<p>And, regarding the GPA vs. SAT question: there is NO DOUBT in my mind that a high SAT will not compensate for a GPA that is below the school's median GPA.</p>
<p>"However, I've heard that being outside the top ten percent of your class is pretty much the kiss of death. Do you agree? "</p>
<p>I don't think this is true for rigorous prep schools.</p>
<p>i completely agree with carolyn. a high SAT will NOT make up for mediocre grades. that combination just makes the applicant look like a slacker who was willing to study for a 3 hour test, but not willing to study and work hard for his or her classes.</p>
<p>no one here is really qualified to say which is the most important factor. I think gpa, but gpa can be inflated, then I think SAT, but if you were a slacker, it just shows you're a good test-taker and nothing else, then I think curriculum, but 95%^ of people applying to selective universities have the toughest curriculum and the recommended/prefferred curriculum, then I think the interview, but people have been known to have a bad interview and then have acceptance, some say the essay, but there are countless stories of unoriginal essays making it through the process to an acceptance, others say EC's, but everyone has different oppurtunities, the prep school student has a lot more oppurtunities than the rural student in a class of 60. There isn't anyone who can answer the question for the reason that every school weighs the factors differently, and basing your match school on these factors is what makes the match school the most challenging. Safeties and reaches are the easy part</p>
<p>sweet, my first thread that's over a page! :)</p>
<p>people are usually less responsive to my posts</p>
<p>As I said, believe what you choose about the relative importance of GPA/SAT's, but there is another book about admissions (written by a lady at Duke), who says the same thing as the woman in "A is for Admissions." It's very PC to bash the SATs right now. I'm not going to get into a huge debate on the merits of the SATs. No school is going to say outright "SATs are more important" because the test is supposedly biased against minorities (and I've even heard it accused of bias against women - whatever.)</p>
<p>Schools need applicants. It makes them appear more selective if they get a ton of applicants. Why on earth would they say "Don't apply if you have below a 1350 on the SATs?" This is just common sense. Of course they aren't going to say they use a cut off, or that if you are below a certain score you have no chance.</p>
<p>And flameball, the reason admissions officers hate that book is because it was written from the inside. Read the case profiles she gives about applicants who were accepted/rejected. It blows the cover off of the diversity stuff. People who claim that race is not a deciding factor, merely part of the package, are in for a rude awakening.</p>
<p>what do you mean it blows the cover off diversity stuff?</p>
<p>AthenaNY: I know the books have SOME valid points. However, I've personally read the book, too. Along with that, I've read the critques of her book. All I can say is, I won't rely on it as the absolute in college admissions. You are free to like it. I am free to be indifferent towards it. All I am saying is that the regional director from Penn told me this. He also said the first thing he looks at (this applies to Penn...I guess) is the transcript. He actually referred to a kid here on this board from the last/or the one before last, RD cycle. I checked...I actually found him. The kid had a 1570 SAT, 800 across the board for SATIIs, took almost all the APs (5's across the board with a 4)... the school rejected him. The kid ranted on CC about how he was in shock. What the adcom said was that the kid wrote a crappy "WHY PENN" essay, so he got rejected. The moral of the story? I don't know. But, it says something about the college admissions process...it can't be dictated by any book...especially when a book tries to generalize the whole admissions process with less than so many pages. </p>
<p>P.S. I don't understand the animosity towards Penn Adcoms. But the guy I met was awesomely cool. By the way, athenaNY, everybody acknowledges that minorities (not including asians), recruited athelets, etc., have an edge...I don't think anybody tries to disguise this fact.</p>
<p>I don't think anyone is denying they have an edge. Plus, I'm not 100 percent opposed to affirmative action myself. I just think it's abused. My point was that the profiles of applicants of white and asian applicants who were rejected, as opposed to some black, hispanic and native american applicants who were accepted or wait-listed, was just a bit surprising.</p>
<p>Actually, for more on this you might want to read "The Gatekeepers" if you haven't already. It's about Wesleyan, and it reads like a novel.</p>
<p>SAT scores and GPA will put get you in the door but not the school y or n</p>
<p>How can you tell if you're a match at a very competitive school?</p>
<p>The bottom line is that at highly selective schools there is no argument about what's important. It's all important: GPA, rank, SATs and other tests, strong ECs. Unless you have a plan to save the world or an extraordinary talent, you will need to have done extremely well by all measures.</p>