<p>Just to throw a monkey wrench in this very interesting analysis…since Harvard uses superscores, that kinda invalidates using the college board data, which reports single sitting total scores.</p>
<p>You’re right; the number of single sitting scores of 2350 or above is irrelevant. My kids’ Wharton friend took that into account in his analysis.</p>
<p>While I totally agree with Gibby, Sherpa et al vs. TomsRiverParent, I find it interesting that the 75th percentile for the ACT is 35 (meaning 25% percent of the accepted students who submitted an ACT score had a perfect score of 36). It is essentially as difficult to score a perfect score on the ACT as it is on the SAT (something like 0.07% vs 0.04%). Making this even more interesting is the fact that there is NO superscoring for the ACT so the 25% being perfect is even harder to come by.</p>
<p>Actually it means 25% submitted a 35 or 36.</p>
<p>FWIW: Page 14: <a href=“http://www.act.org/newsroom/data/2013/pdf/profile/National2013.pdf”>http://www.act.org/newsroom/data/2013/pdf/profile/National2013.pdf</a></p>
<p>According to the ACT National Profile Report: 6,949 students scored a 35 or 36 in 2013. </p>
<p>Harvard’s CDS reports 90% of admitted students submitted the SAT, while 32% submitted the ACT. When reporting the 75/25 percentile ACT score, Harvard doesn’t specify if they are reporting the 10% of students who just submitted the ACT, or the students who submitted the ACT and in addition submitted the SAT.</p>
<p>Harvard’s admissions are holistic, meaning they look at the big picture, not only of the applicant’s profile and life but of the class. They are assembling a class that brings an interesting mix onto campus and for people who will contribute while there. A campus full of people who all took maximum AP’s and got top scores and grades would be very boring indeed: that is not what they are after.</p>
<p>I suggest you do some hard thinking about the way you are living during high school Stop doing things so that you can get into Harvard or any other Ivy or selective school. Follow your authentic interests, both in and out of school. Try to be helpful to friends and community. Paradoxically, once you stop living to build a record and resume, and stop thinking about admissions, you will have a better chance at your chosen schools. And, in fact, once you stop fixing on Harvard et al, you may even choose different schools that are a better fit.</p>
<p>Check out Loren Pope’s books, “Colleges that Change Lives” (also a website) and “Looking Beyond the Ivies.” I hope you can relax and enjoy high school. If you like history, take the class, or take a history class online or at community college or a nearby university if you prefer.</p>
<p>^ Outstanding advice Compmom!</p>
<p>Yes, excellent advice from Compmom. Still, I have to take issue with this assertion:
If max APs, top scores, and grades were all they brought to the table, I’d agree. But why the assumption that that’s all they bring?</p>
<p>What about the student with max APs, great grades and scores, AND who happens to be a recruited athlete? Or the academic superstar with a passion for theater or community service? Are they boring?</p>
<p>I actualy wasn’t making that assumption, but good call on the wording. Add “just” or “only” to clarify. </p>
<p>That said, although there are a few individuals who can pull off stellar academic records with some unusual accomplishment in the arts, service, or some other area, it is also true that a college like Harvard will overlook, say, a less rigorous academic schedule, when it is clear that something had to give in order for the student to pursue something else that absorbed him or her. And diversity of interests and accomplishments is important in assembling a class.</p>
<p>All in all, the real point is that it is better to live a little more authentically (intrinsic versus extrinsic motivators) during high school, enjoy life, and go to a college that fits, whether Harvard or not!</p>
<p>p.s. Also want to clarify that I wasn’t saying individuals themselves were boring, only the mix of the class, which is admissions’ focus. </p>
<p>Sorry for reviving this thread but I wanted to have clarification of something that never sat right with me. Above, I had posted:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To which @sherpa replied:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have to ask if the 75th percentile is a 35, why doesn’t that mean 25% of the students scored above a 35?</p>
<p>Here is a link to Vanderbilt’s explanation of the middle 50%<br>
<a href=“Understanding the Mid-50% | The Vandy Admissions Blog | Vanderbilt University”>http://admissions.vanderbilt.edu/vandybloggers/2010/12/understanding-the-mid-50/</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>@Falcon1 - Let’s walk through it and I think you’ll see. Suppose there are 100 scores, and we rank them from lowest to highest, and the 75th score is 35. This doesn’t tell you what the 76th score is. It might also be a 35. We just don’t know. All we know is that the 75th score is a 35. Therefore we know that scores 76 through 100 are at least 35. It’s possible that scores 76-100 are all 36, but it’s also possible that they’re all 35. In all likelihood they’re a combination of 35s and 36s, but all we know for certain is that 25% are at least 35.</p>
<p>@sherpa It makes sense now and therefore the Vanderbilt example above and numerous others are wrong. </p>
<p>I could never reconcile how, if the middle 50% is 32-35, 25% of the ACT scores are 36 because there are only 1000 or so perfect 36’s each year (no superscoring for the ACT). Especially, since most Ivies reject more than 70% of the 36’s from the data that I’ve seen. </p>