Uhhh…that’s just score speculative only. Higher SAT score can mean one has the mean (test prep) and put more effort into it (I’m Asian so I know why Asians have such a high test score because they focus so much on it). The mentality is that score means everything but reality is not so. I would say that people got accepted because they have other excellent qualities. A perfect SAT score would be nice but I don’t think that it would have a huge effect.
2400 scorers who are admitted are much more likely to post than 2400 scorers who are rejected.
I think I saw at one point that perfect scorers applying to Harvard are admitted about 35% of the time. That seems reasonable. It definitely helps, but it won’t get you in.
There’s a huge correlation/causation issue here, too. I believe, and I think everybody believes, that people who have the magic combination of elements that Harvard looks for in its academic admittees are much more likely to score 2400 on the SATs – with or without superscoring – than the general population. If you are one of those people with the magic combination (or if you are a sports recruit), and you have a 2400, you have close to a 100% chance of admission, but you have the same close to 100% chance of admission if you have the same qualities and 2300 SATs. On the other hand, if you score 2400, but you clearly come up short on several of the magic qualities, and you aren’t being recruited for a sport, your chance of admission is virtually 0%.
You also have to remember too that anyone can post that they got a 2400 on the SAT and it is just self-reported. No one is verifying that it is true. Not that anyone would purposely lie, but just take the information with a grain of salt.
I think there are benchmarks to meet in terms of scores, and after that scores aren’t that relevant. There is little difference between a 2200 and 2400 in terms of chances for admission. Harvard admissions is “holistic” and aims for an interesting overall class, not a campus full of perfect test-takers.
I agree with you @compmom @ jhs @hola1997. Students with 2400 Sat and a list of mediocre ECs were usually rejected. The ones who got admitted were those who also shone in their ECs. Looking at the stats of those admitted, I’ve noticed a strong correlation between 2400 in Sat and impressive achievements in other areas.
The SAT does give a certain assessment about one’s academic capability in supplement with the transcript but certainly, it is not perfect so that’s why ECs, LORs are used in order to make the process as perfect or “holistic” as possible despite not being perfect yet (since no one can verify ECs, some people lie, make up, etc.) but it is the best model that they have right now to recruit and assess applicants. Those who got in had excellent GPA, great SAT, committed ECs, meaningful and unique essays which help display the qualities and characters that Harvard is looking for.
The point is that 2400 is not that relevant. SAT’s are relevant, but the perfect score doesn’t mean that much compared to other relatively high scores.
I like the concept of Lesser Ivies. I take it Harvard is in the “greater” category, when arguably Dartmouth and Brown care more about their undergraduates and provide better undergraduate experiences. Bit of a sophomoric debating point too!
Those who got in had excellent GPA, great SAT, committed ECs, meaningful and unique essays which help display the qualities and characters that Harvard is looking for.