<p>Silverturtle: I am plowing through the entire thread. I am still not clear how Mifune is directly engaging the problem of causality.</p>
<p>I think that the Brown data are most telling, as it is the only school to single out 800. Consider these facts:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Applicants with 800 on the Critical Reading section of the SAT are about 39% more likely to be admitted than applicants with 750-790.</p></li>
<li><p>Applicants with 800 on the Math section of the SAT are over 28% more likely to be admitted than applicants with 750-790.</p></li>
<li><p>Applicants with 800 on the Writing section of the SAT are about 46% more likely to be admitted than applicants with 750-790.</p></li>
<li><p>Applicants with 36 on the ACT are about 119% more likely to be admitted than applicants with 33-35 and about 273% more likely to be admitted than applicants with 29-32.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>There is no merely correlational explanation for these data.</p>
<p>So you know that I’m seeing the obvious: the percentage of applicants who are admitted with perfect SAT or ACT scores exceeds the second highest reported threshold in all of these cases, by a significant amount. </p>
<p>And it’s apparently the case that the marginal increase from the second highest level, to the very highest, is greater than any other range on the scale for both tests.</p>
<p>And I will concede: student x will improve his/her chances of admission in these places if he/she gets a perfect score, versus a nearly perfect score. </p>
<p>I guess that’s your essential point, and I guess I was arguing the contrary, at the beginning.</p>
<p>Here’s what I won’t concede:</p>
<p>a. That a perfect score will increase one’s absolute chances to anything approaching .5. Get a perfect score, and you are still likely to be rejected by the top colleges. </p>
<p>b.
</p>
<p>I bet we could find one, if we kept looking.</p>
<p>c. Taking the test a second time if you just get a 33 is necessarily the BEST way to increase your chances. I think that’s a cost/benefit decision for each individual.</p>
<p>d. That the non-monotonic relationship described in the Princeton example of the Avery paper necessarily results from strategic admissions practices. It could be that, and it could also be dimensions besides the SAT that we’re not discussing.</p>
<p>A final point about the SAT: I believe scores are censored at the top. This means that more people get 800’s (or 2400’s) than 790’s or (2390’s). This isn’t true for the ACT. Do you think this means anything?</p>
<p>Many thanks for your insights, Silverturtle, and please forgive my rocky initiation into this topic.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, actually, I have heard multiple times that Princeton indicated that it usually accepts around 50% of 2400ers, though I cannot find a linkable citation.</p>
<p>Out of pure curiosity, I did a little data compilation of CC 2400ers’ success at Princeton (I disregarded international applicants):</p>
<p>*Class of 2014<a href=“4/5%20accepted”>/i</a></p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 720/780/780/770
Rank: 2/200
[Rejected]</p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 800/800/800/770
Rank: 1 (class size not specified)
[Accepted]</p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 800/800/800/800/780
Rank: 1/517
[Accepted]</p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 800/800/800/800/800/800
Rank: 1/760
[Accepted]</p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 800/800/800
Rank: Top 10% (exact rank not specified)
[Accepted]</p>
<hr>
<p>*Class of 2013<a href=“2/2%20accepted”>/i</a></p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 800/800/800
Rank: not given
[Accepted]</p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 800/780/760
Rank: not given
[Accepted]</p>
<hr>
<p>*Class of 2012<a href=“2/2%20accepted”>/i</a></p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 800/800/790
Rank: 1/500
[Accepted]</p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 800/800/800/800
Rank: not specified, but 4.0 unweighted GPA
[Accepted]</p>
<hr>
<p>*Class of 2011<a href=“2/3%20accepted”>/i</a></p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 800/800/750
Rank: 2/210
[Deferred ED then Rejected]</p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 800/800/770
Rank: not specified, but 4.0 unweighted GPA
[Accepted]</p>
<p>SAT: 2400
Subject Tests: 800/800/800/800/770
Rank: not specified
[Accepted]</p>
<p>10/12 (83%) is not too shabby. Of course, it’s not exactly scientific. :)</p>
<p>wow you guys sound so intelligent… how about some advce for someone trying to get at least a 28. my cuz got acceted to University of Chicago with a 27. thats all the evidence i need. your help would be greatly appreciated</p>
<p>I was in the same situation. I had got a 33 twice. On my fourth try, I finally got a 35. Bumping up in the high-30s range is hard because the very very few questions you are missing are the hardest questions!! I would suggest studying, practicing tests, and taking the actual test more. Sometimes you just need to get lucky.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>UChicago is easily one of the ten most selective schools in the country. A 28 would not put you in a good position at all.</p>
<p>Yes you can…</p>
<p>first act: best act: today’s act predicted
English: 24:35:36
Math: 31:35:36
Reading: 30:35:35
Science: 26:30:35</p>
<p>Just study and you’ll be fine</p>
<p>maybe those with perfect scores are more likely to have stronger all round applications?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s what we were discussing when we mentioned causation and correlation. It is highly unlikely that, for example, people with 800 on the SAT writing section have applications that are so much stronger overall than those with 750-790 that they would have a 50% greater chance at Brown. I suspect that the merely correlational (i.e., not causal) aspect accounts for about 4-5 percentage points, certainly nowhere near 50%.</p>
<p>Improving upon a test score improves upon an application. If applicants have similar stats in other areas of the application, as many do, higher test scores will win. However if you are in a good range, you should focus on other areas of your application. At my school, there are plenty of kids every year with little on their apps besides great SAT’s and GPA’s. So OP- do a little prep and take some practice tests to see how you could improve, and if it looks like a 33 is what you’re going to have to settle for, start working on other areas of your application because you can increase your chances that way too.</p>