<p>I want to know how many people get 1600's each year. Not each test - each year. I know test scores are not all that matters - especially here, but I need this number to test a hypothesis of mine.</p>
<p>According to the College Board website, about 950 last year, which was up from 600+ the previous year. I think that's single sitting, not combined best, but the table doesn't say. Numbers lower for 1590, 80, 70.</p>
<p>The college board number is single sitting.</p>
<p>Here's a link to the numbers, for your hypothesis testing: </p>
<p>Let us know how your hypothesis tests out.</p>
<p>Interesting how there were almost twice as many males with 1600s as females...care to work that into your hypothesis?</p>
<p>And that's weird that the number of 1600s increased, anybody know why?</p>
<p>cuz at this point, seriously, SAT testing has become a joke because while i dont mean to undermine the accomplishment of the brilliant ppl who scored 1600s, i would like to point out that with all the books, courses, and just the unbelievably ridiculous amount of time people have been putting into SATs given the cutthroat yet random nature of college admissions, 1600s are no longer limited to the good test takers/the 'smart' kids but the kids who lock themselves in a room or study for the SATs starting from grade 5. And if you really think about it, while I understand there is some correlation between higher SATs and higher "intelligence", there is a much greater correlation between high scores and high socioeconomic status. Frankly, the SAT needs to be reformed and not in the form of the watered-down substandard cash cow "New SAT". If the United States wants to keep up with the rest of the world (and we're falling behind fast, forced to rely on foreign imports to sustain our intellectual engines), we need to institute a more comprehensive or a more specialized test that truly tests students abilities in depth rather than some hodge podge of multiple choice questions (or a 4th grade level essay)</p>
<p>I read somewhere that the two best predictors of academic success are, in order, (1) High School Grades and (2) Standardized Test Scores.</p>
<p>In this context, the SATs are a confirmation of intelligence and work ethic, not the deciding factor itself.</p>
<p>zoudini: that more comprehensive test we need to institute is called the ACT.
The ACT actually tests high school achievement. The SAT tests how well you can take the SAT. That's all. There are way way way fewer perfect 36s compared to 1600s. ACT > SAT</p>
<p>Gee, I don't think 950 is a huge number of 1600s out of over a million test takers. Incidentally, the frequently encountered assertion that colleges could fill their classes 2 or 3 times over with 1600s seems far-fetched.</p>
<p>Typically, Harvard had 2,100 applicants this year with 800 SAT verbals, and 3,100 with 800 SAT maths.</p>
<p>While the number isn't regularly reported, I have heard that a majority of the 1,600-scorers applies to Harvard every year.</p>
<p>In fact, Harvard seems to receive applications from 25% of the 1,400 + scorers.</p>
<p>In any event, this is apparently the last year for the current scoring system.</p>
<p>To correct the previous post, it appears that Harvard gets nearly 25% of the SAT 700+ scorers on the Verbal, and nearly 20% of the SAT 700+ scoreres on the math. Nationally, there were 46,000 700+ scorers in Verbal, and 66,000 700+ scorers in Math.</p>
<p>According to the Gazette's story about apps for 2009:</p>
<p>"11,000 of the applicants have an SAT verbal score of 700 or above and well over 12,000 have an SAT math score at that level. Almost 2,100 have an SAT verbal score of 800, while nearly 3,100 achieved an 800 in their SAT math test."</p>
<p>I'll just add, without in any way contradictng Byerly's numbers, that the number of test-takers who get 800 in either math or verbal (it's all in the tables) is very large, many times higher than those who get 800 in both. I don't know how many get 1600's by pasting scores from 2 or more sittings together, but that's clearly a higher number than the 950 who do it in a single sitting.</p>
<p>I'll also add that the drift of cc is usually to minimize the importance of SATs in admissions, but I've noticed through the years that when college professors are asked by parents at social events, etc, whether their kid has a chance to get in to their college, they almost invariably respond "what are his/her SATs," though an old friend at H always says "is there anything that makes your child really stand out?"</p>
<p>From the 2003 chart, there were roughly 6,000 nationally who got 800 scores on the Verbal SAT, and 10,300 who got 800 scores on the Math SAT.</p>
<p>This means that roughly 35% of those getting 800 on the Verbal SAT I apply to Harvard, and roughly 29% of those getting 800 on the Math SAT I apply to Harvard.</p>
<p><<this means="" that="" roughly="" 35%="" of="" those="" getting="" 800="" on="" the="" verbal="" sat="" i="" apply="" to="" harvard,="" and="" 29%="" math="" harvard.="">></this></p>
<p>But, do they only apply to Harvard? </p>
<p>Another way of looking at it is that 65% of those getting 800 on Verbal and 71% of those getting 800 in math - don't apply to Harvard.</p>
<p>You don't have to get defensive and snippy, there, "mom".</p>
<p>Out of 1,400,000 total test takers, and thousands of colleges seeking their applications, I think the fraction of high scorers applying to Harvard is rather striking, don't you?</p>
<p>Here is a quote from the Yale Alumni School Committee newsletter, referring to the Yale 2008 applicant pool, which was nearly identical in size to Harvard's:</p>
<p>"Nearly 1,700 applicants scored a perfect 800 on the verbal section of the SAT I, and almost 2,260 received 800 on the math section." So in identically sized applicant pools, Harvard had 30% more high SAT scorers.</p>
<p>It should also be noted that a huge majority of the Harvard/Yale cross admits choose Harvard, and that about 80% of all Harvard admits end up matriculating, so that it seems to have its pick of the high scorers who apply.</p>
<p>byerly why dont you break out into a rah rah chant for hahvahd. you obviously have nothing better to do than to bash yale. So much so, that I think you are actually afraid that yale might(probabily is) better than hahvahd. its nice to have pride in your alma mater, but even pton alumni arent as defensive and offensive as you.</p>
<p>Who's "bashing" Yale? I think the number of high-SAT scorers who apply to Yale is remarkable.</p>
<p><<out of="" 1,400,000="" total="" test="" takers,="" and="" thousands="" colleges="" seeking="" their="" applications,="" i="" think="" the="" fraction="" high="" scorers="" applying="" to="" harvard="" is="" rather="" striking,="" don't="" you?="">></out></p>
<p>No. I would have expected the fraction of high scorers who apply to ivies to be high.</p>
<p><<Here is a quote from the Yale Alumni School Committee newsletter, referring to the Yale 2008 applicant pool, which was nearly identical in size to Harvard's:</p>
<p><<"Nearly 1,700 applicants scored a perfect 800 on the verbal section of the SAT I, and almost 2,260 received 800 on the math section." So in identically sized applicant pools, Harvard had 30% more high SAT scorers.>></p>
<p>I'm quite sure that you realize the statistical insignificance of comparing only one year's applicants, not to mention the fact that you are comparing the 2002 applicants at Harvard to the 2004 pool at Yale. </p>
<p><<it should="" also="" be="" noted="" that="" a="" huge="" majority="" of="" the="" harvard="" yale="" cross="" admits="" choose="" harvard,="" and="" about="" 80%="" all="" end="" up="" matriculating,="" so="" it="" seems="" to="" have="" its="" pick="" high="" scorers="" who="" apply.="">></it></p>
<p>Is that 80% of the 800 scorers or 80% overall? You really do mix and match statistics at will. And I hate math.</p>
<p>I am comparing the 2009 pool at Harvard with the 2008 pool at Yale, only because Yale, so far, has declined to submit a detailed breakdown for 2009. (In fact, Yale's 2008 overall pool was larger than its 2009 pool.)</p>
<p>I could - but choose not to - gather and submit for your hostile review five years of numbers. Trust me (I know you won't) - the Class of 2008 was Yale's high-water-mark in re this stat.</p>
<p>does.it.really.matter.</p>
<p>geez. If all Harvard alums spent this much time dissecting meaningless stats instead of actually contributing something to the world, Harvard's reputation would spiral down into oblivion.</p>