<p>
[quote]
MIT wil make no difference between a 2250 or a 2400 applicant. Nor will it automatically pick a candidate with a 4.0 UW GPA over a 3.85 UW GPA or a kid with 12 APs over a kid with 4 APs.
<p>If there is no difference between a 2250 and a 2400, is there a difference between a 2100 and a 2250? how about a 1950 and a 2100? by that logic, does a 1950 mean the same thing as a 2400? does the SAT mean anything at all?</p>
<p>Unless you can provide evidence (i.e. citations) that substantiates your claim, please stop saying this nonsense.</p>
<p>Why are you so annoyed? It makes us stressed out, anxious college applicants feel better. At this point I can't change my SAT score, but I can change my outlook. If convincing myself that a 2100 is gold will keep my spirits up, then good for me.</p>
Let me tell you one more story that I often relay. I was doing a regional reception in a city a few years back, and afterwards a student -- we'll call her Artemis -- comes up to me and tells me that she has a 760 on the Math SAT. As I was about to tell her that her score was just fine, she keeps talking, to inform me that she was going to take the test again, since "clearly" her score was "too low." I was like, "What?!?!" I "ordered" Artemis to not take the Math SAT again, and instead to have a picnic on that Saturday. Because to us, a 760 math is the same as any higher score she could receive on the retest.
...in terms of MIT admissions, a 760 is definitely <em>not</em> worth retaking.
People with 760's get accepted at the same rate that people with 800's get rejected. At this level, numbers never drive decisions.
[quote=benjones]
Hundreds of kids with perfect scores across the board don't get into MIT. Hundreds of kids with 760's do get in. The point was simply that numbers don't drive decisions.
<a href="Note%20that%20in%20this%20context,%20we%20were%20talking%20about%20the%20difference%20between%20a%20760%20and%20an%20800.%20%20But%20the%20same%20holds%20for%20a%20750.%20:">/quote</a>)</p>
<p>MIT admissions officers have said repeatedly on this board and on their [url=<a href="http://www.mitadmissions.org%5Dblogs%5B/url">http://www.mitadmissions.org]blogs[/url</a>] that any score that starts with a "7" (or even a high "6") will put an applicant in the range for admission. No score guarantees admission to highly selective schools, but someone with a 2400, all things being equal, doesn't get an advantage over someone with a 2250.</p>
<p>EDIT: I should add also, probably, that it would be inappropriate for scores to drive decisions -- internal MIT surveys don't show a difference in freshman math performance between kids who get 700s on the SAT math section and kids who get 800s. SAT scores aren't destiny.</p>
<p>Can you find a quote from an adcom at an elite college saying that "we do not distinguish a 2400 and a 2250"? No difference between 2400 and 2390, fine. No difference between a difference of 150 points? When does the "there is no difference" line cross the line?</p>
<p>MIT is saying that anything above about a 2100 ("something with a 7 in front of it") is equivalent. I don't have a printed cite on that, but a) I have heard it many times from Ben Jones, and b) I can ask him to log on to CC and post it, if you would like.</p>
<p>koolcrud, kids with high test scores are probably more likely to have outstanding grades and outstanding ECs than students with lower test scores. Correlation vs. causation -- those students who were admitted with 2400s would have gotten in even if they had 2250s.</p>
<p>EDIT: I don't think the MIT internal study was done with the intent of predicting grades per se -- they just wanted to see if SAT scores correlated with freshman performance. The admissions process is, after all, a process to select people who are likely to succeed at a given college. If MIT had found that kids with 800s get A's while kids with 700s fail, they would probably change their admissions emphasis on math scores, and I think that's justified. They want to admit people who will be successful at the school.</p>
<p>the intrinistic nature of this argument is a lack of substantial evidence, for even if one adcom at MIT says a 760 is the same as an 800, it is impossible to get the opinions of every adcom on the matter. simply put, an 800 IS better than a 760 by definition. On test day, strive to get the highest score you can. If you get a 760 and know for a fact that you can do better (without too much extra studying) then retake it and get that 800. But the most important thing is not to look down upon your 760, for it is indeed a very top notch score and something to be proud of. So basically, achieve the highest score you can and be proud of it.</p>
<p>also, i think it is worth mentioning that a 760, due to discrepancies in the scoring curves and test day enviornmental factors, corresponds to a range of 730-790. so in that sense, a 760 is not too different from an 800 in that an 800 almost falls in a 760's "range"</p>
<p>Hey, I at least put my money where my mouth is. I got a 1430 on the old SAT the first time I took it, even though I'd gotten a 234 on the PSAT (and a 33 on the ACT in eighth grade). I didn't retake.</p>
<p>Good for you, molliebatmit. Can you find a quote from an adcom at an elite college saying that "we do not distinguish at all between a 2400 and a 2250"?</p>
<p>Whatisayouth...calm down...no one is saying that a 2250 = a 2400...stop concentrating on that and instead think about the overall message...that 150 points isn't as big of a deal as some people like to make it</p>
<p>You're all nuts. If you love the SATs so much how come you don't know that they're curved? To drop from an 800 to a 750 you need to miss about 3 questions. To drop from a 650 to a 600 you need to miss about 20. What, you think admissions officers are stupid? They just take the absolute value of A-B and that number represents how dumb one kid is compared to another? You think colleges would reject kids based on a difference of 3 or 4 multiple choice questions? Hell. I woke up 45 minutes into my relativity exam today. s<strong>t happens. s</strong>t happens to smart kids too. And if the kid were smart he wouldn't worry about having to prove himself through SAT scores.</p>
<p>12 is only 3 questions away from a perfect score on the AIME.</p>
<p>Bronze is only 2 places from gold.</p>
<p>You are only 5 digits away from Gates.</p>
<p>/End of sarcasm.</p>
<p>I am not upset, but tired of hearing the misleading "insights" on how adcoms think. Have you seen the graphs provided by many admissions books? Statistically, a 2400 has much better chances of being accepted than a 2250. Granted, there are many other factors. But to deny a difference between two scores are simply ridiculous.</p>