<p>^^Is there really such a list? My school sends at least 5 people per year to such colleges, and we always have graduating classes of about 40 kids. That's over 10% every year.
^I've never considered it. Maybe I will.</p>
<p>Bump, again.</p>
<p>Bump......</p>
<p>10 kids got into ivies ED with worse academic records than yours? Um, does that include scores?</p>
<p>Not all of them, but the majority had the same or worse. A 3.93 is extremely hard to get at my school. I don't know about scores. 3 of the ones who got in were national merit semi-finalists, but the rest weren't. I don't know how their actual ACT/SATs came out.</p>
<p>As your current scores are below average for ivies, I think we can assume they had higher scores. </p>
<p>I think you need to get realistic.</p>
<p>"As your current scores are below average for ivies, I think we can assume they had higher scores."</p>
<p>No, we can't assume anything, because scores don't indicate a whole lot. Although the Ivies tend to have higher middle-range SAT scores overall, there are those who are on the "bottom" of their bell curve, and the other students at the OP's school could simply have been some of them.</p>
<p>"I think you need to get realistic."</p>
<p>I think you need to stop being so curt and a little more courteous.</p>
<p>First of all, I haven't taken the actual ACT or SAT yet, so I think we can disregard scores for now, until I have actual results.
And I agree that you could be a bit more polite. So far you haven't told me anything constructive aside from the fact that there is some pseudo-list of high schools and you couldn't find mine on there, and that I have no shot whatsoever. Well, I know that they are all reaches, they are my dream schools and I want to know how much of a reach each is. It's not like I'm regarding these as matches or safeties here. I think everyone can have dream colleges, and ask about them. It doesn't mean that I'm assuming I'll get in. I know I probably won't. No need to tell me that. So please, instead of attacking my school and academic credentials, either offer some constructive advice or leave my thread alone.</p>
<p>Kyle, I don't think the purpose of the "what are my chances" board is to write feel good responses. If someone posts what Laura did, she deserves honest answers which include pointing out what makes no sense in her post.</p>
<p>If you read the book currently on the bestseller list by Golden, you know that 60% of ivy seats are filled by the hooked: athletes, urms, legacies and development candidates. Certainly some of her classmates might fit into these categories, but here claim is that 10 got into ivies ED with stats lower than hers, which frankly, is highly unlikely.</p>
<p>Scores are not everything, but do look at the common data sets for the ivies to see just how important they are. In fact Kyle, scores indicate a great deal.</p>
<p>And Laura, no attack meant. Lots of kids read these posts and believe them. I think it's important to point out when people post things that just don't make sense. </p>
<p>The bottom line is what people told you early on, without real scores no one can give you odds. But you, like many posters just keep bumping until you hear what you want to.</p>
<p>No, but the pupose is to offer some constructive advice. You, frankly, have not. In your first response you said that you can't judge. My test scores are not complete-far from it actually. Also, according to collegeboard, my scores are not terribly low for Brown and Georgetown. So step away from scores for a moment. Please judge the rest of me.
Look, I'm not going to disclose my school and persona to satisfy your interest. I will say that academically they are all very good, but not geniuses. I sincerely doubt, I even know for some of them, that they have not gotten entirely straight As, which I have. My school doesn't rank or disclose gpas. I do not know all their ecs offhand. That is all I will say to that- my point in telling you about the other people was also to demonstrate that I go to a highly competitive school.
As for your categories- I do not know how many are legacies. Only 1 is an entirely recruited athlete, 1 is a fantastic athlete but has the academics as well. 2 are African American, so no huge amounts of urms there. I don't know what development candidates are.</p>
<p>I never said scores didn't matter, but they aren't the greatest indicator of chances, either, as you seem to be implying. People are giving her chances with the assumption that she will do well (given her past academic records).</p>
<p>True, these boards aren't for "feel good responses," but you can leave out the unnecessary bluntness like "I think you need to get realistic." Perhaps you're not very adept in diction, but "to get realistic" has connotations of disdain -- maybe "I think you might want to try some other colleges, ones that seem more feasible as you currently stand" or something to that effect. You come across as an unpleasant person, as I'm seeing in your other posts.</p>
<p>So let's try this:</p>
<p>I think you might want to try to be less blunt and a little more diplomatic.</p>
<p>Get it?</p>
<p>You're welcome to your style Kyle, I'll stick with mine. </p>
<p>Laura, at no time did I ask you to disclose your school, much less your persona (sic).</p>
<p>Suze is one of the most knowledgable and respected posters on this site. Know what you're talking about before taking her on.</p>
<p>How important scores are is fact, not a matter of opinion. As Suze said, just look at the common data sets. Then add in that 60% are hooked. Chances of getting into a school with below average stats if you are unhooked are very slim.</p>
<p>The best predictor of SAT scores are PSAT scores.</p>
<p>Well, you drew the validity of my statements into question. How would I prove it to you unless I disclosed my school?
Well, at least I know that you aren't only extremely discouraging to me, after reading you other posts. I honestly believe you need to move past this notion of good scores=acceptance. It's an important factor of course, but there are others. Every college info session I've ever been to (and that includes Harvard, Brown, Penn, Tufts, Swarthmore, etc) the dean has said that grades and rigor of classes is more important. Much more. Perfect scores don't mean automatic admission. Many applicants with 2400s are rejected from HYPS etc every year. I know my scores aren't, and won't be, anywhere near that. But in all your posts, you imply that scores are the most important factor. They are not. So please, either stop harping on my lack of scores and give some other advice, or leave me alone.</p>
<p>How do you think those adcoms generate enough applications to reject 80% of applicants, by saying don't apply if you have below average scores?</p>
<p>"Suze is one of the most knowledgable and respected posters on this site. Know what you're talking about before taking her on."</p>
<p>I don't care who she is or how many posts she has or how long she's been at this site -- I'll "take on" anyone who is being asinine to others. (I can already see the kind of person she is just by looking at her various posts.)</p>
<p>"How important scores are is fact, not a matter of opinion."</p>
<p>You're using "important" ambiguously here -- of little importance? Much importance? I'm guessing the latter, and I agree: they are important, but not the greatest indicator (as suze was implying) and certainly not what will get you in.</p>
<p>"As Suze said, just look at the common data sets."</p>
<p>Yes, and what would those tell me, hm? They'd tell me that, generally, the students have higher scores, but does that say that you have to have those scores to get in? No. It could mean that generally, those who are accepted (the applicants that the adcoms find worthy overall) tend to have high test scores anyway. Obviously there is a lower limit to these common data sets. In conclusion, common data sets don't tell you how important scores are. The adcoms do. =)</p>
<p>At any rate, this is all irrelevant, because we don't know the OP's scores (though, in giving our ideas of chances, we assume she will score high, since there's a strong positive correlation between scores and other academic endeavors).</p>
<p>What Suze never does is personal attacks. She honestly states facts with no sugar coating. You, kyledavid80 seem a little weak on the facts but you do put your misinformation nicely.</p>
<p>"What Suze never does is personal attacks."</p>
<p>Oh, I don't really care, but she has a condescending attitude.</p>
<p>"She honestly states facts with no sugar coating."</p>
<p>Mhm, and many of us all could do the same: but many of us also know how to handle language better so as not to seem condescending, asinine, overly blunt, or just plain rude.</p>
<p>"You, kyledavid80 seem a little weak on the facts but you do put your misinformation nicely."</p>
<p>Hm, do point out where I'm a "little weak on the facts" and show why I'm "misinformed."</p>
<p>Suze, suze, we've discussed this. When you realize it's emotional and the person didn't post for a real answer, log out. And on that note. caio for now.</p>