<p>First off, I'd like to make it clear this isn't a flame bait about how unfair "holistic" admissions is (a contradictory statement in and of itself). I really do appreciate the extent to which admissions offices go to take so many different factors of a person's life into their admissions decision.</p>
<p>However, after having been bombarded with post after post telling me that perfect SATs and 4.0 GPAs get rejected all the time, I feel rather demoralized. It's not that I'm outraged by the fact that these "Perfect scorers" get rejected, it's just that it makes me feel like stats are not valued beyond a certain point. That they are, in a sense, completely unimpressive (for example, when people say there is no difference between a 2200 and 2400 on the SAT).</p>
<p>SO my question is this: Are perfect scores impressive (SAT/ACT/SAT Subject)? And better yet, are they impressive when one takes into consideration the student's background (i.e 2400 SAT in ACT region, comes from a completely unknown public in the realm of top college admissions)?</p>
<p>Perfect scores are impressive, especially on CR which has fewer perfect scores than M. Even at the very tippy top schools students with perfect score have around a 50% chance of admissions, which is light years ahead of the regular applicant pool. But these scores are not automatic admission tickets because (1) colleges only select about half the class for solely academic reasons, (2) disciplinary issues, (3) mediocre grades etc. In contrast a t these schools, the 1450/2200 applicant probably has less than a 25% chance of admission. I do not think though that schools give a huge amount of weight to the 2400 v. 2350 (putting aside scholarships). </p>
<p>The importance of a perfect GPA, which I’ll define as all A’s, varies based on the rigor of the curriculum, the class rank, and the school’s reputation for grade inflation/deflation. The SAT and the SAT subject tests can corroborate the perfect GPA. But if such a student gets 1200/1800 or 650s on two subject tests the strength of the school will likely be questioned.</p>
<p>If you’re talking about MIT, here’s a run down of what they want:
[The</a> Match Between You And MIT | MIT Admissions](<a href=“http://mitadmissions.org/apply/process/match]The”>What we look for | MIT Admissions)
It might seem weird at first, considering we’ve been drilled from when we we’re wee little lads that "Perfect SAT"s and "4.0 GPA"s are what defines a student, but I’m pretty sure MIT wants to admit compassionate human beings who have a passion for the STEM field.</p>
<p>I know, I know, cliche, dodgy, and completely not what I would want from an answer, but I think there comes a point where SATs and GPAs can’t describe who YOU are as a person. I’m kind of glad they don’t because then they would just look at my 4.0 and admit a number, not a person. :)</p>
<p>How can a reviewer know whether the essay is a true story of the appliacnt’s real life or something they have come up with just to get into the program. In the end either the score has more weight age or the essay? Atleast in the case of score it is validated and the test is taken by the applicant while the essay is just made up and can be written by someone. All that is needed is money for someone to write the essay on your behalf and people like you are blown off and give them admssion.</p>
<p>With regards to your question about essays, there obviously isn’t any way to validate the story behind an essay. However, admissions officers are pretty smart and have been doing it for a while, so I’d guess they can tell whether a story is fabricated. No, there is no full-proof method of doing it, but I’d wager that it’s awfully hard to be sincere and right a good essay about something that never happened to you.</p>
<p>From what has been published by schools like Princeton, Brown and Stanford the acceptance rate for perfect scorers on the SATs or ACTs is less than 30% - not 50% - and we don’t know whether the accepted kids had amazing ec’s and academics as well, so you can’t automatically assume a 30% chance if you achieve a perfect score.</p>
<p>@llazar - The perfect SAT and 4.0 applicants are included in a bin that also includes the 2300 SAT and 3.9 applicants, at this level there is nothing to distinguish them. After all the difference between a perfect SAT and a 2300 SAT are a few questions answered incorrectly. As you get older you will see how inconsequential that difference is. The high achiever will get into a top university but maybe not their first choice.</p>
<p>Please post the 30% stat. I have not seen that and was thinking of the 50% stat from Harvard. Your cite to Brown is interesting because they get loads of applications and yet their median SAT is lower than the other Ivies and so clearly they are looking for more than SAT. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, I think we could agree that the higher the SAT the better the chance of admission.</p>
<p>I think it is important to distinguish between two different issues or occurrences described here in regard to perfect scores, so-called “holistic” admissions, different factors and rejection.</p>
<p>One. Probably ninety-nine percent of the (serious) applications to HYP have 4.0+ GPAs and perfect SAT scores. Not everyone is going to get in. Many will be rejected. That’s just the reality of the situation. The fourth best swimmer in the United States is not going to make the Olympic team … even if their 100 meter time is only one-thousandth of a second behind the third best. Same thing.</p>
<p>Two. So-called “holistic” admissions. That is a can of worms that I’m pretty certain the O/P and others don’t wish to get into. But it is a mechanism to identify certain characteristics in order to achieve a desired profile comprising the incoming freshman class.</p>
<p>Number two has an effect on number one. But they are two different things. One is a result of math. The other is a result of human interpretations.</p>
<p>I think what he means is that colleges want their student body to give off a certain image (no negative connotation there). Say there’s a college C which wants to be well known in a certain field. Obviously success in said field may be deeply linked to a personal trait P. College C is going to utilize an admissions process tailored to find P. So in a sense, defining Holistic Admissions is completely depending on which college/university you have in mind; after all, I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that Caltech and UChicago, despite both being incredible schools, look for somewhat different qualities in their applicants. </p>
<p>MIT is a STEM magnet. Innovators in STEM fields are not determined solely by their technical skill, but also the less tangible qualities they possess which will drive them to success: self-motivation, an inclination for learning simply for the sake of learning, and diligence. Moreover, MIT is also community; college is not 4 years of classes and internships, it’s 4 years of your life. So, admissions officers naturally want a positive community which only serves to further aid and encourage the individual student.</p>
<p>Obviously, I’m a 17 year old applying to MIT, so take this with a grain of salt…</p>
<p>Perfect . . I mean, high scores on standardized tests . . . are important.</p>
<p>But some seem to confuse “important” with “determining.” That is, since schools know that standarized are in part sociallly derived, only accurate within a range (+/- 32 points for the SAT in 2010), and tend to reward students who do well on standardized tests, the schools do NOT use them as sole determiners for admissions purposes.</p>
<p>Although you might not know it from CC, there are a tiny number of people who hit the stratospheric heights in strandardized tests. For example, in 2010 there were 382 people worldwide who got a 2400; if you go “all the way down” to a 2350-2400 there were 2331 people.
Want the top 1% of all students by SAT score? That number is 2240 and above.</p>
<p>College isn’t just about test scores . . . there are so many different kinds of colleges with different cultures out there that a significant part of the admissions process has to be “will this kid fit in well in our school.” </p>
<p>Besides, they might need a tuba player this year :-)</p>
<p>And . . it’s hard to tell what they are thinking . . . kid I know from a couple of years ago had a 2350, extensive compsci paid work while in high school, 2 MIT alum parents. Got waitlisted at MIT and accepted at Cal Tech . . .</p>
<p>Well Caltech is not holistic. They are the most numbers based admission profile. They do seem to want the top 1% by scores. </p>
<p>As to the holistic question: think of it his way:
Great test scores, coupled with a great GPA, will get you into the “serious consideration
pile”. BUT that holistic “something else” gets you into the “admit” pile.</p>