<p>I looked at a few of the common data sets, say for cornell and penn, and they have a percentage (not large of course) of students who score 500s, even 400s and <400. </p>
<p>Who are these students? Are they minority? Are they athlete recruits? Or are they regular students who 'just got very lucky.' Or maybe they're like me, they score a lot higher on two other sections? I hope so..</p>
<p>I mean to say 400 to 500 out of 800 for either reading writing or math</p>
<p>I imagine they have something very strong going for them such as: very high scores and stellar achievements that outweigh their low scores on part of the SAT; very wealthy donor parents, plus having scores on the rest of the SAT that indicate the students have the ability to graduate from an Ivy.</p>
<p>I am 100% sure that they aren't students who simply got lucky. Admissions to Ivies isn't a lottery.</p>
<p>In general, if you score 400-500 on any section of the SAT and want to get into an Ivy, you <em>will</em> know if you have some special hook that allows the adcoms to disregard your low test score (wealthy donor parents + legacy, minority status or special disadvantages, D1 athlete, etc).</p>
<p>I truly doubt that minority status alone will get someone into an Ivy who has 500 and 400 scores on any part of the SAT. The URMs whom I know who have gotten into Ivies have had scores far higher than that, and also have had excellent gpas and ECs.</p>
<p>For instance, I know a Native American who got into an Ivy. He had a 750 m SAT, and his v SAT also was high, and was a recruited athlete. He was, however, rejected by a more competitive Ivy.</p>
<p>I know an African American who was rejected by one top Ivy, accepted by another top Ivy, and had V&M scores of above 1500, and had a very high class rank in an excellent high school.</p>
<p>I know a black Ivy legacy who was rejected by his parent's alma mater even though he had excellent ECs, grades, excellent private school, but had V&M of only about 1300.</p>
<p>They are mostly recruited athletes.</p>
<p>Why are they lucky? It would be terrible having the lowest scores at a school. You would constantly be behind in classes.</p>
<p>^I agree... A lot of those recruited student athletes don't do as well in their studies...</p>
<p>red remote brings up an excellent point. People here are apt to forget that getting into college is only the first hurdle, and being at a school where you are academically outclassed is not often a pleasant experience.</p>
<p>Places like Ivies have the highest graduation rates in the country. The graduation rates typically are above 90%. The students who don't graduate in 6 years may have transferred to other similar schools or may return later to graduate. There's no indication that recruited student athletes aren't graduating from places like Ivies. The worst thing that apparently research indicates about recruited athletes at Ivies is that they are isolated from other students.</p>
<p>"Even at the nation's elite colleges and universities, athletes have become so narrowly focused on sports that they are far removed from their classmates academically, socially and culturally, according to a study of intercollegiate athletics in the Ivy League and at 25 other highly selective colleges. </p>
<p>Such institutions do not have the same kind of problems with low graduation rates for student athletes that less selective schools have. But the study found that the recruited athletes were admitted with significantly lower grades and College Board scores and then performed more poorly than would be expected for students with those grades and test scores. ..."
<a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9904E6D71F3BF936A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print%5B/url%5D">http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9904E6D71F3BF936A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print</a></p>
<p>NSM, I think the above posters meant that they would receive poor grades at the college, not necessarily not graduate. Ivies and comparables won't admit people that can't do the work....however they will/do admit people (400-500 SAT, below top 25% of class at a "normal" school) who don't have a snowball's chance of truly excelling in the academic sector. However, the thing about these special admits is that they know why they're there and can succeed in alternate terms. For example if they were born wealthy, they don't need their college grades. If they were an athlete, they may be looking beyond their education and ultimately want to go pro. The list goes on. So, for the normal admit, SAT scores below 500 or even 550 will not cut it. However, those with the serious hooks can, and often will, get admitted.</p>
<p>Fredfred,
Well, someone has got to be invthe bottom quarter of the class even at Ivies. :)</p>
<p>What I found intriguing in the article that I posted was that the administrators at places like Ivies concern about the athletes is that they devote their time to athletics to the expense of participating in other ECs. That indicates how much the administrators at such colleges value the ECs as well as students intermixing with each other. At other colleges, administrators probably are far too concerned about graduation rates to be troubled by whether athletes mix with other students or do any ECs beside athletics. </p>
<p>Of the few recruited athletes whom I personally knew at Harvard, all did well after graduation although no one I know made pro. One went to a Fortune 500 company and afterward became a sports commentator and host of a well known national TV show. Another went to Georgetown Law, and is, I believe, a lawyer. Another returned to his home state, Mississippi, and went to law school at Ole Miss. Those were all basketball players who, I am fairly sure were recruited athletes.</p>
<p>One whom I didn't know became a pro soccer player and now is a top soccer exec.</p>
<p>A member of the track team whom I knew went to law school, and was an administrator of Tulane's law school before leaving for private practice.</p>
<p>I have no idea what their SAT scores were, but it does seem that they did fine even though I don't think that any graduated at the top of Harvard's class. But, there's only room at the top for a few students anyway.</p>
<p>
[quote]
For instance, I know a Native American who got into an Ivy. He had a 750 m SAT, and his v SAT also was high, and was a recruited athlete. He was, however, rejected by a more competitive Ivy.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Tufts Syndrome?</p>
<p>My school reports all the admissions of each class year.
According to the reports, a student with a 4.0UW/4.7W/35 ACT was rejected at Brown and a 2.2UW/2.3W/23 ACT was accepted at Brown. I don't know if this is a mistake by my school or what. If it was due to donor money, then Brown should be ashamed of themselves.</p>
<p>^God, if you are attending an ivy league institution, you still should have good grades in order to justify going there, even if it was due to donor money or sports stuff...</p>
<p>People tend to think recruited athletes are mentally retarded but I go to a all-boys school where every varsity team in every sport has a plenty of D1 and D3 recruits (no one goes D2... its a sad joke, no good colleges are D2. Think about it). Our football team is definitely no exception and last year two kids went to BC. Two went to Harvard. One went to Cornell. Another went to Penn. I can honestly say that of the 6 athletes I named, atleast 4 of them deserved to get in. They spent time training that they easily could have been studying and yet they still excelled academically and athletically and often times had pretty damn good social lives. Some kids let in to Ivies are brilliant but they don't have the necessary social tools or the ability to multi-task in a multitude of settings. The athletes I know have succeeded in life. Minority admits and legacies are kind of bull***** if they don't have the grades and scores because they offer little or nothing unless the legacy donates a ton. Just my opinion; sorry this is long.</p>
<ol>
<li>minority (native american, black, hispanic)</li>
<li>recruited atheletes (usually they have no brains so it's not a surprise)</li>
<li>Legacy w/ parents that are donors</li>
<li>luck. Admissions to elite colleges has everythig to do w/ luck. someone might read your essay as humorous while another as trying to be a smartass.</li>
</ol>
<p>Rich legacy with those grades- maybe, but I don't think someone could get in solely based upon minority status with scores that low. Being a minority is only a minor benefit for the Ivy's, especially because most of them are already about 30% students of color. Being a rich legacy helps because they need the money. Now, minority recruited atheletes are a whole different story.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If it was due to donor money, then Brown should be ashamed of themselves.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Donations go full circle. Without them, there would be practically no financial aid.</p>
<p>Graduates who were athletes in marquee sports probably do pretty well afterwards, in part because they will benefit from the alumni network more than the typical graduate.</p>