<p>Does anyone ever regret getting a 2400 on the SAT? For example, I have heard from people at my school that top universities like Columbia, Yale, and Harvard are more likely to reject a 2400 to say that </p>
<p>a. scores don't matter
b. because Harvard will think that Yale is more likely to accept that person and because they are both concerned with their yield will reject the student with the 2400 and accept the 2290 which itself is a stellar score, am I right?</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone has ever regretted getting a 2400 on the SAT.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>…</p>
<p>The reality is that many 2400ers are anti-social Asians with nothing but grades and scores (especially in Asian-heavy areas like SoCal), which could be the reason between your classmates’ ideas. But I doubt a 2400 in and of itself is more likely to cause rejection compared to a 2290.</p>
<p>^^ That’s a bit harsh and stereotypical. </p>
<p>But back to the question, no one regrets a 2400, what people regret is spending too much time focused on getting a 2400 and not enough time working on their ECs and other qualities needed to get in.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not if you have friends at super-competitive SoCal high schools (e.g. SciOly powerhouse Troy) that know of these anti-social Asians. But, the Asian stereotype of “tests/grades most important” is painfully apparent in lots of Asian parents.</p>
<p>^ This. There’s an asian kid in my AP chem class that I don’t think ever talked during the WHOLE YEAR. It’s one thing to be shy but that’s just ridiculous</p>
<p>^WOW. Hard to believe there are people like that. Well, I’m not gonna discriminate Asians, because I am a Asian (South Korean, do be precise). But I do know some Asians who think 2390 is unacceptable. They just HAVE to get a 2400. I’m not going to mock them, because everyone is different, but don’t you guys think that’s taking it a bit too far?</p>
<p>To each his/her own.</p>
<p>/thread</p>
<p>Don’t put too much stock in what you hear from “people at [your] school.” As the content of this thread demonstrates, “people” will say a lot of baseless garbage.</p>
<p>A 2400 isn’t a guarantee of admission; there’s more to it than that. But I feel quite confident that nobody ever got rejected because of a 2400.</p>
<p>And all that Harvard/Yale talk? Wild speculation. Sometimes people don’t get in, and they want to understand “the reason.” The fact is, a lot of the time there isn’t really a reason. Harvard has room for 1600 freshmen. When 30,000 people apply, Harvard ends up with way more than 1600 highly qualified applicants. So not all of them get in. And that’s all there is to it.</p>
<p>@Sikorsky
That sums it up perfectly.</p>
<p>Sikorsky, I agree with you there, and although I am new to the cc community I’ve been stalking the forums for quite some time now. Any word on how top schools discern one qualified student from te next or do you think it’s like a lottery. The reason I thought of this question is when I saw silverturtle get rejected from harvard :(</p>
<p>My most direct knowledge is vague, decades old, and not very helpful.</p>
<p>When I was in graduate school, I had a friend who had spend a few years working in Harvard admissions (in the 1980s) before grad school. She said that her job involved rejecting a lot of applicants for no good reason, but for every student who had been admitted, she could say exactly why.</p>
<p>Last spring, NPR did a feature on admissions at Amherst College. Students who were serious contenders were considered by the full committee. If the committee voted unanimously to admit the applicant, he or she was admitted. If even one committee member voiced hesitation, that applicant’s file was put aside for later consideration. By the time the committee had considered the whole applicant pool, they had admitted too many students, and had to go back and take applicants out of the “admit” pile. This meant, having even one member of the committee hesitate about taking you meant you’d be rejected.</p>
<p>All of which is a long-winded way of saying, it’s intensely competitive, somewhat arbitrary, and, no, I don’t have the vaguest idea how they decide who’s in and who’s out. I didn’t understand it in the '80s; I understand it even less now.</p>
<p>Oh, and months later, I’m still stunned and sad about silverturtle. Silverturtle is a class act.</p>
<p>goldring, I know PLENTY of smart, social asians, who are my friends, colleagues in Latin-related events, and schoolmates. They end up going to good schools such as UVA or Hopkins. However, I must agree that the asian kid (note the singular) at my school who is obsessed with getting a 2400 is very anti-social, has aspergers, and will die if he doesn’t get into MIT (despite having no EC other than generic robotics, no good teacher recs, and a sub3.7 gpa). Kids like him from my school have historically ended up at Mason, which, while a good school, is no amazing accomplishment for an in-state virginian with such high test scores.</p>
<p>I doubt that anyone actually regrets scoring 2400 on the SAT. On the other hand, I think that the negative stereotype exemplified by the post from 31415926535Iforget is represented on a few admissions committees–MIT’s in the era of Marilee Jones, for example. So one might think of 2370-2390 as really lucking out.</p>
<p>@QuantMech</p>
<p>so do you think that with all else even, a 2370-2390 is better than a 2400 in the eyes of adcoms?</p>
<p>Dies anyone have the link to a statistic comparing the percentage of top school applicants with 2400s that get in to say other scores such as 2350-2390?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I’m an Asian (Taiwanese-American), and I consider myself to be pretty social. Quite a few teachers say that I’m surprisingly social for my intelligence and race, and I’m sure they didn’t mean to be racist.</p>
<p>It’s these people that I’m describing as often anti-social Asians: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And it’s not really a stereotype to say that most of these people are Asians. The fact of the matter is this: Asian parents in America have an obsession with test scores being the sole factor in college admissions, with good (but faulty) reason. In many Asian countries, like China, Taiwan, and Korea, college admissions are based on one cumulative test at the end of high school. You name your top college choices/majors and take your giant test. To get into your top choice, you must score <em>__. To get your second choice, you must reach </em> points.</p>
<p>Many Asian parents mistakenly think American universities work the same way, with the SAT being that “magic” test. And that’s why you see so many Asian teenagers pressured by their parents to get that 2400 that they become anti-social. It’s a stereotype that’s much more accurate than Mexicans all being illegal immigrants or African Americans liking fried chicken.</p>
<p>The good thing about America that is different from other countries is there are A LOT of universities. The Asians you describe seem to think that there are only like 5-10 universities in the whole country, the ivy leagues and other good schools. However you could get into soooooooo many schools with just a 2000. I think that if you want the stereotype of the smart 2400 sat test asian to break, then they have to realize that there is more than 10 universities out there.</p>
<p>No, just at MIT in the recent past, and probably no longer there. The comment about “lucking out” was sort of joking.</p>
<p>Sorry, to clarify: This was a reply to goldring2012, post #15.</p>
<p>If I got a 2400 I would probably cry tears of joy every single day for the rest of my life. If any committee rejects someone solely based on the fact that they achieved a perfect score, they deserved to get slapped. If anyone regrets actually getting a 2400, they also deserved to get slapped, end of story.</p>