My Friends Got Into Good Colleges With Low SAT Scores. . .

Applying to College
21

<p>I think you guys who hate on URM and Recruited Athletes, really do need to stop. Being talented or underepresented is like any other hook a typical 1600 or in this case 1160-1390 would have. They got admitted because they have a uniqueness about them. Not because they feel sorry for them. And I'm sorry to inform you guys but there are many URM with high SAT scores who are rejected from top schools, just because they are URM doesn't automatically get them in.</p>

<p>Look at the Dartmouth guy with the 1190, he wasn't obviously recruited, but I'm pretty sure they accepted him because he was different and had more uniqueness to them then a typical high scoring applicant.</p>

<p>I mean how many long jump runners in the country do you know? I'm pretty sure you know many of those Leadership, Math Science Club Students who have nothing "different" in a group of applicants. </p>

<p>I'm pretty sure you guys have heard me mention this many times, but my friend had a 1070 and she got into Berkeley, and no she wasn't a recruited athlete, and yes she was URM but do remember that UC's don't do affirmative action. This is an example that there's other qualities a student might have that might still get them into a top school regardless of test scores. Also some other student in my high school got into Columbia with less than <1100, and wasn't a recruited athlete or anything like that.</p>

22

<p>u meant UCs claim they don't do affirmative actions,, how can u or i know whether or not they lean towards to urm? the reason that most ppl are not interested in those low SAT scorer who are URMs and atheletes is because being an athelete and URM is the key why they got in, ppl like me, want to hear someone with none of the special "thinging" that still got into good schools with good GPA or ECs, that's what we're interested. we are not against URMs or atheletes, we're simply trying to hear stories that are similiar to our situations.</p>

23

<p>
[quote]
Look at the Dartmouth guy with the 1190, he wasn't obviously recruited, but I'm pretty sure they accepted him because he was different and had more uniqueness to them then a typical high scoring applicant.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, that kid's one of my good poker buddies. He doesn't do any sports or anything, maybe one year of golf (but who really counts that as a sport :)), but he's one of the most outgoing people I know and just really wanted to go to Dartmouth. I don't know what happened at the interview, but I bet that's what gave him the in over the people with obviously much, much higher scores.</p>

24

<p>Liek, UCs do comprehensive review, giving advantage to first generation, low SES and many other factors that would explain the acceptance of someone with promise and a below average stats. It's hard to believe , however, that Dartmouth took someone with an 1190 because of a unique personality. I am always afraid kids will believe these wild stories. I have seen the breakdowns of who gets into ivies, and anyone with an SAT score that much below the average has a major hook that isn't unique personality.</p>

25

<p>But they did, I guess it's all about what the adcoms are looking for on that day.</p>

26

<p>Regardless of URM and Recruitment, think about it, any top college in their right mind would rather take someone who is not like everyone else in the pile. How many journalism, yearbook, asb members would you take in compared to someone who is much more different such as being one of the best in the nation for something, or having something makes them stand out which could be a hook like being musically talented or artistically talented, regardless of any status?</p>

<p>You can be white and have a 1200 combined SAT score, be out of this mind talented and is visible not only by his awards, ec's, but by their passion, and will probably be accepted to any top college, rather than any typical College Confidentialer who has high sat scores, involved, and has nothing special about them that distinguishes them from the rest of the applicants.</p>

<p>For those who are on this thread, who lost hope when they say that some of them were recruited athletes or URM, I think that just shows your lack of confidence. Your SAT scores aren't a big thing, if you are unique, if you are different, if you have something about you, then you will make it. </p>

<p>Admissions to a top university is like an acting casting call, you can be around many people who look like you, who are at good at what they do, who are dying for the same spot, but in the end, the only person who gets that spot will be the ones who can outshine the others.</p>

<p>For the SAT hogs, your score is only a number, it doesn't represent your capability, and a school would be dumb to just want to accept a student based on who has the highest SAT score.</p>

27

<p>liek, the only problem with your arguement is that when you see a breakdown showing numbers of white/asian students with 1200 who get into top schools (non athletes), you see extremely small numbers. I think statements like that give a lot of people false hope and allow top schools to have such low acceptance rates because so many apply believing their qualities will overcome a 1250.</p>

28

<p>And occassionally one of them will get in. </p>

<p>I think I'm more disappointed in myself than anything, because after coming on here I decided not to apply to any Ivies, knowing that my scores didn't compare to anything being posted on here. I really loved Harvard when I visited it, but academically I wasn't in that mid 50%, so I swallowed my pride - never even contacted the coach (I'm almost 100% certain I could run at Harvard), and signed on to Davidson, the school that I thought was one of the academic best school I could get into without the help of track. </p>

<p>I honestly believe that I never found this site, I would have most definitely applied to Harvard and I'm starting to second guess my chances, my ECs are great (president/captain of a few clubs/teams), and this past weekend I ran one of the 20 fastest times in the nation in the 200m. From what I've learned on this site, if you're a recruited athlete, your chances go way, way up. I was recruited by Johns Hopkins, Davidson, Georgetown, Wake Forest, and Muhlenberg among others, and chose Davidson because of the academics.</p>

<p>The point of the thread is that if you don't apply, you'll never know what could have been.</p>

29

<p>Ecliptica, congrats on your 200. I know you will love Davidson, so don't second guess yourself. I think Harvard would have been VERY interested in you- probably Dartmouth, too.</p>

30

<p>Ecliptica, I am surprised this site sidcouraged you given your an athlete. If there is anything I learned here, it's that my athlete son has a better chance at top schools than I thought. Over and over on this site there have been examples proving just how much being an athlete can count. That said, Davidson is probably a better undergrad experience than Harvard (where I went) so relax and enjoy.</p>

31

<p>my friend got into dartmouth with SAT of 900, nothing special he just poured his heart out in the essays</p>

32

<p>I can always go to Harvard grad school :)</p>

<p>As far as Dartmouth goes, they're pretty much a magnet for distance runners. . .I don't go much above 200 meters :p (and I want to start training where it's warm!). If you look at the top running schools in the country (for sprinters/jumpers) they'd be Clemson, South Carolina, Arkansas, Texas, and Baylor. I'm still a strong student (though, as I mentioned earlier, you need 1550+ to get respect on these boards) and I knew I wanted to attend a respected private undergrad school where the average SAT was above 1250 (nothing against South Carolina and Arkansas of course) and I could still be challenged in the classroom. Georgetown, although the most prestigious, didn't strike my fancy as much as Davidson did and the more I type about it, the more confident I am in my decision.</p>

<p>Just want to thank you guys in advance for helping me out, I don't know how this thread turned into "Ecliptica's-second-guessing-himself thread" but I know next September I'll be where I am supposed to be.</p>

33

<p>Crazykid, do you really believe Dartmouth takes kids with 900 who have nothing special and just pour their hearts out? Please!</p>

34

<p>i do, he got in</p>

35

<p>Darling, he had some hook other than fast talking. You may not know what it is, but you've just probably lowered Dartmouth's admit rate for next year because kids will believe pouring your heart out and a 900 SAT may get you in.</p>

36

<p>"I think statements like that give a lot of people false hope and allow top schools to have such low acceptance rates because so many apply believing their qualities will overcome a 1250."</p>

<p>I don't think I give false hopes. I use the example of someone who is talented, and unique. Not everyone is talented/unique, and you should know if you are or arent, and chances are if you don't have something special about you that differentiates you from everyone else, you should know that your chances are slim. I think if anything, the What Are My Chances forum gives false hopes to people. The only people I intend to give hopes to are kids who don't think they are good enough, because they see all these 1400+ and they are most likely discouraged when they see their scores are not high enough.</p>

37

<p>getting into Darmouth with 900 SAT with a heart touching essay.</p>

<p>wow</p>

<p>that means I have a chance of getting in as well. :-P</p>

38

<p>Stop making these posts giving people false hopes. There's a huge difference between getting in with low SATs and getting in with low SATs and legacy status or getting with low SATs as a recruited athlete. Most of the people that you listed clearly had ANOTHER hook, since their scores were below average. In this post you're addressing people with low scores that may not have an outside hook like URM status, athletics or legacies, and so all you're doing is setting them up for heartbreak. Yeah, Dartmouth took your friend who got an 1190 or whatever. Well guess what? Dartmouth will also reject 11,000 other applicants with all sorts of different scores. Harvard will reject 19,000. It's a crapshoot, no more no less. Furthermore, essays rarely tip the scales and interviews are crap. Case in point: my Harvard interviewer told me that he really wanted me to go to Harvard, and my Yale interviewer said that with my attributes (1500, valedictorian, speak another language fluently, etc), I would have "no trouble getting in." I got deferred and then rejected from Harvard and rejected from Yale. So much for that.</p>

39

<p>Eliptica, you will have a better undergrad experience at Davidson, especially if you continue track. Plus it is warm ;).</p>

40

<p>crazykid....lol u first of all, that is impossible. you cant get recruited to an ivy with a 900. the minimum score REQUIRED for ivies is roughly a 1200 and most with that dont even get in unless u are amazing. to be RECRUITED u should have at least a 1300. a 900 is close to impossible</p>

<p>whoever talked about bush...bush was also like a triple legacy with millions of money donated to yale from the family. his father and gpa also had connections to some very influential people. without that bush wouldnt have gotten in. he isnt bright. hes just good at relating to others</p>