<p>A score of 2400 is in the 99th percentile.</p>
<p>A score of 2130 is in the 97th percentile.</p>
<p>Statistically speaking, it’s not a big difference. When you get into the upper echelons of performance on the SAT (if all we’re talking about is performance on the SAT, and not anything else), differences that would be huge at lower levels aren’t that large there. It’s 270 points. For comparison, a 1700 is in the 72nd percentile, but a 1430 is in the 41st percentile. BIG difference.</p>
<p>The problem is, admissions officers are not usually statisticians. They typically tend to go by looks. And at a school where the majority of viable kids applying are going to have 700+ in each section (~2100) there may very well be a big difference between a 2130 and a 2400. I mean, it’s still 270 points, regardless of the fact that percentile rank differences are very small (a 2130 is STILL in the top 3% of test-takers in the nation).</p>
<p>That’s why I answered the way I did in my first post. Is retaking it with a 2130 necessary? No, of course not, especially since the OP is applying to LACs that look at applicants much more holistically than larger schools (and some schools that would die to have a 2130). Would it help if he retook and got a 2400? Sure, of course it would. Higher scores are always better. But considering that the average score jump from junior to senior year is 40-50 points, I wouldn’t if I’d already gotten a 2130. That’s a fantastic score and he should be proud of himself.</p>