<p>All I know is, Harvard waitlisted me and the last kid at my school with 2400s, and accepted ones with scores in the 1900s and 2100s. Test scores are NOT everything or anything at all.</p>
<p>jimbob: Something tells me you will be fine.</p>
<p>Yeah, I got accepted to Duke. I am still waiting on Stanford, my number one dream school! Pray for me :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
what's the answer?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The answer is that some bright learners are turned off by their school lessons. One literary expression of that idea is the autobiographical sketch by Albert Einstein he wrote for a book about his views on philosophy of science, which my dad has owned since before I was born. Other</a> writings of similar purport are frequent enough that I have to believe that this is a genuine concern, even among learners who are not as smart as Einstein. That varies from school to school, of course, and what you call an "academic slacker" who has strong test scores and low grades might be well advised to find a new school. Here in Minnesota, a late governor who lived in Europe between gubernatorial terms strongly pushed a statewide plan of open enrollment in public schools and also a statewide plan for dual-credit enrollment in state colleges or universities for eleventh and twelfth grade. I have read that his son is very smart--he graduated from Stanford Law School--and perhaps the late governor's compassion for highly able learners came from personal experience. </p>
<p>In any event, if a learner finds that high school is easy and boring, it is expedient for the learner to </p>
<p>a) find a better high school, if at all possible, </p>
<p>b) become absorbed in challenging extracurricular activities, in any case, </p>
<p>c) DOCUMENT what the learner does in free time to seek intellectual challenge (which can include taking AP tests, etc), </p>
<p>and </p>
<p>d) consider which colleges have a track record of looking beyond high school grades at other evidence of strong potential for thriving in college. </p>
<p>It is very inexpedient to have the "academic slacker" profile of high test scores with low high school grades, so it is generally to the learner's advantage to devote enough time to schoolwork to get decent grades. But what I do in the first instance as a parent is make sure my children have sound instruction in a challenging curriculum.</p>
<p>It will be interesting to see College Board's report of class of 2007 scores on the SAT I to see just how many 2400 scores were recorded in that cohort. Similarly, the ACT report of class of 2007 scores will show what happened for this year's seniors on that test. </p>
<p>Here's a methodological question on those national reports. The reports make clear that they are reports specific to a particular high school graduation class, NOT a report of all test-takers (of whatever grade) who take a test in a particular school year. But do you see a publication from either College Board or ACT explaining what is done if a particular individual in class of 2006 has taken the relevant test more than once? Are all scores from each test-taker reported on the national chart? Is only the highest single-sitting score from each test-taker reported? Or is something else done in the reporting? </p>
<p>For review, the class of 2006 charts are </p>
<p>and </p>
<p>I don't know that one could classify perfect scores as a hook, but I do have to wonder if, in the case of Early Admissions, esp. binding, if those perfect scores do carry a lot of weight. Plus, I have to agree that National Awards and honors do make an applicant stand out above others. I also know that a lot of emphasis is placed on GPA, but honestly, each high school is different with regard to grade inflation. It really is a mystery as to how those scores are really used at different schools!</p>
<p>Token Adult-
Thanks for the distribution links. They are interesting. Everything from 2200-2400 composite is in the 99%.</p>
<p>Just ballparking it, there are more than 20,000 students who scored in the 99% of the SAT--and you can be sure that no college restricts its recruiting to students scoring in the top 1% of a test.</p>
<p>My kid did not have pefect 2400 but a just below it. But her all 5 score in all 8 very hard science, math, english and history APs may have helped her. </p>
<p>But honestly I can not tell how she got admission from such wonderful colleges. No idea and still stunned.</p>
<p>A correction.
<a href="I%20wrote:">quote</a> Perfect old-SAT when only about 300 people a year achieved it, would certainly have been a "hook". Perfect SAT or ACT today puts you in a pool of several thousand, and many more thousands considering the variation in scores.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Both numbers are too high by a factor of 10. SAT of 1600 before the recentering was about 30 people a year, now it is in the low hundreds. I think I was remembering a figure of 300+ perfect-SAT applicants to Harvard one year, most of whom were rejected. Naturally the rejection rate would be lower among those who confirmed their test supremacy with several additional perfect scores.</p>