<p>I'm applying to UPenn SEAS early. My grades are good, and I'm in the top 5% at my school, but the rank won't be disclosed. I have great recommendations, two from my AP Chemistry and AP US History teacher and one from my yearbook adviser. I also have great essays and well-rounded extracurriculars with some engineering-related ones with awards. However, my SATs are not that great at all. I thought I did well on the October 7th SATs and actually got a 1990, 10 points less than my March score. I have a superscore of 2020, 600 CR, 710 M, and 680 WR. My superscore puts me at a little higher than the 25% for Penn, which is 1970. In addition, my SAT II scores are not the best either. I have a 730 in chemistry, a 720 Math II, and a 660 in biology. I was looking at the ED/RD acceptances and the people who got accepted had many different SAT scores. According to [url=<a href="http://www.admissionsug.upenn.edu/applying/profile.php%5Dthis%5B/url">http://www.admissionsug.upenn.edu/applying/profile.php]this[/url</a>], the acceptance rate per SAT range doesn't fall too much. </p>
<p>Can your awards, extracurriculars, grades, and essays make up for poor SAT scores, especially as poor as mine?</p>
<p>Out of the transcript, essays, teacher/guidance recs, ecs, and SAT scores, my regional representative said that SAT scores count the least. He said that they looked to see if you fall within a certain range, though the actual score wasn't that important. You should be fine with your other awards, ecs, etc.</p>
<p>That table doesn't tell the full story. While the admit rates don't seem to fall off much with decreasing SAT scores (going from a 740M to a 600M appears to reduce your chances only slighly from 18% to 14%), the people at the low end are not generally from the same applicant groups as the people at the high end. They are perfectly willing to overlook low SATs for some people who they want at Penn, scores be damned (URMs, athletes, "development admits"). BUT, that leave them with a problem - they would like to have their overall average SAT score to be in the 700+ range in the US News ratings (and all the other books). So, for every low 600s person they admit, they need a high 700s person to keep the average on target. This means that the scores for everyone else, especially groups that are "over represented" (Asians, people from the Northeast, etc.) are clustered on the upper end of that chart . So, if you are say an AA kid from the ghetto of Phila and you have a 600M, then you may have an excellent chance (even higher than the 14% indicated on the chart). If you are someone they want to be the QB of the football team, your chances are 100%. If you are say the daughter of an Indian radiologist and live in a rich NY suburb with lots of other applicants to Penn, your chances with a 600M are not 14%, no matter what that chart says. They are not even 1.4%. So it really depends who you are.</p>
<p>A 600CR is not really who they are looking for unless you are "special" . They are especially unforgiving if there are lots of other applicants from your school.</p>
<p>The other thing the chart misses is "self-selection". Most people with 600M don't even bother applying to Penn on advice of their counselors, etc. Those that do already know that they have some "hook" going for them.</p>
<p>Lastly the chart is misleading because it's done in percentages instead of raw #s - maybe there were 100 applicants in the 600-640 group and they took 14 of them (14%) but there were 1000 applicants in the 700-740 group and they took 180 (18%).</p>
<p>Penn cares a little bit about SAT scores. However, it cares about keeping its yield high a tad more, so it will waitlist/reject a lot of high-scoring applicants. That is why acceptance rates aren't too different for each section on the high end.</p>
<p>I'm not sure I totally buy into the idea that a lot of people are rejected for being "too good" for Penn (the so-called "Tufts Syndrome"). Penn nowadays (rightfully) sees itself as being "good enough" for everyone. This is especially true of Wharton and double especially true of the joint progs. And of course this has no application at all to the ED round. So, I guess if you had 2400 and stellar EC's and applied to the College in the RD round, MAYBE they'd be suspicious that they would lose you to HYPS, but I think they'd be tempted to take you if you had any connection to Penn (e.g. legacy) or a convincing "Why Penn" essay.</p>
<p>I agree with Percy. When I started looking at colleges I never once thought of Penn has being of lesser quality than HYPS (other than in name brand only). People think that Penn's surge up the US News & World Report rankings has been playing the system, but all the research I did into the school shows a steady improvement since the late 80s and early 90s. Thus, I see a lot of people applying to Penn with high scores being accepted. This will be even more true in the future as more students begin to associate Penn with "Top 5 University" and the old reputation as the "doormat of the Ivy's" goes to dust.</p>
<p>I talked to the local regional admissions rep. The rep said that if all your other stuff is good, then that can outweigh your SATs, but if you only have SATs, then those can't outweigh your other stuff or lack there of. The rep also said the same for grades. It's more than just numbers. Plus, I got the same answer from my friend who is at Penn engineering right now.</p>
<p>By the way, I think I have a good shot with everything else, especially my ECs and awards. Those really convey my science/engineering interests and my interests in writing, which portrays me as well-rounded.</p>
<p>i totally agree with you guys. SATs are a factor but are not everything, espeically for penn. i cant stand people who say you only need an 800 on math IIC to get into wharton, or a 2400 on SATs. i'm applying ED there and i only got a 750, and a 2300 on my SATs. that doesn't mean automatic rejection, despite what most cc kids think. </p>
<p>good luck to all penn applicants, especially wharton kids! i really hope to see us get acceptance letters!</p>
<p>sorry pennhopeful, i didn't want to come off an arrogant biatch, but you're right, 2300 is stellar, but my point is, in the eyes of cc overacheievers, that's not nearly good enough. makes me wanna smack each one of them, lol. </p>
<p>hey guys, it it true that the essays and letters of rec hold the most importance, while the SAT scores and EC's not quite as much (unless ure EC's are like going to Antarctica and saving the polar bears)?</p>
<p>yzheng - it's true that higher is not necessarily better (or only slightly better) for SATs. BUT, only above a certain threshold (and the threshold varies depending on whether you have a "hook" or not). In other words, a 2300 is just as good as a 2400. But that doesn't mean that a 2000 is just as good as a 2300 - it ain't. As I explained above, statistically they really need non-hook (white, Asian, suburban, Northeastern, etc.) applicants to fall mostly (if not always) in the top 50% of their distribution so they can reserve the bottom 50% for the "hooked" applicants. If you are non-hooked and you are below say 2100, you really got some 'splainin' to do. It's not impossible if everything else is stellar and they really like you otherwise, but if there are others from your school that are substantially higher and have similar EC's, they will take those 1st. Remember they have to reject 84% of applicants (90+% for Wharton) so they are just looking for excuses to weed people out.</p>
<p>I don't want to destroy anyone's confidence but there's nothing worse that talking yourself into the idea that you're getting in for sure and then being bitterly disappointed when you don't. Just assume you ain't getting in and be surprised and happy when you do.</p>