<p>If you get a 2400 on the SAT, with no EC's, with a average Class rank and GPA.</p>
<p>What are the chances of an IVY league school?</p>
<p>Would they consider the 2400 as the ticket to their school?</p>
<p>This question is subjective, so please respect everyones views.</p>
<p>um i would think you need atleast 2/3 of the things (GPA, SAT, EC) to get into Ivies...so i no i dont think they would consider it a ticket</p>
<p>On a slightly different note, I think a 2400/4.0 are tickets to most state uni's, whose admissions processes are heavily grade and stat oriented. Definitely not a ticket to any of the Ivies, though.</p>
<p>Thats true because your SAT scores dont prove everything about you.</p>
<p>You don't have a high chance at all. A high SAT score does not make up for low grades, not clubs, and such. People with perfect SAT scores get rejected from Ivies all the time and they had high ranks and grades.</p>
<p>Try Tufts, Washington U., and Vanderbilt.</p>
<p>i think he was just trying to ask a question in general not rate his chances lol..right?</p>
<p>Just a general question.</p>
<p>No, they won't accept you just for your SAT score, especially if nothing else stands out about you.</p>
<p>over half of 2400's are rejected at Harvard. Same for vals.</p>
<p>Exactly. A perfect SAT score isn't enough. Sure, a perfect score opens doors, but if everything else isn't on the same level as your test scores, you're screwed.</p>
<p>The title of your thread is confusing. If it was a myth, why would it be true? :)</p>
<p>if you got 2400 on SAT, chances are, you are pretty damn smart and have excellent everything else...ooh that was alliteration lol</p>
<p>SAT scores prove plenty about you :)
But what they prove best is the quality of your curriculum (a val at a rural school could get 1800s SAT, a 11th percentile student at a prestigious preparatory 2100s...) If there weren't so much prepping for SATs, then factoring out the students that are either extraordinary or terrible test takers, they do have a correlation with general analytical/logical intelligence. Try to think like the test maker- that's a skill too, analyzing other ppl...</p>
<p>But yeah I agree with Dragondefonce, it's rare to get 2400 and not be at least in the top 10% on pure innate talent (unless you go to some prestigious preparatory)...also, remember that there are superscores. Getting a 2400 in one sitting is a pretty awesome thing, but it is much easier to get a 2400 superscore. </p>
<p>But anyway, with those stats, you're pretty much screwed. Unless you're a minority.</p>
<p>Uhhh...I stopped reading the moment you said 2/3. You need 3/3 :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
But yeah I agree with Dragondefonce, it's rare to get 2400 and not be at least in the top 10% on pure innate talent (unless you go to some prestigious preparatory)...also, remember that there are superscores. Getting a 2400 in one sitting is a pretty awesome thing, but it is much easier to get a 2400 superscore.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ha, thing is, Ivies all superscore... by right the admissions committee ppl wun know how many sittings u had.</p>
<p>This is from Princeton stats
2400 --> 26% admit rate
so... 2400 DOES increase your chances dramatically</p>
<p>Something you might learn in a statistics class, or just see intuitively...</p>
<p>Correlation DOES NOT IMPLY causation.</p>
<p>I think that if you applied to all the ivies with a 2400, <3.0 gpa and maybe a sport, that you'd get in somewhere.</p>
<p>I agree with you whiteboy, but what I wanted to imply was correlation (obviously) since only 26% of people getting 2300 + SAT got in (so its definitely correlational. Causation would be 2300 + SAT ---> admission)</p>