<p>There’s nothing in the CDS that tells you if they’ll take someone with world class musical talent over someone with perfect SATs. </p>
<p>Look, I’ve gotten into this argument countless times before, having a high SAT (1450+) is a pre-requisite for the majority of applicants, but from my experience, you are not going to get rejected because you have a 1470 and someone else has a 1530, it’s going to be because the other person has more to offer in other areas.</p>
<p>One of the problems with this site is that some readers seem to crave absolutes. </p>
<p>Anyone who knows something about admissions isn’t going to speak in absolutes. They speak in generalities and caveats. </p>
<p>That’s not what people want to hear, so they discount those contributions and keep seeking out the responses that give them THE answer. Haven’t we all seen knowledgable, experienced posters be eclipsed by the blowhard who pretends to be the expert with the precise answer?</p>
<p>But the fact is that many, many applicants are not all that different from each other. At the top schools, they get lots of applicants with very good grades and scores, and pretty similar extracurricular achievements. Thus, for most applicants, scores are probably used pretty extensively to sort them.</p>
<p>My point was that the CDSs show at top schools your 1450 and 700 estimates of threshold scores are too low.</p>
<p>It is true that many posters here do not know a lot about college admissions. It is also true that many do know a lot about college admissions. No one knows everything. Nothing you see on this site will be the perfect answer. However, there is a lot of good information on this website. I have learned a lot from this website.</p>
<p>The main problem is that people come in with their own opinions and experiences in admissions. They know what their stats were and where they were accepted and rejected and have an idea of their friends and peers and where they were accepted, so posters will have opinions on how they think different schools do admissions. For example, if a poster got an 1800 on the SAT and was accepted to H and rejected from Y using the common app so most everything is the same for his application, he would assume that Y values a higher SAT score than H and share that opinion on CC. That doesn’t make them correct or wrong.</p>
<p>About the SAT score thing, you can see for yourself on the school’s website what the middle 50% SAT score is. You can be bellow and get admitted because 25% of the class is bellow that mark. However, for an unhooked applicant (and I would say the majority are) you have to factor in athletes, generous legacies (the guys with buildings named after them), and applicants who are truly amazing (like an 1800 to HYP who also cured cancer). They probably populate a portion of the lower 25% of SAT scores. There are people who are unhooked who get in with scores in the lower 25%, but there are far more unhooked applicants who are admitted in the top 75% of SAT scores (by virtue of there being more students in the top 75%). The question you have to ask yourself is are you comfortable applying trying to be the exception to the rule? Isn’t it a little less nerve racking if you are in the range of an average student accepted to the school?</p>
<p>Dstark, I am afraid that in your desire to make a point, you have fallen in the trap of over-generalization. You also seem quite confused by the differences between rethorical discussions about rankings or graduate schools’ impact and discussions about college admissions. </p>
<p>Every year more than 4,000 colleges and millions of students play the mating game. For the overwhelming majority, the process is extremely simple as students often get accepted to their first or second choice. </p>
<p>For a small percentage of students, the college admission turns out to be a convoluted process that defies many odds. I believe that you’re placing way too much (perceived) importance on rankings and, interestingly enough by doing so, joining the ranks of the posters who believe their favored schools are “screwed” and lack the recognition they truly deserve. In this vein, your diffuse comments about graduate schools are very telling. </p>
<p>I am not certain why you think you may know more than someone else about college admissions, and know enough to be able to decree that others know less than what you might consider adequate. The reality is that the “required knowledge” is extremely variable ranging from what is needed for students who walk into their community college all the way to those who “play” the HYPS admission game. </p>
<p>By the way, in case you missed it, there is a PERFECT spot for a post like yours. Here’s the link: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parent-cafe/319650-say-here-cause-yo-can-t-say-directly-get-off-your-chest-thread.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parent-cafe/319650-say-here-cause-yo-can-t-say-directly-get-off-your-chest-thread.html</a></p>
<p>Posting there might make you feel better.</p>
<p>Xiggi, I’m not getting your post. Just to clarify…</p>
<p>I wrote this…</p>
<p>“Why is it so important for some posters to have rankings verify their choices of favorite schools?”</p>
<p>and I wrote this..</p>
<p>“To get into many programs at the top schools, SAT scores mean very little. There are many programs where passion, activities and creative thinking are more important than SAT scores and even grades when trying to get into a school.”</p>
<p>The word many is a “qualifier”. Without the word many, the sentence has a very different meaning.</p>
<p>And I wrote this… “Everything should be verified and everything read here and elsewhere should be read with a very skeptical eye… including what I write.”</p>
<p>I wrote. ..“including what I write”. I am no different than anybody else.</p>
<p>There are many good posts here. I, of course, like Hoedown’s…subjectively speaking. :)</p>
<p>Dstark, I think what many of us want to know is what programs you are speaking of. While many is indeed a qualifier, we all know the definition of the word and I for one can’t think of any, much less many, programs at top schools where SAT scores “mean very little.”. Can you clarify further?</p>
<p>I told you I’m not going to clarify it. Sorry.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Haha, Dstark, I did not “get” your post either. Let’s leave it at that! :)</p>
<p>PS I forgot to answer your earlier query about Cal. And, you were right in that I did not apply there for graduate school, and, obviously, will not be attending. I will, however, stay in California, and not too far from Berkeley to boot.</p>
<p>Then why post, all credibility is lost with the above post.</p>
<p>Dstark, I mean no offense, but do you realize that by posting and then failing to attach any credibility to your post you’ve become that which you originally feared others might fall prey to?</p>
<p>I understand you included yourself, but it seems extremely hypocritical?</p>
<p>Maybe he’s talking about Julliard. That’s a top school that doesn’t care much about your SATs.</p>
<p>OK Xiggi good luck. </p>
<p>NIce :)</p>
<p>"We aren’t all that bad entomom…</p>
<p>I waited two years to transfer =)."</p>
<p>Bourne, I think you know I wasn’t referring to you, as you seem pretty well grounded in reality.</p>