<p>@intparent And my unhooked daughter got into UPenn RD with a 2140. That doesn’t mean every kid should apply thinking they have a better shot because she got in with that. Your child is the exception, not the rule. It’s also just logical to think that GPA is weighted more heavily than SAT score. 4hrs will never outweigh 4 years. Not now, not ever. With your logic, the average SAT score at the Ivies would be much higher than it actually is. A 2400 does not get someone a stronger look. Why? Because it’s a difference of just a few questions compared to a 2300 or even a 2250. You can’t just throw out unsubstantiated claims when there is explicit evidence showing otherwise. You should refrain from giving outright, incorrect information. Perhaps you are trying to find the reason why your child got in with an average GPA and in your mind, test scores is the only reason. But it’s probably more than that.</p>
<p>Here is another quote from another elite school. This is Stanford’s take on the discussion:</p>
<p>Yeah the average sat at most elite colleges is low to high 2200’s. Gpa is the most important factor, according to the crimson more than 50% of Harvard’s incoming class had 4.0s. So it’s not just a 3.7 keeps you out of the rejection pile, way way less than 50% of people with more than 3.7 will have a 4.0, even less than 50% of
People with greater than a 3.9 or 3.95.
I do think a 2400 will get someone a stronger look, it means you aced the test. There probably is some boost for a 2400, but it’s not enormous. Certainly not
The boost for a 4.0.</p>
<p>Actually, it’s a bigger boost at many schools because a 4.0 just isn’t that rare. In any case, essays, EC, recs and all that other stuff matter to a large extent at many places. Great essays can make up for one set of mediocre numbers (either GPA or test scores) at many schools.</p>
<p>Nope. She wasn’t lucky, and not even an exception. She was what the colleges are looking for and can’t often find. A kid with a truly intellectual bent and a lot of horsepower who isn’t worried about punching every ticket, didn’t grind out every possible A, but did what was interesting and fulfilling to her. They want to know if you can do the work, and then they move on to the next thing in the application to see what you will add to their community. Way too many students here are trying to squeeze in one more AP or boost one more A- to an A. It honestly isn’t the ticket to college admission success, but there is a lemming-like mentality that keeps many students thinking that is their ticket to a top college.</p>
<p>So explain why over half the people in Harvard have 4.0’s then. Fluke?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but your daughter applied to schools with a more intellectual bent like Harvey mudd and Uchicago which are notorious for trying to really weed out grinders and take people who they (feel) are truly intellectual.
Most, but not all, top notch colleges aren’t as renown for their intellectuality.</p>
<p>Keep believing whatever you like, but take a look at the 2018 ED decision threads (so below HYPSM and easier to get in to than RD) to see who gets in and who don’t. Heck, check out the 2018 RD decision threads as well.</p>
<p>Different highly selective colleges focus on different criteria. There are some highly selective colleges that admit nearly every top stat applicant (Vanderbilt, Rice, WUSTL, Notre Dame, etc). Some of these will often give notable merit money to applicants who pull up their stats. There are others highly selective colleges with more of a holistic focus that reject most perfect stat applicants. For example, In a 2006 interview, the Dean of admissions at Stanford said they rejected 65% of the 359 applicants fitting the profile of perfect SAT (1600) and perfect GPA. There was guy on this college admissions forum who claimed that he was rejected from all ivies with perfect stats (he later admitted he had a 800 on M+V, with slightly less than 800 on W). </p>
<p>
While that rule may be true for your kid, admissions stats for larger groups do not suggest a 3.7 threshold. I’ll use Harvard as an example since it was mentioned in posts above. Other HYPSM… type colleges also do not suggest a 3.7 threshold. The admit rate to Harvard by GPA over the past 3 years among Parchment members with a 2250+ SAT score who took 3+ APs is below. Yes Parchment isn’t perfect and overestimates, nevertheless, I find it useful for this type of rough trend.</p>
<p>4.0 – 31% (the group with by far the largest sample size)
3.9-3.99 - 17%
3.8-3.89 – 19% (small sample size)
3.7-3.79 – 6% (too small to be statistically significant)
Below 3.7 – 5% (too small to be statistically significant)</p>
<p>Among this group of 2250+ SAT Parchment applicants, slightly more than half had a 4.0 GPA. So one would expect the majority of admits in this group to have a 4.0 GPA, even if Harvard completely ignored GPA in their admissions decisions. I’d expect having such a huge number of 4.0 applicants partially relates to why so many Harvard students have a 4.0 in the survey mentioned above. However, the admit rates above also suggest that Harvard favors higher GPA applicants and may give some kind of bonus for a 4.0 where a perfect 4.0 is treated as better than a 3.95-3.99. Or it might also simply relate to correlations with other areas of the application. Applicants with a 4.0 instead of a 3.95-3.99 may be notably more likely to have some other criteria that Harvard values.</p>
<p>Princeton publishes their admit rates by GPA without filtering for SAT or course rigor, so we are comparing groups with different average scores and course rigor. Nevertheless, again the gradual decrease does not suggest any kind of GPA threshold:</p>