Do "decent" SAT scores kill an applicant's chances?

[jamesford]

<p>

When will people at CC realize that GPA/transcript is twice as important as the test scores?</p>

<p>That a 4.0/2100 is much more impressive than a 3.7-3.8/2400, assuming that SAT II scores and such are the same, and assuming that there’s not significant grade inflation.

</p>

<p>Not nearly twice as important. A person with a 2100 has an extremely low shot of getting into a top tier school. I’d take a 3.8/2400 over a 4.0/2100 any day. </p>

<p>

Maybe you all should realize that people with 2300+ scores got in because people with 2300+ scores are more likely to have higher stats in other categories as well, be better writers, and succeed more in school? I honestly don’t think colleges care about SAT scores too much once you get into the 2000+ range. Sure, it helps, but as a Yale adcom said, they measure academics, ECs, and perhaps most of all, character. SAT scores don’t make up half the equation.

</p>

<p>Sadly, there is a massive difference between 2100 and 2400 and even 2200 and 2400. Even a 100 point difference will help you (or hurt you) significantly in admissions. I don’t know where CCers get the idea that scores stop mattering at some arbitrary cut-off.</p>

<p>

However, when applying to harvard, you are up against the best of the best…most of whom do have that 2300+

</p>

<p>30,000 people apply to Harvard, I think the number of 2300+ scorers is less than 10,000. Furthermore, not all of those 10,000 apply to Harvard so the vast majority of applicants have scores below 2300.</p>