<p>Can anyone who goes to Exeter, Andover and those in that league, tell me about themselves and how they got in with a low SSAT score? Low means 50-70.</p>
<p>No. I will tell you that if your scores are below an 80% your chances are very very low. And at competitive schools that means no. I have always been told, 80% would be the "rock bottom". Andover, Exeter, SPS ect. won't really go below an 80%... That is what I have been told at least. I'm pretty sure that 80% is the low.</p>
<p>Unless there is some underlying factor in your application.</p>
<p>Honesty is all I'm promising from my end. Try applying to schools that are closer to your SSAT range. Are those national or SSAT percentiles? If you got them from the princeton review then they are national and are about 5% higher than the SSAT(Boarding schools look at the SSAT).</p>
<p>THERE ARE OTHER SCHOOLS. Do you think that every kid applies to exeter or even wants to go? Tons of lesser known schools that have great programs. I'm learning that lesson as I go through this process as well.</p>
<p>Try:
Kent, NHM, Salisbury, Canterbury, Loomis might be a stretch. Keep on searching.</p>
<p>You can get into a GREAT school with those scores. It may not be one of the ones in the "league" that you mentioned, but nonetheless, a great school. Broaden your search.</p>
<p>There have been many students - even a few who posted here a couple of years ago I believe - who HAVE IN FACT gotten in to Exeter, Andover, SPS, Deerfield with scores in that range. AND they did not have a major hook. It does happen. Is it common? No. Does it happen? Yes.
Schools look at the entire student package, not just the scores. If you are an overall very strong candidate otherwise, you have a chance. Is it harder? Yes. Typically, we've heard from many sources, that 80's is where you don't have to worry about your scores. But it's certainly not impossible.</p>
<p>Linda S' points are absolutely correct. I would also add that there have been a few who have posted and boasted about 99 percentile results last year, only to be rejected across the board at the aforementioned schools.</p>
<p>Is the OP a minority applicant? Many of the conventional wisdoms re ssat scores are tossed aside with respect to the URM hook, provided that the student is otherwise a very strong applicant.</p>
<p>At least one school, the Taft School, publishes that the minimum SSAT score considered for admission is a 50. Taft is an elite school, but in a lower tier than Groton, St. Paul's School, Deerfield & Andover.
With respect to the three listed schools, St. Paul's, Exeter & Andover, St. Paul's School is less than half of the size of Exeter or Andover in terms of number of students. Students scoring below an 80 probably need a hook to get into Groton or St. Paul's School (Groton is even smaller than SPS). Post #4 may be writing of admitted posters who were & are unaware of the nature of their own hook. Each school defines what it considers to be a hook and what constitutes a hook for one or two years may not be a hook in subsequent years due to changing needs & priorities of that particular school.
Low SSAT scores may present an unreasonable challenge & burden at smaller elite academic powerhouse prep schools such as Groton & St. Paul's because of the lack of easier courses; especially since neither school accepts PG students.
PG (post graduate) students are almost always Division I quality athletes attending prep school to improve both sports skills, physical size & maturity, and to bolster their academic credentials for college. The largest prep boarding schools, such as Andover & Exeter, accept PG students and have many course designed for them which, in turn, accommodates students matriculating with SSAT scores below the median.
As a final note, I think that it would be difficult for any single poster to list all attributes which may constitute a "hook" as this differs from school to school & from year to year. As a starting point to define what is a "hook" , it might be better to start with categories such as diversity, financials, athletic skills, other EC skills, etc.</p>
<p>The median SSAT score for St. Paul's is 88. That suggests to me that there are a lot of people with scores in the 60's and 70's. Last year, there was a poster, nhfootballer?, who had scores in the 50's and he was admitted to St. Paul's and several other schools. The SSAT score should not prevent you from applying to any school you are truly interested in.</p>
<p>I do think it could be a good year to reach a little for schools. With the current economic situation, applications could be down. Why not pick a few of the really competitive schools and give it a try. If you have your heart set on attending BS next year, though, make sure you apply to schools with lower average SSAT scores and higher admission rates.</p>
<p>nhfootballer was a minority student so he had a hook.</p>
<p>A mean score of 88 on the SSAT suggests a more narrow range than that implied in post #7. If exactly half the accepted students had a 99 SSAT and the other half had exactly 77 SSAT scores, then it would constitute a mean of 88 on the SSAT. Assuming that exactly half of the admitted students had a SSAT score of 94, then that would require the other equal scoring half to a SSAT score of 82 on the SSAT to maintain an average score of 88. You can apply similiar reasoning to medians as well.
P.S. nhfootballer had more than one hook.
P.P.S. I do not agree with Post #7's assumption that there are a lot of SPS students with SSAT scores in the 60s & 70s, upper 70s, yes, but relatively few with SSATs below 75. I also disagree with the advice in post #7 regarding applying to any school regardless of your SSAT scores as a low SSAT scorer will have a very tough, demoralizing, self esteem busting experience at schools like SPS & Groton when the same student could grow in a much more positive fashion in a more suitable academic environment.</p>
<p>I'll be honest... I can't see getting in with a low score to those competitive schools without some HUGE hooks. Maybe 10 out of the 250 kids have an SSAT in that range. SPS probably picked the median because their mean was lower. A lower means translates into data being slanted. The kids on the "tail" of the slant have to have big hooks... Maybe U19 team USA goalie or something?
When a school accepts low SSAT students that poses a risk. The risk is that they will not be able to keep up academically and may end up hating the school. Think about it... A student probably won't just drop out in the middle of the year(may be easier to do at home) because they paid the money to get there... they grow unhappy...An unhappy student is a bad thing at any school.</p>
<p>The lowest score at SPS could be a 1... I truly doubt that. Median doesn't tell much, You could have 20 99%, 1 88% and 20 60% scores... Median of 88. Mean of 79.7.</p>
<p>I'm not saying you couldn't get in. You asked with low scores. I'm assuming everything else is average for top tier applicants. Just based on the scores, I would say no. There is a big difference between a 50 and a 70 though. 50 is average, 70 is above average.</p>
<p>THE BEST COMPARISON I CAN GIVE:
An average SAT is 1511 out of 2400. A 50% on the SSAT(SSAT percentiles) is equal to a 1511(Average score in 2008). Pretend you are applying to an Ivy with a 1511... Ivy average scores are normally the top 8-10%... This would be like a 90-92% SSAT(Andover is a 93% average, Exeter is near that also...). Top 10-8% is a 2100 or higher total score. You are applying with a 1511 to a school that averages 2100 or higher(Most are higher by 100 points).</p>
<p>Italianboarder: Are you confusing "mean", which means "average", with "median" (middle)? The "mean" in your example equals 79.7, not 88.
Also, your post is not clear regarding your statement "I can't see it." To what are you referring?</p>
<p>the mean is 79.7. The median(How SPS showed their score) is 88. </p>
<p>That was a typo.</p>
<p>I agree with Periwinkle's posts below. In all honesty you can still get into a GREAT school. What defines great really? Academically challenge is what Exeter/Andover are known for... You can find a challenging academic enviroment for yourself at a school that is more realistic.</p>
<p>ColdWind, thank you for joining discussions in this forum. I find your posts to be well-informed, realistic, and very useful.</p>
<p>I called an elite school, to ask if they had any minimum score requirement on the SSAT. The admissions assistant who answered the phone stated, "they really like to see an 80 or over." </p>
<p>Note that schools will state an average SSAT score, or a median, but they don't give you the mode. You cannot assume that a median of 88 means that there are lots of students who score in the 60s. It's quite likely that most scores are 80 or above, with the exception of students with hooks.</p>
<p>If he was accurate, nhfootballer was a promising minority athlete, who behaved very well in posting, and whose posts were eloquent and well phrased. His recommendations were probably stellar, and I'm sure he interviewed very well. His success would be the exception which proves the rule. </p>
<p>If your SSAT is 50, and you are accepted to an elite school, then deciding to attend means that you will be content with the equivalent of a C- (or lower?), no matter how hard you work. Trying to keep up will also leave you little time to participate in extracurriculars.</p>
<p>At this point in the process, you should be focusing your attention on a list of schools which gives you a realistic chance of attending prep school next year. Some schools are reaches for everyone, but your list should not consist of reaches. With a score between 50 and 70, your list should not consist of Exeter, Andover, Deerfield, St. Paul's and Groton, especially if you have no "hooks."</p>
<p>This was the original question:
[quote]
Can anyone who goes to Exeter, Andover and those in that league, tell me about themselves and how they got in with a low SSAT score? Low means 50-70.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It is possible. Actually, I should have answered your best bet is to have a great hook or meet a need the school has that year (which varies from year to year). </p>
<p>All applicants - even (or maybe espcially) those with 99% on SSAT should look at a variety of schools in terms of a range of admissions competitivness. And should look at the school that is the best fit for them.</p>
<p>The answer to you question is Yes. If your current school grades are very good along with relevant EC's, a great interview and corresponding application, then you most certainly do have a chance.
As Linda S mentioned, the SSAT is just one unit of measurement the schools utilize in reviewing prospective students. Tierlevelitis is contagious and I hope CC can assist in neutralizing it by showing that there are many really good BS out there.</p>
<p>IF you have all As and are an excellent student and SSAT wise your scores are sub par... Your grades do not look impressive at all.</p>
<p>ECs are completely different.</p>
<p>I completely disagree that simply because a studen has low SSAT scores they will be demoralized etc at a school like St. Pauls. I would assume that an accepted student has some qualities that made the admissions committe believe he/she could thrive at the school and benefit from being educated at the school. If a student believes a school is a good fit for them why should they not apply even if their scores are low? The worst that could happen is that they are not accepted.</p>
<p>
[quote]
IF you have all As and are an excellent student and SSAT wise your scores are sub par... Your grades do not look impressive at all.
[/quote]
Not necessarily true. It could mean a number of things. It could mean you don't test well and quite frankly most schools would much rather a smart kid with good grades that doesn't test well than a smart kid with great test scores and not so great grades 0 implying he/she does not try hard in school. It could mean you were sick on the day of the test. It could mean any number of things. And the SSAT score is much less weighted than grades, and a lower score does not make good grades look less good.<br>
I have heard this from many admissions professionals.<br>
They are looking for the whole package - students who will make their school a better place to be.</p>
<p>Italian does have a point about the grades vs. ssat thing. I mean, the wild differences between what publics teach vs private and grade inflation and deflation is the very reason that the ssat was created. If you have all A's but low scores, that COULD signal that your A's aren't worth much. I think when the schools say that the ssat is only part of the package, they are being truthful. I really do think that they compare grades and ssat. High ssat and a few B's might indicate that the school doesn't grade on content knowledge or that a kid is lazy and unmotivated or any number of things that the admissions committee will, to the best of their ability try to sort out based on OTHER pieces of the puzzle, like essays and recs. I think they all work together. </p>
<p>Still, I don't think any of us on this board can say yes or no to the original poster. People here tend to obsess on ssat because it is really the only objective piece of information that the schools get. It is the common denominator, so to speak. I will never believe that the schools don't really care about them. They wouldn't ask for them if they didn't use the info. Also, consider the type of data that the ssatb sends to the schools; ranking applicants by prior applicants vs accepted students. The ssatb is now even working on some type of validity study that will help students predict success at their school based on ssat scores.</p>