<p>This is kinda a dumb question but...
Is it true that during the regular admission rounds, really selective colleges will turn you down because of your standardized test scores...even if they are within range of most applicants? Let's just assume that everything else is good. </p>
<p>Thanks in advance</p>
<p>Well, the "range of most applicants" is probably extremely different from the range of accepted applicants at really selective colleges, so if someone's toward the bottom of the pool and everything else is just "good," there's no reason they wouldn't turn someone down since they know they have more than enough more qualified applicants.</p>
<p>If they are within range of most applicants, then no. Honestly SATs don't matter that much. A 2400 will certainly help but if you have something like 2150 it's almost the same.</p>
<p>You have more chance of getting in with a 2400 than a 2150 definitely. I had a 2180 and I definitely think if I had 2300+ i would have got into 2 or 3 more schools</p>
<p>Honestly it wouldn't have made a difference. A school is not going to reject you just because of a 2180 instead of a 2300. Trust me, I had a 2300+ and was rejected to many schools.</p>
<p>No they wont reject me, but they might waitlist me. Im pretty sure i wouldnt have been waitlisted from Notre Dame if i had a 1550/2300</p>
<p>
[quote]
Honestly SATs don't matter that much.
[/quote]
This is a gross generalization that simply is not true for all colleges. </p>
<p>The OP asks about "really selective colleges", and when many/most of these schools indicate the importance of standardized test scores to their evaluation process, why would you have reason to doubt their relative importance? Certainly these colleges are not out to mislead applicants, and neither should applicants create any self-delusion that when a college says test scores are "important" or "very important" that they would be anything less.</p>
<p>When evaluating one's admissions' chances, the only thing you have to go by is how the applicant compares against the data of admitted students, correlated to admissions factors. Criteria is relative for each college (in the case of some excellent schools, such as Middlebury College -- a top LAC, they do not require any SAT/ACT scores), and each college's criteria/factors have to be examined individually. With many of the highly selective colleges, factors are weighted for importance, and even then, personal and compelling reasons may make a difference, e.g., URM status, disadvantaged educational or socio/economic environments, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
A 2400 will certainly help but if you have something like 2150 it's almost the same.
[/quote]
This certainly goes against the grain of any statistical evaluation for most of the highly selective schools. Whereas most all colleges state clearly that test scores are but ONE means of evaluating an applicant's chances for academic success at their respective schools, it's wishful thinking to hope that any given factor can be arbitrarily discounted just because an applicant does not like that part of his/her admissions information. If, as an example, Duke has its middle 50% range of ACT test scores for accepted students at 29 - 34 (25th percentile - 75th percentile), it states clearly that if one's ACT test score fell below 29, it also falls into the lower quartile for accepted students. All other things being equal (and of course, they are NEVER equal in any holistic application evaluation), that level of test score would give a candidate a 1 in 4 chance for admission. I repeat, however, that test scores are but one evaluation factor.</p>
<p>Boo21, in your case, I honestly think that your application will be a coin flip for most of the colleges you have expressed opinion in. I suspect that a re-take of ACT or SAT with improved scores will certainly help. The other factor that may work in your favor is that you are from a rural community in Kansas, and Asian, which happens to put you in the minority in that state. Because national universities seek to have representation from all 50 states if possible, you present extenuating circumstances for the adcoms to consider.</p>
<p>You would do well to control what you can and not try to control what you cannot. Retaking the tests would perhaps help. It wouldn't hurt. It's also within your control. Developing compelling essays that present an added boost to your already impressive academic/EC profile would also help. Again, this is within your control. See the potential shortcomings in your application, and do what you can to resolve them if you can and if you want. </p>
<p>I recognize that it may be frustrating to face up to reality, and sometimes admissions directors at colleges don't help either. They're faced with their own pressures of increasing applications, and they are very encouraging of all students to submit applications. Unfortunately, when acceptance rates for selection colleges range from 10-30%, that means they are rejecting many more than they are accepting. Your chances are very solid, and there are still things you can do to upgrade your prospects. Good luck to you!</p>
<p>wow^ thank you so much for your advice! That really helps to outline what I have to do in the future to increase my chances. I'll work on my standardized testing and hope for the best. Thanks again!</p>
<p>SAts matter. Period.</p>
<p>SATs matter more in early decision rather than regular decision but they still matter in regular decision.</p>
<p>Boo21,</p>
<p>
[quote]
... in your case, I honestly think that your application will be a coin flip for most of the colleges you have expressed opinion in.
[/quote]
That is, ... "for most of the colleges you have expressed interest in"</p>
<p>It's like that one saying, "SATs can't get you in, but it can get your out"</p>
<p>...as can bad grammar and careless typing.</p>
<p>"Sats won't get you in, but they can keep you out." Whether they admit it or not, most schools have an SAT cutoff.</p>
<p>SAT's basically play as big a role in schools' admissions as they say it does... for example, on collegeboard, if standardized testing is listed under very important, then it IS very important</p>
<p>
[quote]
All other things being equal (and of course, they are NEVER equal in any holistic application evaluation), that level of test score would give a candidate a 1 in 4 chance for admission.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>it doesnt mean that at all. if it did, more than half of harvard applicants with 1500+s would be accepted and someone with a 75th percentile score at a school that accepts 95% of applicants would only have a 75% chance of admission. what it does mean, and nothing more, is that 25% of admitted students scored at or below that number. </p>
<p>several others schools publish similar data, but here is something for lehighs class of 2010 that gives you some idea of how a moderately selective college admits students with varying sat scores:</p>
<p>overall acceptance rate: 39%
rate for 1500-1600: 66%
rate for 1400-1490: 64%
rate for 1300-1390: 58%
rate for 1200-1290: 32%
rate for 1100-1190: 17%
rate for 0400-1090: 09%</p>
<p>accepted student 25-75: 1260-1430.</p>
<p>ironically, the 1260 equaling a 25% chance works out pretty well here if you dont include hooked applicants (including athletes, who make up a large percentage of the bottom 25%). more importantly, note that there doesnt appear to be a huge difference between having a 1400 and 1500, though the drop off is quite large once one falls below the schools mean enrolled sat (1310). this number is near 1500 at top schools.</p>
<p>
[quote]
This is a gross generalization that simply is not true for all colleges.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's not true for all colleges, but the OP didn't ask about all colleges, did he/she? No, he/she asked about "really selective colleges." So let's talk about really selective colleges.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The OP asks about "really selective colleges", and when many/most of these schools indicate the importance of standardized test scores to their evaluation process, why would you have reason to doubt their relative importance?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Because you are interpreting it wrong. It's very important in that if you got a 1000 on the SATs it will be VERY hard to get you in. That's why it's important. When it comes to the top scores like 2100+ the difference is minimal.</p>
<p>
[quote]
When evaluating one's admissions' chances, the only thing you have to go by is how the applicant compares against the data of admitted students, correlated to admissions factors. Criteria is relative for each college (in the case of some excellent schools, such as Middlebury College -- a top LAC, they do not require any SAT/ACT scores), and each college's criteria/factors have to be examined individually.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I see you like examining. Tell me, have you actually examined many students and their stats? The criteria that these selective colleges have? From your user name I am going to assume that you did not just attend a high school with tons of students with similar stats who applied to similar really top selective schools, so let me tell you how the admissions process really works.</p>
<p>When talking about selective colleges, I am referring to Ivy Leagues, Duke, MIT, Northwestern, U of C, UCB/UCLA, etc.</p>
<p>I usually don't like to post my own stats here, but I will if it will help other candidates in the future:</p>
<p>GPA: 3.6uw, took the hardest classes at my school
SATs: 2330 composite, 2250 one sitting
SAT IIs: 790 Math IIC, 780 Chemistry, 770 US History
ECs: Marching Band for 4 years (section leader), Piano for 8 years, 2 1st places in festivals, president of Knowledge Bowl, president of Math Club, president of tutoring club, key club, chess club, ~100 hours of community service, have done Cross Country, Track & Field, and swimming
Okay essays and good recs</p>
<p>Rejected from: Yale, Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, U Penn, Duke, MIT, UCLA (in-state)</p>
<p>UCLA! What's up with that? About 15 other people from my school got into UCLA, with much worse SATs (think 1800-2000), about the same GPA, some ECs, and I don't know about essays.</p>
<p>So can you explain to me why UCLA, whose average admitted SAT score is 2010, rejected me? I was well above average. Same goes for SAT IIs. So if they were really that important, why did UCLA reject me and accept someone with a 18xx score? She wasn't a minority, didn't win any special awards, or do anything spectatular. She's just a pretty good student with some leadership. So why was someone who got a 2250 rejected while someone with a 18xx accepted if SATs really mattered that much?</p>
<p>Maybe she was just special somehow? I know more people. A girl with 2070 who got into Berkeley (fall admit) and Northwestern. I didn't even get into Berkely for fall (spring admit). Why did she? She had about the same GPA, and just some ordinary ECs, was a member of orchestra, etc. Can you explain that?</p>
<p>Another example: A girl gets into UCLA and Berkeley (fall) with I think...2030 SATs. Let's see, nothing too special, girl scouts, key club. If there is really such a big difference between a 2250 and a 2030, why did she get into schools I didn't?</p>
<p>Well, maybe UCLA is a little random, you say. What about all those other schools that rejected me? Let's take Cornell. What's its 25-75th percentile? 1280 - 1490. My composite was 1530. So I have a higher score than roughly 80% of the people there. Why didn't it at least give me a waitlist? I expressed a lot of interest, visited...why did students who got scores like 21xx get in while I didn't?</p>
<p>Maybe there's just something about me. Maybe I'm not likable. I have another friend: 2270 SATs 1 time sitting, 3.9uw GPA (VERY high at my school), ran 4 years of Cross Country and Track, editor of the school yearbook, etc. Good writer and good recs. He was rejected from Berkeley, Columbia, Williams, etc. Why the heck did this happen? Please explain that to me. His SATs were certainly pretty darn high. Why did the two girls I mentioned, with ~2000 SATs get in, while my friend, with a 200+ score increase, didn't?</p>
<p>Well, maybe it's just my high school. I have looked at countless threads on CC with stats/acceptances. Let's take a look at a few of the "selective colleges."</p>
<p>Let's take a look at Harvard. Harvard is pretty selective right?</p>
<p>Okay, let's take a look at this girl:</p>
<p>Decision: ACCEPTED</p>
<p>Stats:
SAT I:1960
SAT IIs:710-Chem 700-Lit 670-2C
ACT: 30
GPA: 5.5
Rank: none
Other stats:
Deferred?: YUP</p>
<h1>of apps from your school: lots</h1>
<p>Subjective:
Essays: killer
Teacher Recs: excellent
Counselor Rec:crazy good
Hook (if any):
Important ECs:
Location/Personurham
State or Country: NC, USA
School Type: Science and Math
Ethnicity: Black!!!
Gender: Female
Perceived Strengths/Weaknesses:
Why you think you were accepted/rejected/waitlisted:
Is Harvard your #1 choice?:</p>
<p>Come on, 1960? That's pretty low for Harvard. But she was accepted. Why? The only thing I see is...possibly good essays (we don't know) and she's black. Come on, URM matters more than SAT scores? Guess SAT scores aren't really important.</p>
<p>Another girl:</p>
<p>Stats:
SAT I: 2120 - 740 Critical Reading, 680 Math, 700 Writing
SAT IIs: 760 - MathII, 660 - US History, 640 - Literature
GPA: 3.9 uw, 4.7 w
Rank: 9/426
Other stats: AP USH, Govt, CalcAB Scores - all 3's
Deferred?: YES</p>
<h1>of apps from your school: 2</h1>
<p>Subjective:
Essays: Amazing
Teacher Recs: Glowing
Counselor Rec: Great
Hook (if any): Poor, but passionate? haha I don't know!!!
Important ECs: Theatre (Student Director, Stage Manager, Designer, Drama Club Historian), Film Society (President, Founder), Varsity Crew for 4 years (Vice President), Figure Skating for 7 years, Successful Web Developer/Designer for 6 years
Location/Person:
State or Country: VIRGINIA (Richmond)
School Type: Public, Suburban
Ethnicity: White - but very poor!
Gender: Female
Perceived Strengths/Weaknesses: Strengths = essays, passion in EC's, 3 extra courses taken through Harvard; Weaknesses = SAT SCORES!!
Why you think you were accepted/rejected/waitlisted: BECAUSE I AM DETERMINED & PASSIONATE &... WHO KNOWS!
Is Harvard your #1 choice?: It's tied with NYU Tisch - where I was JUST accepted as a <em>Tisch Scholar</em>... I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO!!!</p>
<p>2120? That's not that great. She's not an URM either; she's white. You claim that there's is a big difference between a 2120 and 2360.</p>
<p>Look at this guy:</p>
<p>Decision: Waitlisted </p>
<p>Stats:
SAT I: old-1600; new-2360 (w-800, m-790, cr-780)
SAT IIs: IIc-690, lit-800, us history-800
ACT: n/a
GPA:4.26
Rank:5
Other stats:eh
Deferred?: i applied regular, so no i guess?</p>
<h1>of apps from your school: probably 10ish</h1>
<p>[ b]Subjective:[ /b][ list][<em>] Essaysretty good[</em>] Teacher Recsretty good[<em>] Counselor Recrobably fairly generic[</em>] Hook (if any):nope[li] Important ECs:band, academic decathlon, summer research program[/list]Location/Person:[/li]State or Country: texas
School Type: large public
Ethnicity: whitey
Gender: female
Perceived Strengths/Weaknesses: good stats/average ec's
Why you think you were accepted/rejected/waitlisted: see above
Is Harvard your #1 choice?: i guess so, i dont really care at this point</p>
<p>Huh? Also white female, great class rank and solid ECs. Why didn't she get an accept? Why did the 2360 get waitlisted and the 2120 get accepted if SATs mattered so much?? Look at this:</p>
<p>Decision: REJECTED</p>
<p>Stats:</p>
<ul>
<li>SAT: 2390 (790M, 800V, 800W)</li>
<li>SAT IIs: 800 math 2, 780 lit, 710 bio (explained extenuating circumstances for the last one in app)</li>
<li>GPA:4.0 unweighted (took all AP/Honors classes available though)</li>
<li>Rank:1/300</li>
<li>Other stats: National Merit Finalist, AP Scholar, 5 on AP Calc BC and Stats</li>
<li>Deferred?: N/A</li>
<li># of apps from your school: 3</li>
</ul>
<p>Subjective:</p>
<ul>
<li>Essays: one very strong, extra one perhaps a bit cliche</li>
<li>Teacher Recs: positive but not "warm"</li>
<li>Counselor Rec: same as teacher</li>
<li>Hook (if any): white engineering girl from an unheard of public school in the middle of nowhere?</li>
<li>Important ECs: academic team (president), science olympiad, robotics team, robotics class at Case Western (wrote about my research in app), varsity tennis w/ good record, 1st chair clarinet in band and student director, various volunteer stuff</li>
</ul>
<p>Location/Person:</p>
<ul>
<li>State or Country: OH</li>
<li>School Type: public</li>
<li>Ethnicity: white</li>
<li>Gender: female</li>
<li>Why you think you were accepted/rejected/waitlisted: they knew i'd rather go to MIT anyway? lol i guess high stats but not much community service/no hook</li>
<li>Is Harvard your #1 choice?: not really</li>
</ul>
<p>2390 and rejected?? Come on, not even a waitlist? How can this be? I thought SATs were really important! She was valedictorian for goodness sakes! What's up with this??</p>
<p>Decision: Rejected</p>
<p>Stats:
SAT I: 800 Math, 800 Verbal, 800 Writing
SAT IIs: 800 Math 2C, 800 Chemistry, 800 World History, 800 Chinese, 750 Biology E
ACT
GPA: 5.21/5.4 (except it's really 5.21/5.29 when required lower-level classes are taken into account)
Rank: N/A
Other stats: Intel STS Finalist, NY All-State String Orchestra, National Merit Finalist, National Science Bowl Semifinalist, National Science Olympiad medalist
Deferred?: Yes</p>
<h1>of apps from your school: Not sure...maybe about 15?</h1>
<p>Subjective:
Essays: I feel like this must have been what killed me but I didn't think they were terrible
Teacher Recs: Good
Counselor Rec: Extremely good
Hook (if any): Intel STS Finalist, science research in general
Important ECs: Intel, Science Olympiad, Science Bowl, Chamber Orchestra
Location/Person:
State or Country: NY
School Type: Public
Ethnicity: Chinese
Gender: Male
Perceived Strengths/Weaknesses: Ummm I thought Intel Finalist was a pretty big strength...
Why you think you were accepted/rejected/waitlisted: I would guess the essays? Being a previously deferred Chinese male from Long Island doesn't help either
Is Harvard your #1 choice?: Not anymore</p>
<p>PERFECT SATS!! This guy got a PERFECT SATs. Look at this, really high GPA, he was an intel finalist for goodness sakes! If the SATs were REALLY important, the PERFECT SAT should have at least gotten him a waitlist right?? Unless...maybe the SATs isn't that important? What other explanantion is there? I'm welcome to hear it.</p>
<p>Decision: Rejected</p>
<p>Stats:</p>
<ul>
<li>SAT: 790m, 800v, 770w (but not all at the same time... I rocked the old SATs)</li>
<li>SAT IIs: 800 Math 2, 780 physics, 780 chem.</li>
<li>GPA: 4.08 UW</li>
<li>Rank: Unranked. But 2nd out of about 250. </li>
<li>Other stats: 5s on AP Physics B and Calc AB</li>
</ul>
<p>Subjective:</p>
<ul>
<li>Essays: I personally enjoyed it... It was funny. </li>
<li>Teacher Recs: Awesome</li>
<li>Counselor Rec: Um. I feel like he doesn't know me, so probably not so hot.</li>
<li>Hook (if any): umm none. I'm white, from new england, middle class... </li>
</ul>
<p>Location/Person:</p>
<ul>
<li>State or Country: New Hampshire</li>
<li>School Type: Rural, alternative (kind of artsy, we call teachers by their first names and all that)</li>
<li>Ethnicity: White</li>
<li>Gender: Female</li>
</ul>
<p>Other Factors:
* Extracurriculars: FIRST Robotics, Concert Band, Math Team Captain, Marching Band, Handbell Choir, Girl Scouts, Community Service.
* Why I think I was rejected: Cause it's Harvard I'm psyched, it's my first rejection!!
* Other thoughts: I can take classes there anyway cause I got into MIT! And MIT is way better for science anyway!</p>
<p>2360 and rejected! Another very high SAT scorer who was rejected! Are you starting to see a pattern here? I sure hope so.</p>
<p>Look at this one:</p>
<p>Decision: ACCEPTED!!! </p>
<p>i have only just checked my email, im on the other side of the globe in Australia. So happy! Btw, my SATs were NOTHING spectacular: i got 610 in one of them! I think my saving grace were my essays, my interview and my high school results.</p>
<p>To those that have been admitted, have you received the Certificate of Admission? Because it says that its attached, but its not. So, I'm a bit freaked out that it could be a mistake, or worse, a cruel joke!</p>
<p>Still, im super excited, and i cant wait to see you all this year!</p>
<p>He/she ADMITTED that he/she had bad SATs. 610 means the best he/she could get is 2210, but it's more likely to be around 2100. What's up? Why are people with 2100s getting admitted over people with 2360? 2390? 2400?? Would you like me to dig up other schools for you? I've read 10, 20 pages of this on Yale, Cornell, U Penn, MIT, you name it. The same happens for all these schools. Now, I see two possibilities:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>All these people, tens, hundreds of applicants, are somehow all the exceptions to the rule. Somehow I have found about 100-200 exceptions, whereas every other applicant follows the rule that SATs are very important. Perhaps these hundreds of people on numerous threads I've seen all have something horribly wrong with their apps that didn't get them admitted, despite having spectacular GPAs and a plethora of ECs.</p></li>
<li><p>Maybe, just maybe, once you reach a certain level a difference in SAT scores is almost meaningless. Maybe, the difference between a 2150 and a 2350 isn't that big after all. Now you might say "but if two applicants were exactly the same, the one with the 2350 will get in." Come on, that's never going to happen. If that's the case, why did the person with 1960 get in? No one else was very similar to her but had a SAT score of higher than 1960? What about the 2120? </p></li>
</ol>
<p>You have the evidence. You tell me what to think.</p>
<p>
[quote]
it's wishful thinking to hope that any given factor can be arbitrarily discounted just because an applicant does not like that part of his/her admissions information.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'll tell you what's wishful thinking: what's wishful thinking is that if you spend a lot of time prepping for the SATs, retake it, and get that score bumped up from a 2180 to a 2380, that it will make any difference in the admissions process. It won't. No school will say "I would have accepted this kid, except 2180 was too low for our school."</p>
<p>
[quote]
Boo21, in your case, I honestly think that your application will be a coin flip for most of the colleges you have expressed opinion in. I suspect that a re-take of ACT or SAT with improved scores will certainly help.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Boo21, in your case, I honestly think that it depends on your situation. If you got something lower than a 2200 and honestly think that with some prepping it will improve by a lot, go for it. Most people I know retook the SATs and their scores did not go up by a lot. Maybe 30-50 points. That's really not a big difference. Not enough to get you into that college that would have otherwise rejected you.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I recognize that it may be frustrating to face up to reality, and sometimes admissions directors at colleges don't help either.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It IS frustrating to face up to reality, the reality that even though SATs probably should matter even after we get past the 2000-2100 mark, it simply doesn't. In fact, GPA seem to matter a lot more. The only thing all these accepted people in all these threads I have read in common is a really high GPA/rank. I have seen a person with a 3.5-3.6 get into an Ivy maybe once or twice.</p>
<p>Look, I'm not here to try to make anyone feel bad. I'm not here to vent because I'm bitter. I honestly just want to give you the reality of the situation. Heck, if I knew that GPA mattered so much and SATs mattered so little (once you get past 2100), I wouldn't have applied to all those schools just to get rejected. And if I knew this earlier, I definitely would have paid more attention to my GPA and not retake the SATs so much.</p>
<p>Vicissitudes,</p>
<p>Thank you for giving my comments earnest consideration. I acknowledge your opinions as being well-founded; however, there is nothing in my beliefs that I dont believe to be true.</p>
<p>Generalizations are rarely accurate for ALL instances where specifics need to be considered. I took issue with your generalization (that test scores dont matter) because I had a different, also well-founded, opinion. My opinion is based on years of research, many hours of volunteer work for both secondary education and higher education institutions, and discussions with many admissions staff/counselors. My undergraduate background includes a degree in social psychology/education. Members of my family, as well as I, have had affiliations with excellent schools, e.g., U.C., Berkeley, Stanford and Harvard. Members of my family have been readers of admissions apps at both UCB and Stanford. I have gone through a years-long effort with my own daughter recently in helping her to evaluate colleges relative to her academic interests. I know of very few parents who conducted as deliberate and extensive an evaluative process as what I have gone through in the past couple of years. Im sure it helps that I perform research for a living and understand research techniques and have tools/resources available to me that others do not have.</p>
<p>Regarding my exposure to students, it has been constant and ongoing since my daughter was in kindergarten. I have helped develop and strategize on curriculum for innovative educational programs in one of the best school K-8 districts in California. My daughters H.S. district is acknowledged to be among the best in the state, nationally distinguished and recognized, and has only achieved a 10/10 in annual Academic Performance Index (API) here in CA. Graduating classes typically send 98-99% of its 330-345 graduates to college. A third usually attend the UCs, including dozens to UCB and UCLA. Many are accepted to an array of the very best colleges/universities in the country. A third of the recent graduating class will attend school outside of CA, including representation to highly selective schools such as Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn, etc. As a respected member of the community, I have been asked to write letters of recommendation. The last one I did was for a brilliant young lady who chose to attend Stanford (7 will attend Stanford from my daughters graduating class). Do you want any more bona fides?</p>
<p>In the past couple of years, I have consciously chosen not to participate on CC because I did not want the distraction. In actuality, I have been lurking for years, often out of curiosity but sometimes because I found myself learning something new as well. The CC discussion form is a good one, and it serves the purpose for many different people who come here. My own purpose is to offer some assistance by responding to queries by people who are seeking clarification. I have nothing to gain, save the gratification of providing an informed voice of opinion and assessment. So, thats where Im coming from.</p>
<p>I can see very well how youve shaped your opinions based on your experiences. Frankly, a subtle thread of bitterness wends between your words. I hope that you will get past it. Nobody likes to suffer rejection, but I assure you it is part of life itself. How one responds constructively to the rejection is more important than debating the reasons. As Im apt to say, some things are beyond our control. </p>
<p>As a segue back to our original discussion, I wish I could explain rejection to you. Im sure it rests with subjective faults in an otherwise well-intended holistic comprehensive review process. Im surprised by your rejection at UCLA, but Im never surprised any longer. Youll find that I have also mentioned that just as SAT scores are not to be arbitrarily discounted, they should not be looked upon as a singular indicator of a students prospects with a highly-selective school. For years, I have observed how even perfect SAT scores have not been enough to win admission to the competitive UC campuses nor perfect 4.0 GPAs. I dont doubt that there are those who will feel victimized by the evaluation process, and judging by your comments, you may be one of those people. As Forrest Gump said, Sh_t happens. In the past couple of years, it was an eye-opener to have followed the travails of Andis son (the superlative student who was rejected by all of his colleges, eventually took a gap year, and happily will be enrolling at MIT this fall). The caveat was clear the worst can happen. It happened to him, and it can happen to anybody. His story is inspirational in some ways, because I realized that I could lend assistance to those who seek it. I might not be able to help everybody, but maybe I can be of assistance to somebody and help steer his/her direction for a short while on what will hopefully be a very long and fruitful journey.</p>
<p>Yes, life can be frustrating at times, and one thing we cannot do is to rewind our lives in order to reconstruct something to give us a better advantage. I recognize that your good intent is similar to mine and we even agree on some things. A couple of months from now, when youve begun at Berkeley, I hope youll just put everything thats been unappetizing behind you and realize that youve the good fortune of attending one of the best universities in all the world. I wish you the best of luck!</p>
<p>Marvelous post Vicissitudes and NorCalDad.</p>
<p>Wow, those stats amazed me but I was awestruck how come most of those high-stats top-notch high caliber students didn't get into some of their first-choice schools. Your posts gave me hope, but for sure left me awestruck.</p>
<p>NorCalDad, very enlightening and informative post.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Youll find that I have also mentioned that just as SAT scores are not to be arbitrarily discounted, they should not be looked upon as a singular indicator of a students prospects with a highly-selective school. For years, I have observed how even perfect SAT scores have not been enough to win admission to the competitive UC campuses
nor perfect 4.0 GPAs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You're right, a perfect SAT score isn't enough. We hear stories of someone with a perfect SAT not gain admission to [insert selective college]. But perhaps he didn't have such a good GPA. Or perhaps he didn't have good ECs. But when you start seeing kids like the one I posted with the perfect SAT, four perfect SAT IIs, really high GPA, and intel-finalist and all-state string orchestra, rejected (not waitlist), and you start to see it over and over and over again, you really start to wonder just how much do these SATs really matter.</p>
<p>When you have read numerous decision threads like me with 10-20 pages of decisions, and you see SAT scores varying from 1900-2400, yet something that always follows the "ACCEPTED" is a very high GPA/rank, and at least some solid ECs, the only conclusion you can draw is that there is little difference between a 2180 and a 2380, and that GPA matters a lot more, and I want the college hopefuls on this forum to know that (without reading all these boring decision threads) and stop worrying about a 30 or 50 point difference in their scores. I guess I feel more personally connected to the issue because I have had so many friends who are like this, and they really do go crazy.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I can see very well how youve shaped your opinions based on your experiences. Frankly, a subtle thread of bitterness wends between your words. I hope that you will get past it. Nobody likes to suffer rejection, but I assure you it is part of life itself.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yes, life can be frustrating at times, and one thing we cannot do is to rewind our lives in order to reconstruct something to give us a better advantage.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, if there was any bitterness, it was only bitterness that I didn't realize sooner how SAT scores worked in admissions, which to say that after a certain point (around a 2100) a gain in score does not matter very much at all. It was frustrating to realize this after admissions are over. You're right, I can't rewind my life back to my junior year or sophomore year, and tell myself to work more on my GPA and to not retake that 2250 I got on the SATs. But what I can do, or at least what I hope to do, is to tell this to others on CC who may be in their sophomore years or junior years. I mean, a few months back, I went on a thread on the Yale forum that said "is a 2250 good enough for Yale?" It's people like these that makes me want to post. Heck, I wish I had someone who told me about what I know now.</p>
<p>I'm sorry to seemed to have jumped down your throat a little. Sometimes I get a little passionate on these threads. I've just been attacked over and over on this issue of GPA vs. SATs, and this is the first time I've actually really responded. So, I guess you were the unlucky one. :)</p>
<p>I can see that you are pretty connected with the college admissions process (although from a different perspective). I appreciate your well-written and carefully thought-out post, and I sincerely hope that you and people like you will continue to post here and help out high school students who are lost about the admissions process. I think that's one goal you and I share.</p>