<p>Rank- 20 out of 632
GPA- weighted 4.0
1 AP Sophomore Year
4 APs Junior Year
5 APs Senior Year
Varsity Swimming and Soccer
Active in Church Youth Group
Spanish/National Honor Society Member
Done Mission work every summer throughout high school
Vice President of Junior State of America at school
Sat Math 740 Reading 640 Writing 610
White Male</p>
<p>Your rank and GPA are both very good. Your SAT's could use some improvement. All 3 of my children were accepted at Bucknell. My S and one D had higher SAT's and similar ranks and GPA (although smaller hs). My other D had similar SAT's but a bit lower rank and GPA-- but she applied ED.</p>
<p>All 3 kids had many more EC's.</p>
<p>i think you are almost a definite, though higher SATs wouldnt hurt</p>
<p>Re: the people suggesting you need higher SATs: here's Bucknell's 25/75%tile SATs:</p>
<p>Bucknell University 1230 1400</p>
<p>So, you're ahead of, say, 70% of the enrolled students, which I would think is plenty high enough.</p>
<p>Actually, for the class of 2012, Bucknell's 25/75 percentile SAT is 1290-1460. Your CR is on the low end of this range and your math is on the upper end of the range. Hence, as some of us have said, a higher SAT would help. Especially in CR.</p>
<p>I have heard from a college counselor that the SAT ranges at schools with good Engineering programs (like Bucknell) are high - and the boost largely comes from the Engineering School applicants. Acceptance into the Eng. program is much more competetive than most of the other programs - so perhaps your scores are fine depending on your proposed major. Hope that makes sense!</p>
<p>morrismm, the range you posted is for ACCEPTED students in the class of 2012. as with any school, the top of the admit pool has more (and 'better') college options than the bottom and, as such, ENROLLED student sat scores (those you see in usnews) are universally lower. </p>
<p>official class counts arent tabulated until after the 10th day of classes (which was this week), so we should be seeing enrolled numbers soon. my guess for the enrolled class of 2012 is 1240-1410, give or take 10 points on each side, since yield (accepted students who enrolled) was way up for an accepted student group with the same sat range as 2011.</p>
<p>with that in mind, be careful in general when dealing with sat ranges posted on school websites. some, like colgate and now lehigh, ONLY post those of accepted students. some, like bucknell and lafayette, post both. and some post scores for enrolled students only. an easy (and free) way to check is to look up the school on the college board website. the numbers there are currently for ENROLLED students from the class of 2011. if the 2012 numbers look substantially higher than the 2011 ones, youre almost certainly comparing apples to oranges. </p>
<p>anyway, in terms of how to approach enrolled student scores when thinking about chances, youre dealing with a very inexact science. three big reasons:</p>
<p>1) special admits: a significant percentage of students at most liberal arts colleges are recruited athletes. the vast majority were good high school students, but relatively fewer would have been accepted had they not been recruited. (think someone on the swim or track team with a 3.6/1240: solid student, probably wouldnt have gotten into bucknell.) throw in the children of wealthy alums as well as urm and fine arts admits and youre looking at quite a few large, desirable groups of students with average sat scores below the universitys overall average. </p>
<p>2) you have to view the range within the context of the percentage of applicants with similar sat scores who were admitted. if two schools have identical score ranges but the first admits students scoring in the 1300s at twice the rate of the second, then the second school is effectively twice as difficult to get into for someone scoring in that range. unfortunately, this data is difficult to come by.</p>
<p>3) while stats are important, most schools admit students holistically. what is important here is that a higher-stat, less interesting applicant is likely to have more consistent admissions outcomes than a lower-stat, more interesting one. and since 'interesting' is subjective, peer schools reach for a more diverse group of of lower-stat applicants compared to a somewhat less diverse group of higher-stat applicants. net result: lower yield for high-stat acceptees and a deflated sat range. to make all of that simpler, each school is not selecting the consensus most qualified candidates among those with lower stats and as a result, those deemed qualified (but with lower stats) are more likely to enroll.</p>
<hr>
<p>the result of all of this is that a student having an average sat score for enrolled students, as well as an otherwise 'average' (for enrolled students) profile, does NOT mean the school should be viewed as a match, not that im sure there is a consensus on what exactly a 'match' is.</p>
<p>assuming it to mean a 50% chance at admission, a typical applicant to bucknell would likely need a 1350+, if not higher, with an otherwise solid application. </p>
<p>...but i see nothing wrong with a 1380.</p>
<p>ericatbucknell you have been very helpful on many Bucknell threads, so this is not meant to be disrespectful. But enrolled students MUST BE ADMITTED. And it seems to me undecided72 wants to be ADMITTED.</p>
<p>Having gone through the college application process as a P three times, I have learned that acceptance to college in many ways seems like a crap shoot. I have a S at Colgate, a D at Cornell and a D at Bucknell. I have been shocked at some of the admission decisions of my kids and their friends. I know of kids with similar or lower SAT and hs rank than undecided72 get into MIT and Stanford. I also know of many top/honors kids getting rejected from Bucknell. </p>
<p>So, the point is, with next year supposedly being the most competitive year ever in terms of number of students applying to college, it is probably a good idea to try to make yourself ABOVE the average.</p>
<p>As my original entry stated, undecided72 I think your rank and gpa are very good. It would help to improve your SAT in CR and maybe your EC's. If you love Bucknell, and show that in you application, I believe you stand a very good chance at addmission.</p>
<p>
[quote]
ericatbucknell you have been very helpful on many Bucknell threads, so this is not meant to be disrespectful. But enrolled students MUST BE ADMITTED. And it seems to me undecided72 wants to be ADMITTED.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>absolutely. </p>
<p>but i ask, what does it matter if bucknell (or colgate, or any other highly-selective--but not super-selective--school) admits 500 4.0/1500+ers every year who have little to no intention of actually enrolling? how do those students impact a somewhat less qualified applicants chances?</p>
<p>answer: they dont. as such, published data for accepted students, a significant majority of whom will NOT choose bucknell, should be seen as nothing more than a marketing ploy. (in this case, a move to keep up with colgate, which for years has only posted accepted student data on its website.) </p>
<p>now, as i said, an unhooked applicant DOES want to be above a school like bucknells enrolled midpoint to have a 50% chance of admission in an 'all else equal' scenario. the fact that a number somewhat above bucknells enrolled median isnt dissimilar to the accepted student median is coincidence, though. think about harvard or yale: an otherwise typical applicant at that level needs a 1600 for a 50/50 shot, well above each schools accepted student median. on the other end, think of a school with an 80% acceptance rate and an average sat score of 1000. someone with a 900 likely has a 50% chance there.</p>
<p>as such, ill stick to my initial point. look at enrolled student data and acceptance rates. at bucknell, with an enrolled midpoint around 1320 and a sub-30% acceptance rate, a typical applicant will probably need a 1350 (perhaps higher) for a 50/50 shot. that is indeed above the enrolled student average, for reasons i pointed out at length. but its not because bucknells accepted student range is 1290-1460. thats simply coincidence.</p>
<p>Speaking of keeping up with Colgate...In November of 2007, Bucknell created a list of metric goals that they hope to reach by 2016. An example is the proposed target SAT range of 1260-1430 which is identical to Colgate's current range. Also, the targeted USNWR rank is 15, which is right around Colgate's rank. The administration certainly has its work cut out for itself.</p>
<p>I think Bibbist has a good point. The average SAT score in the College of Engineering(according to the COE web page) is 1364 and the average for the entire school is about 1310.</p>
<p>Wow...I haven't looked at this thread in a while...thanks everybody for your insight</p>