<p>When I look at the middle 50% of GPA scores, SAT scores, ACT scores etc for the colleges that I am interested in, what does this mean? Should I assume that if I fall within those guidelines, I have a very good shot at getting in?</p>
<p>I dont have any hooks, I am not an athlete, just a average kid from a middle class family who wants to go to college.</p>
<p>Please reply.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t say “very good shot,” but I’d say “good shot.” The middle 50% represents, pretty much, the average rage of GPA, SAT, ACT, etc. If you score above those guidelines, you’d have a “good shot,” and you’d be above average at that school.</p>
<p>25% of admits had below that range and 25% had above that range. Figure at major public Us that many in the lowest 25% have a hook like being an athlete.</p>
<p>I’d say that you’re in the range and better to be at the top end than the bottom. The rest of your app needs to be in the range, too.</p>
<p>Middle 50% class rank/test score published by colleges should be understood as a guide and not any guarantee of admisson. The school is telling you that 25% of its freshman class scored better than the high end of the middle 50% and 25% scored lower than the low end. Being in the middle 50% usually means you have a decent chance, but it is obviously better if you are closer to the higher part of the middle 50% than if you are closer to the lower end. Actual admission may ultimately depend on other factors. Also, published middle 50% ranges can be somewhat misleading. What many publish is middle 50% of those who enroll as freshman not those actually admitted. Usually a school admits a much higher number than those who ultimately enroll. The middle 50% of those actually admitted can often be higher than the enrollment middle 50% figure that is published.</p>
<p>If a school admits more than, say, 30% of applicants and you’re above their 75th percentile, you could probably call that school a safety. But if we’re talking HYP-selective, you want to be around the 75% mark just to be competitive, as much of the class will be taken by hooked applicants.</p>
<p>My D was right at about the 50% mark or a little above for every school she applied to for SAT scores, and at about the 48% mark for GPA, yet she did not get into every school. They are just numbers, and don’t really mean much. She is also just a regular person who hasn’t cured cancer or published a book. Good luck.</p>
<p>If you are in the middle 50%, then it is reasonable to conclude that your chances are higher than the acceptance rate (ceteris paribus). It is hard to tell how much higher because there is very little published information on the applicants that are rejected.</p>
<p>Your high school might have Naviance, which would give you a better idea of the odds.</p>
<p>what is Naviance. Thanx for the answers, its what I thought but I wasnt sure.</p>
<p>I’d agree that just how meaningful this statistic is depends a lot on just how selective the college or university in question is. I’ve often wanted to see the data for unsuccessful applicants at colleges that interest my kids. I have no doubt that Princeton, for example, rejects and wait lists a lot of applicants who are just as good on paper as the ones they admit. </p>
<p>I’d agree that you have a very good shot at most colleges and universities if you’re around their 75th percentile, and if you’re within the top half, you’re certainly in the mix. If I were much below the median, I’d figure I was going to need something else (e.g., high grades, great essays and personal story, being 6’10") to boost my chances.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What?! So at a school like Michigan with 26,000 undergrads, 6,500 would be recruited athletes? I don’t think so.</p>
<p>A high percentage of those below the 25th percentile being recruited athletes is much likelier at a smaller school. Think about it. You need as many people for a football team or a men’s or women’s basketball team whether you’re a big public university or a small LAC. And many of the top LACs have as many or more varsity sports than large public universities. </p>
<p>My D’s LAC estimates that 40% of the students are varsity athletes. They weren’t all recruited athletes, of course. And many varsity athletes, including many who were recruited, have very strong academic stats. But at smaller school I think it’s a safe bet that a very high percentage of admitted students falling in the bottom 25% statistically are “hooked,” whether by virtue of being recruited athletes, legacies, URMs, having some. unique talent that the school covets, or some combination of these </p>
<p>My rough rule of thumb: if the school’s admit rate is less than 25%, you probably need to be well into the top half of the class to have a decent shot at admission if you’re not “hooked.” If the admit rate is 15% or less, you can’t assume you have a good chance even if you’re in the top quartile.</p>
<p>^ In my own defense I said many, not all, of the bottom 25%, and I said like being an athlete. For instance, at the college where my wife used to work, the only group with lower stats than the basketball team was the group listed as Male Ballet Dancers. Not the athletes you expect. That being said, you are probably right that the percentage of recruited athletes in the lowest quartile is greater for a small school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This isn’t necessarily true. At a highly selective school with a very strong applicant pool, the admit rate for those with stats in the middle 50% range may be lower than the school’s overall admit rate.</p>
<p>Most schools don’t provide a lot of detail on this. Brown does. For Brown’s Class of 2014, the middle 50% SAT CR was 660-760, and the middle 50% SAT M was 670-770. The overall admit rate was 9.3%. Yet applicants scoring 660-690 on SAT CR were in a band (CR 650-690) for which the admit rate was only 7.2%, well below the school’s overall admit rate. Same with SAT M, where those scoring 670-690 were in a band (650-690) for which the admit rate was 7.5%.</p>
<p>It’s perhaps even clearer if you look at ACT scores. Brown’s middle 50% ACT scores were 29-33. Yet ACT scorers in the 29-32 range—that is, almost the entire middle 50%—were admitted at a rate of 7.1%, again well below the school’s overall admit rate of 9.3%.</p>
<p>If you think about it, this makes a lot of sense. The admit rate is going to be much higher for those in the top quartile statistically. At Brown, applicants scoring 800 on the SAT CR were admitted at a 22.1% rate; those scoring 750-790 were admitted at a 14.5% rate. Same with SAT M, where 800 scorers were admitted at an 18.2% rate, while 750-790 scorers were admitted at a 13.2% rate.</p>
<p>Bottom line, your chances of admission go up sharply if you’re in the top quartile. If you’re in the middle 50% your chances of admission may be roughly equal to, or possibly even lower than, the school’s overall admit rate, at least at highly selective schools like Brown.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not really, unless your definition of “major” it the top ~5. Once you dip below the really selective publics, admissions is wide open at most of the others. Heck, both 'Zona’s were still accepting applications on May 1! Something like ~90% of UT-Austin’s class is from the Top 10% rule; by definition, half of those top ten percenters will be in the bottom half of SAT scores.</p>
<p>What about if your SAT scores are at or above the 75% but your have no idea what the schools GPA band is because they don’t publish it… and your school does not rank. This is where it gets tricky and why my S is casting a VERY wide net.</p>
<p>^google the college’s Common Data Set, or use ipeds for test score info.</p>
<p>[College</a> Navigator - National Center for Education Statistics](<a href=“http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/]College”>College Navigator - National Center for Education Statistics)</p>
<p>If the data is from students who were admitted and not just kids who enrolled, couldn’t the data be inflated?
For example, I go to a really competitive school, top 50 in the country in NJ. Rutgers University is considered a Safety by all of the students. Almost everyone applies there and 99% get accepted. However only 10% actually end up going there. The average SAT score for my school is 2100 and for some academies the average score goes up to 2200.
This would mean Rutger’s average SAT scores of people going there aren’t really all that high.
So wouldn’t the scores be somewhat inflated?</p>
<p>Shaggy, not sure I’m following you, but, yeah, that’s what drusba said in post no. 5.</p>
<p>This means that you should be in the top 25%</p>
<p>that is correct, shaggy, and why I recommend the Common Data Set which is based on matriculated students.</p>