<p>
</p>
<p>If a student spends an inordinate amount of time trying to bring up test scores, to the point where schoolwork and ECs suffer, it may be counterproductive.</p>
<p>But was it counterproductive for one of my kids, who got a 690 on one section of the SAT the first time around, to prepare a bit more and take the SAT again? It didn’t take much time and didn’t detract from “real learning.” And it yielded an 800.</p>
<p>Wow, looking at Brown (thnks for the link!) a kid with an 800 in CR STILL has only a 22% chance of getting in, and even less with an 800 in Math…</p>
<p>It is all sobering and yet good to be aware of when advising our kids/other students.</p>
<p>There’s a 13 year old in my son’s Kaplan SAT class. I guess this explains it . . . Can’t imagine having the money or the time to prep my kids for the sat’s for FIVE YEARS STRAIGHT.</p>
<p>My 800/760/680 got into Harvard. (I admit first year writing was even on the SAT, and he no doubt had at least some legacy advantage.)</p>
<p>My 790/680/690 (superscored) got into Chicago, Tufts and Vassar. </p>
<p>I think there’s quite a bit of forgiveness for the writing score. I also think you can have a slightly weaker math score if there are other things to make up for it. (Younger son was taking Calc BC and had a letter of recommendation from a math teacher that said he was one of his best math minds in his class even though he did not get the best grades on tests.)</p>
<p>That said, my general advice for students aiming at the top colleges is to try to get over 700 on CR and M, and the subject tests. Over 750 is safer. But good scores will never get you in, it’s just that if you have good scores you can feel comfortable that it was something else more out of your control that caused the rejection.</p>
<p>The most selective schools sometimes use a 5 test SAT score is what I have been told. THe SAT1 and two Sat2 scores. </p>
<p>There was a book out that was written by a former admissions person at Duke who explained how that school evaluated applicants. Six areas were assessed by two adcoms on a 0-5 rating, then the scores averaged. Anything below a certain break point or above it were pretty much auto outs or ins unless they were flagged applicants who went through their own assessments. If a certain category came below a 3, it was flagged even if the over all score was high. If the SAT1 score which was one of the 6 areas appraised was over a certain number, and the other 5 areas added up to a certain score, it was an ********* even if the 6 area, 2 person average should turn out lower than the break point for auto admit. Again, lower than a certain number in any category would be flagged.</p>
<p>So, yes, above a certain number, the chances curve seems to get steep and more in ones favor. That does not mean below that number, you don’t have a chance.</p>
<p>Well, I had a kid whose 5-test SAT score was 3920, no score lower than 750, and perfectly good class rank (the guy behind him got in everywhere, no hooks), and he was rejected or waitlisted at two colleges where he was a legacy. Five years ago, when their acceptance rate was 50% higher than last year’s. Grades and scores alone just aren’t good enough.</p>
<p>(He was fine, he had great options, but they didn’t include the most selective schools to which he applied.)</p>
<p>It’s not 100%. The chances are just better given certain stats and at certain schools there are near certain stats for entry.</p>
<p>Altough many people try to deny it, Standard Scores do play a very significant role in college admissions. I would say that the Forbs article is more correct than wrong. Nowadays, scores below 700 can realy decrease the chances of admission of an “unhooked” student at very top schools.</p>
<p>For a nice detailed analysis about this issue, search google books for this book: “Ivy+ Admission Analytics for the Fox Parent: Intelligence, Strategy and Decision Rules for Breaching the Ivory Citadels”</p>
<p>I have no affiliation with this book, but to me the analysis is very telling.</p>
<p>NYB, Wow that book had more information and in such detail that I had never seen before. It was almost a blueprint BUT there was no mention of sports, a dearth of extracurriculars and minimal comments on a social life/dating. It worked for his kids but like anything, you can’t cookie cut everybody into the same mold.
He went into the explanation for applying ED or EA but there can sometimes be reasons NOT to apply early other than the obvious ones. My youngest son is looking at undergraduate business schools, many of whom require you to apply after Freshman or Sophomore year for admission to the business school. Some of these schools try to recruit higher qualified candidates with merit scholarships, which come with direct admission to the business schools if a minimal 3.0 is maintained. If you apply and are accepted ED, there is no incentive for the school to try and recruit you with a merit scholarship ( and the direct admission) so it makes more sense NOT to apply ED. Granted these are not HYPSM schools but still top 50, as not all top tier schools have undergraduate biz schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My kid with 620/580/730 got into Chicago & comparable schools. </p>
<p>The kid who is turned down with the 3920 didn’t miss out because his scores aren’t good enough, he’s missed out because other areas of his application didn’t have whatever it took to get accepted at those schools that year. What that quality might be is unknowable, because it is a combination of subjective factors. </p>
<p>My kid probably got into Chicago largely because she wrote a funny, Chicago-focused essay. That’s not all she did, but that’s probably the part of her application that brought a smile to an admissions reader, and made the ad com remember her in the spring. (She was deferred EA, then admitted). </p>
<p>You can’t plan to get into a college by writing funny essays. The essay could fall flat. </p>
<p>And some universities are more numbers oriented than others. </p>
<p>But the point is that the test scores are probably the least significant data point that the colleges look at. </p>
<p>Currently, 23%+ of Chicago matriculants have test scores in the 600-699 range, on at least one test. See:
<a href=“https://bigfuture.collegeboard.org/college-university-search/university-of-chicago[/url]”>https://bigfuture.collegeboard.org/college-university-search/university-of-chicago</a></p>
<p>That 20% figure is going to fall below the “mid-range” (which cuts off at the 25% mark) – but it is a significant number. We know its not the bottom line because 2%+ have at least one score of 590 or below. </p>
<p>Chicago is a school that places value on essays and likes quirky students. So that’s probably the best use of a Chicago applicant’s time: work on those essays, and make sure that those essays don’t come off as hackneyed or conventional. </p>
<p>I think very high scores can be a ticket to admission… but only at the types of colleges that don’t ordinarily see high score applicants. The elite schools see the students with the 750+ scores all the time. They like those scores, but they aren’t impressed by them.</p>
<p>Ok try this.D is at Wellesley ,top tier school.Unhooked non athlete 30 ACT 5 AP courses in HS leadership in multiple ECs interviews very well 4.0 GPA.This erroneous belief that it is all numbers contributes to the pressure to send kids to Kaplan at age 13.Enough already.</p>
<p>Hi Calmon:
“I think very high scores can be a ticket to admission… but only at the types of colleges that don’t ordinarily see high score applicants. The elite schools see the students with the 750+ scores all the time. They like those scores, but they aren’t impressed by them.”</p>
<p>The point is not that more than 700 is a ticket to admission at highly selective schools. The point is that less than 700 decreases your chance of admission at those schools.</p>
<p>In my birth country it is not uncommon to attend 3 years’ worth of cram school to prepare for the national entrance exam. That’s 3 years of 52 weeks of two nights a week of studying just for one exam. No superscore. </p>
<p>At the same time, questions on the exam become more and more far-fetched, including math problems straight from Math Olympiads, and physics problems that few people can agree on a solution. </p>
<p>And, unlike our beloved multiple choice SAT’s, math/science problems in Elbonia focus on depth vs breadth. Meaning, instead of 100 Mary-Had-A-Little-Algebra problems in the math test you get a dozen problems of the rather difficult variety.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, the Forbes article posited that 700/700/700 was a cutoff, and that the only students who ever got in with lower scores were athletes, affirmative action minorities, and development cases. </p>
<p>The raw stats suggest that the “cutoff” for the top schools is about 600 per test, not 700. </p>
<p>Although I suspect that the use of composite scores and the fact that the score ranges are reported separately for each test probably results in a “cutoff” score of about 1900, with almost all admitted students at the elites having at least 1 score above 700. </p>
<p>The schools don’t need the highest scoring students; for their own purposes, they only need to maintain a consistent average or median. So every upper end scoring student admitted in essence creates an opening for lower scoring applicant. Since the colleges seem to want to maintain a consistent score distribution, that means that they are going to continue to want to fill their “lower” 20% with students just as much as they want to fill the top 20% of slots. If it were otherwise, you’d see a gravitation toward higher and higher scores every year … instead the numbers hold steady.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, what the article actually said about 700/700 was:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The “special hook” doesn’t necessarily mean URM, athlete or development cases: it can be a unique interest, EC, talent or background. This has been discussed here ad infinitum.</p>
<p>On the flip side, there are plenty of 2300+ students that don’t get in either…</p>
<p>Yes, and “very special hook” is not president of the key club, debate team, model UN, 12 years of violin lessons, local volunteer, or captain of a sports team (unless a recruited athlete).</p>
<p>12 and 13 year olds are trying to take SAT for programs like DukeTIP and CTY and may be in those prep classes.</p>
<p>I know someone who had 2400 and perfect scores in 5-6 subject tests. Harvard and Princeton admitted the kid but Yale deferred. Does it mean Yale did not like the scores? Hardly.</p>
<p>special hook usually costs a few million and results in your last name on a building on campus. everything else is a hook.</p>
<p>My kid has 800/730/800 - one and only sitting. He asked whether I thought he should re-take and I said no. I believe that a score like this, compared with all his other scores, proves that he tests well and then other parts of his application will come into play. I believe that he will not get rejected BECAUSE of 730. But it is only my belief ;)</p>
<p>Ditto Kelowna. My S had similar scores (slightly lower, but close) and a great GPA. His scores and GPA obviously did not guarantee admission at any of the most selective schools, but at least they got him to the table. I suspect his quirky essay is why Chicago admitted him, along with the fact that he brought some geographic diversity.<br>
His scores/GPA alone were good enough that we were pretty sure he would be accepted at his safety. He ultimately chose the safety over Chicago (and several other options) because he simply loved the safety and they made it worth his while to choose them…</p>