<p>LOL- can I point you to like c.1900 when opting out didnt prevent one from critiquing? </p>
<p>If something is going to be self-styled national institution they are going to invite critiquing by the nation. </p>
<p>The lowest possible line of defense is claiming insider status. You will be going all Ferdinand Foch on us next. What someone held you to your own standards? How horrible for you.</p>
<p>Soon, I’m sure, this thread will be the product of useful information.</p>
<p>I’m just going to approve lookingforward’s post, because I feel she should be getting more little green jewels for patience and persistence! Just sayin’</p>
<p>^ I like her posts too, so gave out a few today, her included.</p>
<p>Hah! Lookingforward and me don’t even always agree, but I would be bored around here without her, for sure.</p>
<p>I thought the 500’s were recruited athletes, isn’t that the CCCW?</p>
<p>(CC conventional wisdom)</p>
<p>They could be anything including development cases, first gens, athletes or whatever.</p>
<p>The common misperception is that same the person got under 600 in all sections which is wrong. Most kids are lopsided and mess up one section while they do very well on the other two on SAT. If you look at various chance me threads, you will notice this phenomenon. So it is possible that someone has 590 and still have 2150 or something like that.</p>
<p>^ good point. We do see that all the time.</p>
<p>Know what poetgrl? You influenced me. Got me thinking. Thanks. And to you, too, Lake.</p>
<p>Yes, I definitely had to clarify my own thinking in order to argue with you, no better way to figure out what you REALLY think. </p>
<p>Now, back to your regularly scheduled programming:</p>
<p>Texas is right. I doubt even the athletes have completely subpar SATs. They probably bring in one “lesser” area.</p>
<p>texaspg makes a good point. Does Harvard really want to be turning down AMO/Intel winner math geniuses because of mediocre CR scores? Or rejecting brilliant published poet/authors because they didn’t do enough math prep? Take a look at the CDS for MIT. Clearly a lot of lopsided kids there.</p>
<p>SAT Critical Reading SAT Math SAT Writing
700-800 61.5% 92.3% 67.6%
600-699 31.7% 7.7% 27.3%
500-599 5.9% 0.0% 4.7%
400-499 0.9% 0.0% 0.4%
300-399 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
200-299 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
100% 100% 100%</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course, it’s false. Judiasm has clear definitions of who is and is not Jewish. But as a practical matter, if you’re trying to count Jews on a college campus, you have to rely on self-reporting, which does not necessarily coincide with technical definitions.</p>
<p>Marian, Reform Jews have a different definition from Conservative and Orthodox. My children, who have 3 Jewish grandparents, would not be considered Jewish by the Orthodox since the non Jewish grandparent is their maternal grandmother (my mother). But they and I couldn’t care less, because any Reform temple and any Hillel would certainly “accept” them as Jewish. The Orthodox do not have a monopoly on the definition.</p>
<p>If you want to get an idea of what the 100 valedictorian, 800 scorers should have done, check out the accepted students threads at the universities you are interested in. There’s a wide variety of activities.</p>
<p>FWIW, my oldest was in the top 1% of his class, had one 800 section on SAT1, three 800s on the subjects tests and still got rejected from Stanford, MIT and Caltech. The horror! I’m sure that the soft parts of his application were judged differently by different admissions committees. And that’s fine.</p>
<p>"Shouldn’t there be a special checkbox for under-represented WASPs? "</p>
<p>Good idea, But there would have to be different categories of WASP. Although I am Scottish,English and Swedish and Protestant, my family did not come over on the Mayflower! I am certainly not a “High WASP.” Does that make me a “Low WASP”? :)</p>
<p>^ If you were really a Harvard sort of High WASP, you would know that coming over on the Mayflower was distinctly second-class, the Pilgrims being something of a nut-job splinter group, and not even a particularly successful nut-job splinter group. (The successful nut-job splinter groups produced what are now known as “Rhode Island”, “Connecticut”, and “Pennsylvania”, along with corresponding Ivy League universities.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m glad someone finally answered this question above. To be precise – What the 100 kids with higher test scores should have done to avoid being displaced by 100 low-testers was probably get an all-state first-team offensive line selection, get drafted by the NHL or Major League Baseball, win an Olympic medal, or garner an Oscar nomination. Stuff like that adds a ton of vitality to an application.</p>
<p>Well,Thanks for the info, JHS. Just confirms my lowly status! I do have a BIL that went to Yale years ago but H’s side of the family is slightly higher class! (probably somewhere between High and Low, need a new category!).</p>
<p>JHS forgot buildings matching the last name on campus. I think the Tufts guy explained this as an institutional need.</p>
<p>Networth definitely trumps wasp class. :p</p>
<p>sevmom: But there’s good news! High, low, no one cares anymore about distinctions among WASPs! No one cares anymore about distinctions among white people in general, except maybe Ron Unz.</p>
<p>Among American Jews, there used to be huge social distinctions among Sephardic, German, and Russian (actually, anywhere in Eastern Europe) Jews. In the second half of the 20th Century, for fairly obvious reasons, people stopped caring, or even noticing, very quickly. (There was an apocryphal story about my old law firm, which for a long time had only German Jews, and a few Sephardics. In the mid-30s, it hired a brilliant Russian Jew who had been on the Harvard Law Review, and who later became the firm’s first Russian Jewish partner. On the day Nazi Germany invaded Poland in 1939, the then-chairman of the firm showed up in the associate’s office and said, “Congratulations, Bernie. Now you are a German Jew, too.”)</p>
<p>Those distinctions could be important to colleges, too. When my grandmother’s generation was going to college – the first generation in my family to do so – Yale and Princeton were accepting some Jews, but not Russian Jews. Harvard/Radcliffe’s willingness to take my grandmother and her brothers despite their “low” status played a huge part in creating a century-long loyalty that is only abating now that their great-grandchildren are no longer being accepted. </p>
<p>But now? Distinctions between German and Russian Jews mean about as much as distinctions between people who are left-handed or right-handed. Less than that, actually.</p>
<p>Good to know all this,JHS And good to know you don’t feel there are distinctions between left-handed and right-handed people(since I am left-handed, a distinct minority).</p>