Detailed Briefing: "Dream Big, But Apply Smart - Finding the Right Balance in Your College List" by IvyCompass
"详细说明：《勇敢追梦，理性择校——如何科学规划你的大学申请名单》 by IvyCompass"
This briefing synthesizes the key themes, most important ideas, and facts from the IvyCompass seminar "Dream Big, But Apply Smart - Finding the Right Balance in Your College List," delivered by "Professor An." The seminar focuses on strategic college list creation, emphasizing a balanced approach over simply targeting "brand name" schools.
本简报提炼了安教授在 IvyCompass 研讨会《大胆追梦，理性择校——如何平衡你的大学申请名单》中的核心观点与关键信息。该研讨会重点探讨大学申请名单的战略制定，倡导采取科学平衡的择校策略，而非盲目追求"名校光环"。
I. The Core Philosophy: "Dream Big, But Apply Smart" & Finding the Right Balance
核心理念："敢于追梦，理性申请"——寻找最佳平衡点
The central message of the seminar is to "Dream Big, But Apply Smart" (07:09). Professor An stresses that creating a college list is a "very specific and personal exercise" (07:47) that goes beyond simply looking at rankings or brand names.
本次研讨会的核心理念是"志存高远，理性申请"(07:09)。安教授特别指出，选校清单的制定是"高度个性化且需要量身定制"(07:47)的过程，绝不能仅凭大学排名或知名度来决定。
The true purpose of the seminar is "finding the right balance" (08:08) for each individual student, rather than a generic approach (08:24). Success is defined as "getting in to where you want to go" (08:48).
研讨会的核心在于为每位学生"找到最适合的平衡点"(08:08)，而非采用千篇一律的方式(08:24)。成功的标准在于"进入心仪的院校"(08:48)。
II. Sources of Information for College Research
大学调研的信息渠道
Professor An outlines various sources for college information, categorizing them by their utility and recommending caution:
安教授系统梳理了大学信息的各类获取渠道，按照实用价值进行分类并提示需审慎参考：
Reliable Free Databases:
可靠免费数据库资源：
US News and World Report: Considered the "most common globally expected and reliable free database or website on the internet" (09:11).
"《美国新闻与世界报道》：被公认为“互联网上最常用、全球认可且值得信赖的免费数据库/网站”（09:11）。"
Guides (with Caution):
"指导手册（使用时需谨慎）："
Fisk, The College Board (administers SAT/ACT/AP exams), Princeton Review (10:13).
菲斯克大学、大学理事会（SAT/ACT/AP 考试主办机构）、普林斯顿评论（10:13）。
Caution: Guides are helpful but may push towards specific types of colleges (e.g., engineering, business) or undergraduate/graduate focus. They "should be used with a little bit of caution" (09:36).
需注意：选校指南虽有参考价值，但可能过度推荐特定类型院校（如工科、商科）或侧重本科/研究生教育。"建议结合自身情况审慎参考"（09:36）。
Dean's Books:
院长推荐书目：
Written by retired or current deans (admissions, academics). They are "fine," and "good sources," but primary sources are generally better (10:36).
这些内容由退休或在职的教务院长（分管招生或学术）撰写。虽然这些来源"尚可"且"具有参考价值"，但通常来说一手资料更为可靠（10:36）。
Primary Sources (Best):
最佳原始资料：
Actual Students: Ask current students, friends, and family. Utilize YouTube videos where students share their experiences (11:16). This source is "overlooked, but also sometimes misused" (11:16).
"真实在校生：向在读学生、亲友了解情况。可观看 YouTube 上学生分享的校园体验视频（11:16）。该渠道'容易被忽视，但使用不当也会产生误导'（11:16）。"
School Websites & Representatives: While providing factual information, understand that it's from "the perspective of the school" (11:36).
"学校官网及招生代表：虽然提供的信息属实，但需注意这些内容都带有'校方立场'（11:36）。"
School representatives are considered "even more than a primary, like a student who's actually there, but representative of the school" (12:28).
"学校代表被视为'比在校生更具代表性，能充分体现学校特质'（12:28）。"
Campus Visits: While generally not affecting admission chances, it's recommended to go "a little bit away from the tour" (13:06) and experience the school in its "natural state," like visiting libraries, student centers, having lunch with students, or attending events (13:06-13:59).
"校园参观：虽然一般不影响录取结果，但建议'适当脱离常规参观路线'（13:06），亲身感受校园的'日常氛围'，例如走访图书馆、学生活动中心、与学生共进午餐或参与校园活动（13:06-13:59）。"
Other Sources (Use with Caution):
其他信息来源（使用时需谨慎）：
Professor An advises caution against "success bias" (14:42), where one might find information to confirm a preconceived notion, like wanting to go to MIT despite not being strongly STEM-focused (14:42). "Use your own judgment" (15:09).
安教授提醒需警惕"成功偏见"现象（14:42）——人们往往会搜集支持固有想法的信息，例如非 STEM 方向学生盲目追求麻省理工（14:42）。他强调"要自主判断"（15:09）。
III. Due Diligence and Speculation: Beyond Current Perceptions
"第三部分：深入调研与合理推测——突破表象认知"
Professor An emphasizes the importance of thorough research and forward-thinking:
安教授着重指出，深入调研和前瞻思考至关重要：
Due Diligence (All Information):
全面尽职调查（所有信息）：
Means "looking at all the information, even things that you may not be that interested in" (15:27).
"意为'全面审视所有信息，即使是对你吸引力不大的内容也要关注'（15:27）。"
Cost: Often overlooked by students but crucial for parents (15:27).
费用问题：学生常会忽略，但对家长而言却至关重要（15 分 27 秒）。
Location: Can affect student life (15:27, 27:17). Professor An notes that some perceived "dream" locations like Princeton, New Haven, or West Philadelphia (UPenn) might not meet expectations upon visiting (27:17).
"地理位置：直接影响校园生活体验（视频 15:27，27:17 处）。安教授特别提醒，像普林斯顿、纽黑文（耶鲁所在地）或宾大所在的西费城区这类被过度美化的'理想校址'，实际探访后往往与想象存在落差（见视频 27:17）。"
Credibility of Source: Be aware of potential biases from alumni or transfer students (15:59).
信息来源可信度：需警惕校友或转学生可能带有的主观倾向（15 分 59 秒）。
In-Process Factors: Colleges are dynamic, constantly changing. This includes new departments, building construction, library modernization, new partnerships (e.g., NYU in Saudi Arabia, Harvard in China, MIT with hospitals), and community involvement (16:18-18:25).
"动态因素：高校始终处于发展变化中。具体表现为新增院系、校区建设、图书馆升级、新型合作项目（如纽约大学沙特分校、哈佛中国中心、麻省理工与医疗机构的合作）以及社区参与度变化（视频 16 分 18 秒至 18 分 25 秒处）。"
Emphasized dynamic nature: "These days, colleges are so much more than just a place where you go study, get a degree, graduate, and leave, okay? So they're much more dynamic" (16:47).
"重点突出了动态特性：'现在的大学早已不只是读书拿文凭的地方了，懂吗？它们变得更加灵活多元了'（16 分 47 秒）。"
Speculation (Future Direction):
前瞻性推测（发展方向）：
Consider the future direction of the school based on rhetoric on websites, dean videos, and speaking with alumni (18:25-18:53).
通过浏览学校官网宣传内容、观看院长视频访谈及与校友交流，了解该校未来发展方向（18:25-18:53）。
Interviews: Good opportunity to ask about the school's future, especially for dynamic fields like STEM (18:53, 19:23). Some schools, like Georgetown, automatically offer interviews upon linking your Common App (19:06).
面试环节是了解学校未来发展的良机，尤其适合咨询 STEM 等快速发展的领域（时间点 18:53, 19:23）。部分院校（例如乔治城大学）在关联 Common App 申请系统后，会主动为学生安排面试（时间点 19:06）。
IV. Criteria for Building a Balanced College List
IV. 制定均衡选校名单的标准
Professor An outlines universal and unique criteria:
安教授阐述了通用标准与个性化标准：
Universal Criteria:
通用标准:
College Type: Specialized lists for fine/performing arts (Barnard, Juilliard, Curtis Institute, Parsons School of Design, RISD) or visual arts (21:04).
院校类型：美术/表演艺术类院校专项名单（含巴纳德学院、茱莉亚音乐学院、柯蒂斯音乐学院、帕森斯设计学院、罗德岛设计学院等）及视觉艺术类院校（21:04 时段提及）。
Scholarship Opportunities: Athletic and non-athletic (21:49).
"奖学金机会：体育类与非体育类（21 分 49 秒）。"
Brand Name: While many focus solely on top names (e.g., "Harvard and other" 22:44), Professor An encourages expanding horizons beyond the Ivy League to "lower tier or second tier schools" like Johns Hopkins, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, Rice, which are equally valuable depending on the student's purpose (22:50-23:36).
名校情结：针对多数人只盯着顶尖名校（如"哈佛等校"22:44）的现象，An 教授建议拓宽选校视野——像约翰霍普金斯、杜克、芝加哥大学、西北大学、莱斯这些"非顶尖梯队"的学校，只要符合学生发展需求，其价值完全不逊于常春藤盟校（22:50-23:36）。
Cost: "Cost is often a factor" (25:27). Scholarships can make state schools a better financial and strategic choice, especially if the goal is graduate school (25:27-26:22).
"费用问题：'学费往往是重要考量因素'（25:27）。若能获得奖学金，州立大学无论在财务规划还是升学策略上都更具优势，尤其对于计划攻读研究生的学生而言（25:27-26:22）。"
Subsequent Paths/Graduate School Goals: If the undergraduate degree is not the "stopping point," the college list should reflect long-term goals (24:58).
后续规划/研究生目标：若本科学历并非终点，选校清单需与长期目标相匹配（24:58）。
There's no particular added advantage to attending a highly-ranked undergraduate school for admission to top graduate programs like Wharton MBA or Yale Medical School (24:23-24:58).
本科就读名校(如沃顿商学院 MBA 或耶鲁医学院等顶尖研究生项目)并不会为申请带来特别的加分优势(24:23-24:58)。
Location: Can influence student life (27:17).
地理位置：会对学生的校园生活产生影响（27 分 17 秒）。
Size: Varies significantly (e.g., UT Austin with 250 students in an elective vs. Emory with 40-student classes) (28:21).
班级规模差异较大（例如：德州大学奥斯汀分校的选修课可达 250 人，而埃默里大学则保持 40 人小班教学）(28:21)。
Unique/Personal Criteria:
个性化考量标准：
Personal Preferences: "your own personal preferences" (27:58). This can include demographics (e.g., UC Irvine's large Asian population, 27:58).
个人偏好："你自身的偏好"（27:58）。可涵盖人口结构因素（如加州大学欧文分校亚裔学生比例较高，27:58）。
Priority & Change Over Time: Acknowledge that priorities may change. While rankings and name recognition might seem important now, their significance often diminishes as one advances in their career (31:51-32:46).
优先级会随时间改变：要认识到个人优先级可能发生变化。尽管院校排名和知名度当前看似重要，但随着职业发展深入，这些因素的重要性通常会逐渐降低（31:51-32:46）。
V. Assessing and Evaluating Criteria for the Right Balance
V. 评估与筛选标准的合理平衡
Assessment Tools:
测评工具：
Rankings: US News, Wall Street Journal, NYT, London Financial Times (29:18).
排名榜单：《美国新闻与世界报道》、《华尔街日报》、《纽约时报》、《伦敦金融时报》（29 分 18 秒处）。
Acceptance Rates: Be wary of artificially inflated application numbers by some colleges to appear more selective. Ivy League acceptance rates are genuinely competitive (4.5-5%) (29:41).
录取率需谨慎：部分院校会虚报申请人数以营造高选拔性假象。常春藤盟校的实际录取率确实极低（4.5-5%），竞争异常激烈（29:41）。
Awards and Recognition: Self-explanatory (30:17).
奖项与荣誉：无需赘述（30 分 17 秒处）。
Subsequent Paths (Post-Graduation): Where do graduates go (e.g., NYU business to NYC, London, HK; Johns Hopkins to research/medicine/government; Caltech 75% to PhDs) (30:22). This is a crucial "way for you to measure" (30:59).
"毕业去向（毕业后发展）：例如纽约大学商学院学生多前往纽约、伦敦、香港工作；约翰霍普金斯大学毕业生多进入科研、医疗或政府机构；加州理工学院 75%毕业生选择攻读博士学位（视频 30:22 处）。这是评估学校的重要指标（视频 30:59 处强调）。"
Breadth and Depth: Assessments should be broad and deep, considering all factors like major distribution, gender balance, and demographics (31:04-32:46).
"评估需兼顾广度与深度：应综合考虑专业分布、性别比例、人口结构等所有相关因素（31:04-32:46）。"
Evaluation Methods:
评估方式：
Objective Ways: Starting salary post-graduation (33:28).
客观衡量标准：毕业生起薪水平（视频 33 分 28 秒处）。
Career Momentum vs.
职业发展动力与
"Upside Down": Evaluate if accepting a scholarship at a state school might provide better "momentum" for future goals (e.g., medical school) than accumulating debt at a highly-ranked undergraduate school, especially if it doesn't lead to an equally competitive graduate program (33:40-35:06).
"逆向思维": 权衡接受州立大学奖学金(为未来目标如医学院提供更好发展势能)与就读高排名本科院校(可能导致债务累积但研究生阶段未必具备同等竞争力)的利弊(33:40-35:06)。
Cost-Benefit and Lifelong Benefit: Consider the long-term advantages, particularly the network and resources available at a university, which can extend globally (e.g., Wharton Club of London, Ivy League Association of Manhattan) (35:06-36:38).
成本效益与终身价值：考量大学的长期优势，尤其是其全球化的校友网络和资源（如伦敦沃顿商学院校友会、曼哈顿常春藤联盟协会等）（35:06-36:38）。
This is a "very personal" and "subjective" aspect (35:14). If a school is purely vocational, its "use" might end after graduation (36:38).
这是极具"个人色彩"和"主观性"的考量(35:14)。若学校仅提供职业培训，其"价值"可能毕业后就所剩无几了(36:38)。
VI. Compiling the Final College List: Practical Considerations
"第六部分：确定最终申请院校清单的实用考量"
"It's My Life": Professor An strongly emphasizes student ownership of the college application process, telling students, "it's your life" (37:47, 47:15).
"《It's My Life》：安教授特别强调大学申请应当由学生自主决策，反复提醒学生'这是你自己的人生'（37:47，47:15）。"
The college choice has broad, long-term implications for career, marriage, where one lives, and even where future children attend college (38:03).
大学的选择将深远影响个人职业发展、婚姻生活、定居地点，甚至子女未来的教育路径（38:03）。
One College at a Time: Students can only attend one college at a time (38:57).
择校唯一性：同一时间学生只能选择就读一所大学（38 分 57 秒）。
Transferring: Consider transferring as a strategy, especially if the "dream college" is initially out of reach (38:57-41:12). Professor An works with transfer students at three levels: transferring out, transferring in, and approving transfer credits (39:24-40:18).
"转学策略：若心仪大学暂时难以申请，可将转学作为备选方案（38:57-41:12）。An 教授负责三类转学生事务：转出审核、转入评估及学分转换认证（39:24-40:18）。"
Practicality of List Length: While a student once applied to 29 colleges, this is not recommended (41:12). The average is 10-15 schools (01:14:05). Students must be realistic about the time and effort they can dedicate to applications (41:12).
选校清单的合理长度：虽然曾有学生申请过 29 所大学，但这种方式并不值得提倡（41:12）。通常建议申请 10-15 所学校为宜（01:14:05）。学生需要根据自身实际情况，合理评估可投入申请的时间和精力（41:12）。
Common Mistake: Generic Applications: Admissions committees can detect generic applications, especially in essays and interviews (42:01).
常见误区：千篇一律的申请材料：招生官能轻易识别模板化的申请材料，尤其在文书和面试环节（42 分 01 秒）。
It's crucial for applicants to "uniquely answer the essay and the interview questions and portray yourself as someone who really understands what each of those schools, stands for and then why you uniquely want to go to them" (42:56).
"申请者需要'在文书和面试中给出独特回答，展现出你真正理解每所学校的核心价值，并阐明为何你与该校特别契合'（42:56）。"
A common essay question is "Why us?" which requires a unique answer (43:34).
常见的文书题目是"为什么选择我们？"，这类问题需要给出独特见解(43:34)。
Prioritize Best Application: "Always put your best application forward regardless of the timing" (01:07:01). Do not apply early if it compromises the quality of your application (01:07:01).
"务必以最佳状态提交申请：'不论申请时机如何，始终确保申请材料的质量'（01:07:01）。若提前申请会降低材料水准，则不应选择提早提交（01:07:01）。"
VII. Early vs. Regular Decision: Debunking Myths
"第七章：早申请与常规申请——常见误区解析"
Misunderstanding: "There is a misunderstanding that applying early increases your chances" (45:05).
"误解：'有人认为提前申请能提高录取概率，这是一种误解'（45:05）。"
Why Early Acceptance Rates Appear Higher (Fallacy):Colleges do not "loosen their standards" for early applicants (45:53).
"关于早期录取率偏高的常见误解：大学并不会降低标准来录取早申学生（45 分 53 秒处）。"
Colleges are not afraid of not having enough applicants in the regular decision pool (45:53).
大学并不担心常规录取阶段的申请者数量不足（45:53）。
The early applicant pool is "generally more competitive" (46:17). A smaller number of higher-quality students leads to a higher percentage of acceptances, but it does not mean standards are lower (45:53-46:41).
"早期申请者群体'整体上竞争更激烈'(46:17)。虽然申请人数较少且生源质量更高会带来较高的录取率，但这并不代表录取标准有所降低(45:53-46:41)。"
Yield Concerns: While colleges care about "yield" (percentage of accepted students who matriculate), this "does not result in a higher chance of being accepted" for early applicants (46:48).
"招生考量：尽管高校重视'入学率'（录取学生中最终注册的比例），但'这并不会增加早申学生的录取概率'（46:48）。"
Colleges may use the notion of increased early chances to encourage high-quality candidates to apply early and reduce uncertainty in class filling (01:17:49).
高校可能通过宣传提前录取的更高几率，吸引优秀生源提前申请，从而降低招生名额的不确定性（01:17:49）。
Deferral Process: A deferred application means it has been evaluated and scored. It does not get re-evaluated with new information (e.g., higher SAT scores, new awards) during the regular decision period. The score is "set" (01:04:33-01:06:25).
延迟录取机制说明：若申请被延迟，表明校方已完成评估并给出分数。在常规录取阶段，即使提交新成绩（如更高的 SAT 分数）或获得新奖项，也不会重新评审。该评分将保持"锁定状态"（01:04:33-01:06:25）。
The deferral simply means the application will be considered alongside regular decision applications without re-scoring (01:04:33).
延迟决定仅表示该申请将纳入常规申请批次统一审核，且不会重新打分(01:04:33)。
VIII. The Single Most Important Factor: Chance of Getting In
第八部分. 最关键的因素：录取概率
Realistic Assessment: The "single most important factor" in creating a balanced college list is "getting in" (48:04). Students need a "serious and... realistic assessment of your chance of getting in" (48:27).
"理性评估：制定合理的大学申请名单时，“最关键的因素”是“确保能被录取”（48:04）。学生需要对自身录取概率进行“认真且...客观的评估”（48:27）。"
Probability: It's illogical to apply to all eight Ivy League schools on the hope of "getting lucky" if the individual probability is low (48:27). Probability should guide the inclusion of "backup schools" or "target schools" (48:27).
"概率角度：若单个录取概率很低，盲目申请全部八所常春藤盟校指望“碰运气”并不明智（48:27）。合理运用概率原则，应搭配“保底校”和“匹配校”（48:27）。"
SAT Equivalencies (Racial Disparities in Admissions): Professor An presents a Princeton study showing racial disparities in SAT scores required for "equal" consideration: "Asians have to score over 100 [points] to be considered the same score as other people" (50:40).
"SAT 等效分数（招生中的种族差异）：安教授引用普林斯顿大学研究数据指出，不同种族学生在申请时需要达到的 SAT 分数存在明显差异：'亚裔申请者的 SAT 成绩必须比其他族裔高出 100 多分，才能获得同等的录取考量'（50:40）。"
A later study showed things "getting tougher" (51:19). This data "should make sense if you had no chance of getting in or you suppose somehow you had a magic ball and it said you had zero chance of getting in, why would that be on your list" (51:37).
"后续研究表明形势'愈发严峻'（51:19）。这些数据'其实很好理解——如果你根本不可能被录取，或者假设你有预知能力确定自己毫无机会，那为什么还要把这类学校列入选校名单呢？'（51:37）。"
Beyond Scores and Activities: High GPAs, perfect SAT/ACT scores, numerous APs with fives, and leadership roles are not guarantees of admission (52:24).
成绩与课外活动之外：即使拥有高 GPA、SAT/ACT 满分、多门 AP 五分以及领导经历，也不能确保被录取（52:24）。
Many such students are rejected, while others with "far less" are accepted because "there's a whole lot more than just these three, just these three factors" (52:24-52:53).
"许多这样的学生遭到拒绝，而条件'远不如'他们的申请者却被录取，原因在于'录取标准远不止这三个因素'（52:24-52:53）。"
IX. Role of the Interview
"第九部分：面试环节的重要性"
Does it matter? Yes, the interview report "does matter" (01:20:31).
"这重要吗？重要，面试报告'确实会纳入考量'（01:20:31）。"
Does it mean you've passed a screening? No (01:20:31).
这是否表示你已通过初选？没有（01:20:31）。
When does it matter? It's scored during the "scoring stage" of the application process (01:20:58). While it may not be heavily reviewed initially, it "matters a lot later on" when the application reaches the committee for voting (01:21:44).
这个环节何时起关键作用？在申请流程的"评分阶段"会进行考核（01:20:58）。虽然初期审核可能不严格，但当申请进入委员会最终表决环节时，这一部分将"起到决定性作用"（01:21:44）。
Why it matters to the committee: It provides a "subjective" perspective that complements objective academic records (01:22:10). If there were academic concerns, the application wouldn't have reached the committee (01:22:10).
委员会重视的原因：该材料提供了学术记录之外的"主观"评价视角（01:22:10）。若存在学术问题，申请材料根本不会进入委员会评审环节（01:22:10）。
Who interviews? Alumni, admissions officers, professors. The weight of the interview report depends on "how it's written, not who wrote it" (01:22:40, 01:23:09). A specific and insightful report from an alumnus can weigh heavily (01:23:09).
"面试官包括校友、招生官员和教授。面试报告的评估重点在于'内容质量而非撰写者身份'（01:22:40，01:23:09）。校友撰写的内容详实、见解深刻的报告可能具有重要参考价值（01:23:09）。"
Actionable Advice: Don't dismiss the interview. Not showing up or behaving inappropriately will be noted (01:23:36). Students can learn to speak in interviews to ensure certain things are recorded (01:24:00).
实用建议：切勿轻视面试。缺席或不当举止都会被记录在案（01:23:36）。学生可通过练习面试技巧，确保关键信息得到有效传达（01:24:00）。
X. Specific Advice for Pre-Med Applicants
针对医学预科申请者的具体建议
Maturity and Understanding: Demonstrate maturity and a true understanding of what being a physician entails (00:59:54). Research the AMCA and understand why medical students drop out (00:59:54-01:01:01).
成熟度与职业认知：展现成熟的心智，准确理解医生职业的真实内涵（00:59:54）。需深入研究美国医学院协会(AMCA)，掌握医学生中途退学的核心原因（00:59:54-01:01:01）。
Trend Reversal in BS/MD & EAP Programs: Many such programs (e.g., Brown's PLME) are being phased out or are highly selective. Interestingly, students in these programs sometimes struggle more or drop out, implying that direct entry isn't always an advantage (01:01:01-01:02:45).
"BS/MD 与早期保证项目(EAP)的新趋势：许多此类项目（如布朗大学的 PLME）正逐渐取消或竞争异常激烈。值得注意的是，参与这些项目的学生往往面临更大挑战甚至中途退出，这表明直接录取未必总是有利(01:01:01-01:02:45)。"
Gap Year vs. Direct Entry: Consider the difference between going four years then a gap year before medical school, versus direct entry programs (01:02:45).
间隔年 vs 直申项目：比较大学四年后间隔一年再申请医学院，与直接进入医学院项目的区别（01:02:45）。
Students in direct entry programs still face the same academic rigor, including MCAT knowledge (even if not required to take the test) (01:03:10).
即使无需参加 MCAT 考试，直接录取项目的学生仍需掌握同等难度的医学知识，并接受同样严格的学术训练（01:03:10）。
Scholarships and Medical School: A full scholarship at a state school might be a better path than a highly-ranked, expensive undergraduate school for medical school admission (01:10:03-01:13:49).
医学院申请策略：相比学费高昂的名校，获得州立大学全额奖学金可能是更明智的本科选择（01:10:03-01:13:49）。
Scholarship recipients are often "the best of what the university is," receive significant investment in their success, and gain VIP access to resources, advisors, and research opportunities (01:10:03-01:13:10).
奖学金获得者往往代表着"大学的顶尖水平"，学校会重点培养这些学生，他们能优先使用各类资源、获得导师指导及参与研究项目的机会（01:10:03-01:13:10）。
This can provide a stronger foundation for demonstrating the qualities medical schools seek (01:10:03).
这能更有力地展现医学院看重的各项素质。
XI. Law School Preparation
第十一部分：法学院申请准备
Common Majors (Empirical Data): Historically humanities (philosophy, history, literature, sociology, anthropology). Now, increasingly STEM majors, especially computer science, are common undergraduate backgrounds for law school (01:15:08).
常见本科专业（实证数据）：传统以人文类为主（哲学、历史、文学、社会学、人类学），如今 STEM 专业逐渐增多，尤其是计算机科学已成为法学院申请者中常见的本科背景（01:15:08）。
Desired Aptitude: Law schools look for both qualitative and quantitative analytical ability, aptitude, and acumen (01:16:04). Engineering and computer science majors demonstrate not just quantitative problem-solving but strong analytical skills (01:16:25).
核心素质要求：法学院注重考察学生定性与定量相结合的分析能力、学术潜力及思维敏锐度（01:16:04）。工程类和计算机专业的学生不仅具备量化问题解决能力，更展现出突出的分析素养（01:16:25）。
XII. Cultural Perceptions (Audience Feedback)
第十二部分：文化认知（观众反馈）
Differences from China: An audience member notes that many Asian families carry perceptions from China, such as:
"与中国差异：现场有观众提到，许多亚洲家庭仍保留着来自中国的固有观念，比如："
Overemphasis on STEM for job security.
过度强调 STEM 学科以保障就业。
Belief that only test scores (like China's Gao Kao) determine school tier (like 211 and 985 schools).
认为学校的层次（如 211、985 院校）仅由考试成绩（如中国高考）决定。
Assumption of needing to declare a major directly into college (unlike the US system) (00:53:40-00:54:35).
与美国教育体系不同，部分国家要求学生入学时直接选定专业(00:53:40-00:54:35)。
This seminar serves to "re-emphasize" and "change their perception" about the US college application process (00:53:40).
本研讨会旨在"再次强调"并"转变他们对于"美国大学申请流程的认知（00:53:40）。