<p>This might be a little bit of a stupid question, but is it ever possible that someone with like a 2100-2200 SAT ever get accepted over someone with a 2400? Basically what i'm asking is can factors like EC's, essay, strength of schedule, recs, etc. ever boost someone with not-so-awesome SATs into the range of acceptance?</p>
<p>DEFINITELY. happens more often than not probably with highest tier schools</p>
<p>Of course, the SAT is just one exam…</p>
<p>Definitely…I mean year in year out we hear of the 1900 guy in MIT or the 1700 in Cornell…Problem is we never hear the rest of the story…Is he a certified genius in what he wants to do…Is he potentially the world’s most promising cellist…Did he fall sick before his SAT and not take it…Does someone think that he is just a bad test taker but a hell of a mind based on knowing him for years and years…then there are the “wild child” cases who have bags of ability and have to be tamed to get the best out of them…The SAT is such a big deal because when you say rejected/accepted its a number you can throw across easily for other people…If I was at teh admissions office I wouldnt risk giving a place to someone based on a perfect SAT score!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. Your question is stupid.</p>
<p>Ivys reject loads of applicants who score 2400s. A 3 hour test isn’t and cannot be given more consideration than 4 years of high school and ECs. Also, a 2000 is anyday better than a 2400 with an LOR that describes you as “overly grade conscious”.</p>
<p>^^^^
Well said…Being grade conscious counts for little in the real world…and going to college is the transition from school world to the real world…They need to know you arent still a kid and you what you want in the world…Not saying that 1800’s are going to get you into Harvard…But I think once you show that you are smart/not an idiot (based on what tier university)…your essays reccs are what decides whether its teh thick envelope or the thin one…</p>
<p>If you look at the Early Decision results from last year, there was an applicant with a 2400 who didn’t get in.</p>
<p>in practice very few 2400’s get rejected, they usually have high GPAs, and tend to be involved, since they realize that studying isn’t all that counts for college. perhaps they’d be in activities for the resume value, but they’re still in them, participating, interacting and learning from them. Sure a 2400 with below average ECs and a sub par personal statement and little else to run with will be near certain of a rejection. But i believe there is a positive correlation (however marginal) between SAT and all round achievement. so 2400s rarely get turned down, they often don’t get in only because of their 2400 though.</p>
<p>^^^^
Have to agree with you…Practically a lot of the perfect score applicants have a lot about them…But I think if you break it down…The guys who get into top universities with low scores have “something” that numbers dont describe…Point is you can easily look past one low test score…You cant look past a lack of anything other than a good one…</p>
<p>as concol pointed out, the kids with perfect scores getting rejected are the exceptions, not the rule. similarly, the “kids with 1900s getting into MIT all the time” are also the exception, not the rule. furthermore, the perfect score kids are getting rejected not for the kid with the 1900, but for the kid with the 2390 or 2380 who has substantially superior ECs, soft factors, GPA, etc. At a certain level, the difference becomes marginal for adcoms. </p>
<p>However, I think people tend to think the “marginal difference” range of scores is a lot bigger then it really is (a 2100 is not the same as a 2300, sorry.)</p>
<p>Ok ConfucianNemisis. I understand that someone w/ a 2100 SAT got more wrong answers than someone w/ 2300, but I’m sure anyone w/ about a 2000 or more would do perfectly fine at any Ivy or top school and therefore I’m sure once that point is met other factors become more impt.</p>
<p>“but I’m sure anyone w/ about a 2000 or more would do perfectly fine at any Ivy”</p>
<p>i’d say most wouldn’t, rendering other factors important, but yes, the sat begin to lose predictive value after about 2000-2100.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re still missing the major point. I’m sure they could do fine also, but there are so many applicants who score in the upper reaches of the score range, that adcoms don’t <em>have</em> to set the ‘threshold after which we stop caring’ as low as 2000 - they’ll still have an embarrassment of riches at 2100 or even 2200. To put a finer point on it - there’s a difference between “no longer caring” and “does it differentiate applicants”. The former may in fact be true with a difference of 100 points or more, the latter almost certainly isn’t.</p>
<p>According to College Boards latest national data report, close to 20,000 college bound seniors in 2007 scored over a 750 in just the Writing section alone, the section with the fewest scores in that range (as compared to 28k in Reading and 35k in Math). Another 40k students scored between 700 and 749 on the writing. </p>
<p>So you may argue that the 200 point difference in SAT scores is statistically insignificant, but try telling that to the adcom who already has the application of someone with the same level of soft factors as you with the higher score on their desk.</p>
<p>Of course its never as cut and dry as the false ‘head to head’ comparison that people conjure as an example. I doubt that ever happens in real life. And colleges <em>do</em> accept people with lower scores over people with higher scores. But the idea that someone who scores 100 to 200 points more on the SAT than you isn’t at an advantage in the process is ludicrous. How that advantage plays out depends on everything else in the application, but it’s still a significant edge.</p>
<p>Yes, I am currently a SEAS student with an SAT score in the 2200 range. My friend, who scored a 2400 SAT, was rejected from CC today, while I have another friend who got a 2200 who not only was accepted to CC, but also got a likely letter and a John Jay Scholar designation.</p>
<p>lol I got a 2400 and was rejected or waitlisted from Brown, YAle, Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Caltech and Chicago.</p>
<p>But I got into Dartmouth and Columbia :)</p>
<p>and the rest of my app isn’t bad either; it’s really rather confusing. Maybe 2400 works against you?</p>
<p>Also, Columbia places greater emphasis on your personal statement than the SAT score. Notice how its admission rate was the lowest of all the Ivies, yet its mean SAT/ACT scores were lower than most of the Ivies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I didn’t notice that because it’s not true.</p>
<p>I got a 2000 overall, applied ED, was deferred and finally accepted. I must say, though, that the low score was caused by the math score. I did quite well on the CR and writing portions and since I want to major in history, they probably decided not to care about my mathematical abilities.</p>
<p>Yea my friend entered columbia with a 1790 and a 570 and 650 on his sat2s. he was like in the 20% section of his class. but he said its natural intelligents and a unique essay that get you in</p>
<p>Well I’m sure you have lots of natural intelligents.</p>