<p>I thought so too. Now I can't say I'm sure... though I realize one case study makes a very bad sample size. I was rejected by HYP with a 2240 (first retake after 2110) and straight A's, which by the way, I was reasonably satisfied with during application time. Extracurricular wise, I considered myself a strong applicant. </p>
<p>As a graduated senior, I just retook the SAT in June to exempt from a college writing course and open up the possibilities for a transfer next year. I scored 2300+ on the exam, with an 11 instead of 8 essay. I can't help but wonder if that could've made the difference in my application results.</p>
<p>Here are some things to consider:
- Accepted legacy and URM's drag down the median and average scores. If you're the average white or asian kid (based on SAT scores), you'll be the below average white or asian kid in the application process.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>A study showed that your chances of getting into these top schools increases exponentially in that score range. If I remember correctly, going from 2200 to 2300 almost doubles your chances. </p></li>
<li><p>The overall acceptance from these schools is 8-15%. At 2200, you may be top 1% of the test takers, but the mere middle of the applicants - many of whom will conjure up all sorts crazy EC's, essays, and even lies that you can't imagine. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>My advice: don't be satisfied with a 2200, especially if your school accepts score choice. You could end up regretting not taking it a few times...</p>
<p>Good thing I’m Hispanic.</p>
<p>But thank you for the thoughtful post. It’s helpful to have information from someone who has gone through the process already.</p>
<p>^Like.</p>
<p>And no, it would probably add like 5-6% to your acceptance chances. Not much at all. MOST 2300+ applicants get rejected.</p>
<p>Jersey those are great statistics. </p>
<p>I also remember the data graphed to show the exponential curve (somewhere here on CC) but I’m struggling to find them…</p>
<p>I have a question here. Given Brown as an example, the acceptance rates for CR and M are 16.6% and 15.9% respectively for scores between 750-790 in each subject. Will the the acceptabce rate becomes higher if both subjects are in the same range? </p>
<p>Or does it go with lower percentage (15.9%)? In other word, if you fumbled in one subject, you are doomed?</p>
<p>Jersey, have you ever thought that some of the reason that the 2300+ students get in exponentially more often is a combination of higher SAT scores AND more success in highschool? It’s been proven that the SAT predicts highschool performance as well as college performance…Think about it. All of the 2300+ students I know tend to be better students as well, and to prevent the power of suggestion from working on me, they were better students before they even took the SAT.</p>
<p>^ Yes, I don’t think that just because there are higher acceptance rates that the SAT score is the cause. “correlation doesn’t imply causation”</p>
<p>Also Jersey, are there statistics like that for ACT scores?</p>
<p>^^ I’ve stated numerous times that the data only shows a correlation. However, this correlation is undeniable that higher scoring students have higher acceptance rates and disproves the absurd misconception that their is some “threshold” for SAT scores.</p>
<p>Jersey: That’s my point: It doesn’t. The only way to disprove that there is not a threshold is to keep GPA and everything else constant on a graph with SAT scores and acceptance percentages. You missed my point: The reason higher SAT scoring students get accepted more often might have something to do with causes other than their high SAT.</p>
<p>Read the first line of my last post and you’ll see that I didn’t miss your point. I seriously doubt that there is a corresponding increase between GPAs and SATs and there is really no way to graph subjective factors. Based off the information given, the correlation is clear and the notion of a threshold is disproved. Unless you want to argue that 2300+ students are completely superior to 2200-2300 students in GPA/Class Rank/ECs etc., the data speaks for itself.</p>
<p>from common sense 2300+ students probably have stronger applications overall than 2100-2300 students</p>
<p>How is that common sense in any way? 2300+ students have stronger testing scores than 2100-2300 students, nothing more.</p>
<p>okay, think about it this way: what do you think the difference between a 2400 student and a 1800 student is in grades, essays, and EC’s?</p>
<p>Seeing as the SAT does not test whether you are actually a strong writer and definitely has nothing to do with extracurriculars, the difference between two students with the aforementioned scores in those aspects indeterminate. Grades will be higher but once again, how can you prove that it is causation and not just correlation?</p>
<p>okay, for some reason I can’t find it, but there was a post by MITChris or some rep that said that SAT/ACT scores are just used to see if you are a capable student, and then admissions moves on to other parts of the application.</p>
<p>Correlation usually implies underlying causation, though it does not prove direct causation.</p>
<p>In this particular scenario, there are two ambiguous scenarios of causation/correlation that I can think of.</p>
<ul>
<li>The most obvious is that colleges just accept higher scores more often.</li>
<li>The second possibility is that higher scores tend to be higher achieved, and therefore receive more acceptances. </li>
</ul>
<p>Personally, I think the first has more weight in college decisions.</p>
<p>an MIT rep specifically said that SAT scores are used only to see if you meet a certain range, then they look at other parts of the application.</p>
<p>sic_infit</p>
<p>That’s what every college says. That they use a “holistic” measure in the application process. And they have to say that if they want a diverse pool of applicants. </p>
<p>Although I think it’s common practice both here and from college reps to downplay test scores, the statistics seem to point otherwise. It seems that so many students have outstanding extracurriculars that test scores may be the essential tiebreaker.</p>