<p>Obviously there are multiple factors in college admissions, but does every ivy applicant need a 2300? I'd say that a solid 2100-2200 with a strong personality and ECs is stronger than a 2300, academic student. </p>
<p>And do Ivies really need to be weighed on the 2400 scale? Writing is the easiest subject to perfect, so it is expected that the student scores a 700+. And a M650 + CR650 + W800 = 2100. Clearly that won't be accepted to an ivy league. </p>
<p>So does an ivy league simply require, say, a 1400-1600 with a 700-800 in W? So a 2100-2200?</p>
<p>What makes you think the higher stat student wouldn’t have a strong personality and Ecs?</p>
<p>The fact that several people with perfect scores get rejected every year, the answer is no. you don’t NEED 2300+, but it certainly helps. The scores are only part of your profile. If it’s a bit low, you can compensate for it with other parts of your application just as the score itself can help compensate for other areas you feel you may be lacking in. That being said, something really low wouldn’t get you in if there wasn’t a legitimate reason for it. </p>
<p>When you get that high up on the scores, the difference between scores is only from a few questions. Imagine a teacher saying to two students, “Well, you got a 92 on this exam, but she got a 94, so she’s WAY more qualified than you.” </p>
<p>Difference in scores can make the difference for you, but you won’t get in on them alone; as you said, it’s better to have other things backing you up like ECs than to just have the score alone.</p>
<p>@woeishe: I don’t think the OP was saying that all high scorers are just academic, but was just pitching a hypothetical situation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nothing definite. Perhaps on a 1 vs 1 basis it is unfair. But on the whole admissions pool, I think a 2100-2200 student stands out because they are forced to prove themselves in other ways? Or are scores that low only for minorities and legacies and sports?</p>
<p>^ Actually, the students with higher stats tend to have better Ecs and such.</p>
<p>A lower score=/= instant rejection, but you do have to compensate for it in some way.</p>
<p>Look at admissions stats. 2300 is around 75th percentile. Clearly not required.</p>
<p>I don’t think 650/650/800 is necessarily going to be rejected. That’s the same logic that leads people to believe that you “need” a 2300. Unless a school only looks at Math and Critical Reading, I’m not sure it would be right to disregard Writing. The national average for Writing is lowest, actually.</p>
<p>I think the writing average, nationally, is lower than M and CR.</p>
<p>Edit* I see that’s already been pointed out</p>
<p>Only one Ivy seems to provide a straight forward correlation between SAT and admission percentage. Brown shows a higher probability of admission if you score perfect scores in a section (1/5) which is on par with valedictorians. If you look at the ACT perfect scores, the percentage jumped up to 31% which kind of makes you wonder if there is a similar statistic for perfect SAT scorers.</p>
<p>[Brown</a> Admission: Facts & Figures](<a href=“Undergraduate Admission | Brown University”>Undergraduate Admission | Brown University)</p>
<p>Absolutely not, I received a 2140 (800 M, 690 W, 650 CR) and was admitted to Harvard’s Class of 2015. Best of luck to you.</p>
<p>There is no minimum SAT score to get into any of the Ivy League schools. They could admit/reject you for any reason they feel like.</p>