIM could still get in.
Click to expand...
My cadet was not accepted to AIM (he was waitlisted but never pulled from the waitlist). There was not a virtual option when he applied. He was accepted EA. We come from an area that sends a lot of students to service academies, and he comes from a military family. Despite not being accepted to AIM, he took the opportunity to go up and visit during cadet for a day, and continued to show interest. To me it makes more sense to invite students who really don't have any idea what they are getting into or from underrepresented areas, so they can be better informed as to whether it is is good fit for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top