<p>Well, I got my scores for the SAT II today, and i got a 740 on the SAT II History, and a 630 on Lit. I thought these were pretty good, but after looking at all the scores of people on CC, i'm thinking that my scores are pretty weak! i mean, people on this board are saying 710 is not "good enough." so are my scores lower than the average applicant, at say, UCLA, UCD, BU. etc?? or are people on these boards super smart? i'm starting to worry! So if anyone can tell me what's the real deal, and if my scores are good enough for UCLA, etc, please post!</p>
<p>ppl on CC represent .000001% of everyone with top stuff</p>
<p>Don't worry. I become nauseated every time I see people complaining about a 2100 on the SAT I or a 700 on the SAT IIs.</p>
<p>Yeah, CC seems to be a disproportionately high average. On the cornell forums the class of 09 did a SAT score average game it and came out to 1450ish i think, while cornell's average SAT hovers around 1400. The guidebooks and colleges' published statistics don't lie. If you're in the range there, you're in the range.</p>
<p>""The guidebooks and colleges' published statistics don't lie. """</p>
<p>i don't think that is true.</p>
<p>the collegeborad website says UPENN's ACT is 28-32.</p>
<p>princeton review says it's 30 ACT.</p>
<p>However, Upenn's website says it is 30-34!!! <<high...</p>
<p>why???
PRinceton review says it's 30 ACt. My college counselor went on this special database and it said 30.</p>
<p>oh, and I don't really believe that is is 30...too low for upenn.</p>
<p>It may seem low but some of those people may have, say, incredible grades, ECs, and essays. They get in that way and they "bring down" (which is good too, im not saying bringing down as a bad thing) the average.</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>wwait wait wiat</p>
<p>WHYYYY is the school website's ACT DIFFERENT from princetonreview/Collegeboard??</p>
<p>which one should i trustg?</p>
<p>to original poster:
hehe...don't worry - your scores are decent.
CCers do NOT in any way represent the average person applying to any school - even the Ivies.
If you're aiming for UCLA and BU and such, I suggest raising that 630 a tad, not because it's not good enough for those schools (for BU at least, while SAT I scores are not the same as SAT IIs, 630 is within their mid-50% range), but raising the score will make sure they don't have a stupid reason to reject you.</p>
<p>haha i find this site pretty discouraging at times too but wutever afirmative action will put me above a lot of these nerdz.</p>
<p>Princeton Review and College Board (among others) survey all the colleges annually to obtain this data, and then they publish it online and in guidebooks. In general, the data should be the same as on the college's web site, since they are the original source for the data. However, you may see differences because a college is usually able to publish data for it's latest class sooner than PR and CB. Check to see if there's a date to help you identify which class the data is for. Another source of difference may be the data format: PR and CB collect the data in a standard format all colleges use to report statistics to the goverment. It's possible that the college may be using a different format that it prefers on it's own web site. Also, keep in mind that PR and CB are reporting stats on enrolled freshmen only, not applicants, and not admitted students. The college could be reporting stats for enrolled or applicants or admitted students.</p>
<p>thanks for all your replies! it's good to hear that I'm the not the only one who thinks these CCers are indeed above average. :) good luck to you all, and I will definitely think about retaking the Lit test...I might as well! :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
haha i find this site pretty discouraging at times too but wutever afirmative action will put me above a lot of these nerdz.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I hate that attitude.</p>
<p>I hate AA.
I work harder than ANY black or mexican guy...
(that was a joke, mexican president style).</p>
<p>Seriously though - AA has some merit and purpose, but it really should be replaced by a system that rewards "bonus points" to people in bad economic conditions, rather than people of certain races.</p>
<p>y hate? there will allways be state schools for yall</p>
<p>"rewards "bonus points" to people in bad economic conditions"</p>
<p>spartan, ther are bonus points to those with bad econ. conditions.</p>
<p>(of course not nearly as much as URM)</p>
<p>AA is unfair. It is reverse discrimination. Why shou;d blacks and hispanics get a boost. White kids who work just as har if not harder than they give up their spots so the college can have "good minority numbers". Some blacks and latinos are just plain lazy. they dont deserve to go to a selective school over some hardworking white kid. You dont need AA to help a "disatvantaged people". look at asians, they didnt have aa treatment but yet they still fouught their way to the top</p>
<p>girlfriendmb it doesnt matter if you go to a better college than me because u get AA treatment and I dont since I m asian. With that attitude, I will definetly be more successful in life than u</p>
<p>how can u be more succesful with a community college degree?</p>
<p>Ignore the troll.</p>