<p>SAT 1:CR-600, M-790, W-610
SAT 2:M-800, Chem-800</p>
<p>ranked 1 in school, lots of prizes in science/math olympiads, good chess player.</p>
<p>should i retake SAT 1 in October or does the EA scheme (without financial aid, of course) give me a sufficient advantage?</p>
<p>The SATs definitely need to be retaken and I don't see why you shouldn't as you must be bright (valedictorian) and rich enough to buy prep books (lol, jokes but without FA). Plus they superscore so you know you have excellent Math scores. You're defs on the right track!</p>
<p>Hard to say with such insufficient information like how good a chess player you are and how impressive the math + science olympiads are. </p>
<p>But good luck! You seem academically very strong but make sure to emphasize you're more then just school!</p>
<p>Can you describe those olympiads you participated in?</p>
<p>Anyways, though MIT/Caltech don't place as big of an emphasis on character, it is still recommended to show good character, and that you aren't all about school, like shore said above. Can you show you've been involved in your school, and can you get good recs conveying sides of you that are NOT math/science?</p>
<p>rank 6 in state math olympiad.
rank 1 in state cyber olympiad.
KVPY scholarship holder....</p>
<p>i was chesschamp at school and played an online exhibition chess match with Vishwanathan Anand last year.</p>
<p>i also play the guitar, so do you think an additional recommendation from my music teacher will help?</p>
<p>Well how good/competitive are you at the guitar? Unless you have won awards and are completely dedicated to it, it's not worth it.</p>
<p>Btw def take your SATs again. it's WAY TOO LOW</p>
<p>whats your uscf rating. If its not above 2000 its not worth much.</p>
<p>how much do you think i need to get if i retake SAT 1?</p>
<p>2250+ is very good for most schools...but for caltech i reckon a 2300 is prob needed</p>
<p>@ Equilibrium: On the contrary! MIT and CalTech both put a large emphasis on character (and extracurriculars). They're looking more for someone who will be successful, likely to have the characteristics to thrive in a world of adversity rather than the perfect student. That's why you see/hear a lot about them dropping students with 2400s.</p>
<p>i agree with computergeek. But i do think MIT and Stanford put a greater emphasis on character than Caltech.</p>
<p>will a campus visit help at all?</p>
<p>what do you mean by character? I would argue that character is even more important at Caltech than others schools because the Honor Code is such an important part of everyone's lives.</p>
<p>bump.........</p>
<p>CalTech is more numbers-based than MIT. Look at the stats on the collegeboard site. The middle 50% of the Critical Reading SAT is 700-780. A 700 is only on the 25th percentile of accepted applicants. To make you an average applicant, you're going to need to raise it to at least a 700-740. Make sure you let CalTech know why notwithstanding the mediocrity of your CR score they should accept you. If that reason doesn't suffice, you cannot reasonably expect an acceptance.</p>
<p>MIT and Stanford put more emphasis than CalTech on character because they're slightly less techy. CalTech's curriculum is known for being suicidal, and so every accepted applicant is reasonably expected to score high 700s on every part of the SAT without a problem. Sure, the 610 isn't too horrible. But why should they choose you over an applicant with a high 700s on every part of the SAT AND good personal qualities? You need to raise the score and show CalTech why you're special. The SAT is more of a preliminary test, and you need to do well to show you can handle the intense curricula. These kids are (almost uncomfortably) strong in math and science but they're also viciously verbal.</p>