<p>It's like around 1500. The scores for all races are around 1500 (+ or - 100 points). However, the standard deviations for Asians are the highest (indicating that Asians have the most high scorers). It was posted somewhere on CC.</p>
<p>Do they have averages based on race solely for Penn?</p>
<p>i dont think they would release that</p>
<p>lol. The most incriminating thing they release is legacy admit rate. 1/3 isn't <em>that</em> high. If they (or any college) shows more the whole educational system will be ****ed.</p>
<p>Penn I don't think releases figures by race (or by legacy status). </p>
<p>Nationally, Hispanics are in between the black and white #'s. See graph 10 at this link:</p>
<p>1500 +/- 100 is not correct. The average is about right but the black-white gap is around 100 points PER SUBTEST and the Hispanic gap around half that much. I haven't seen the SAT 2400 data but it shouldn't be that different from the SAT 1600.</p>
<p>I meant that on the new scale out of 2400, all races had an average of about 1500, generally between 1400 and 1600. On the old scale that would be about 1000 but ranging between 900 and 1100. African Americans have an average score in the mid 800s though. Thats pretty low.</p>
<p>Also, Penn releases legacy admit rate.</p>
<p>The black - white gap on the old test was around 200 pts (86x vs 106x, Asians 109x) - on the new one you'd expect it to be around 1.5 times all the old numbers or around 300 pts. (B 1300 - W 1600 ). So I'd say 1500 +100/ -200 is about right.I haven't seen the actual breakdown on the SAT2400 but I think these numbers come close. </p>
<p>I meant legacy SAT/GPA, not admit rate. AFAIK they don't release those.</p>
<p>Percy, are you saying that since I'm black and I have a 2370 SAT (higher than those Asian/Jewish/Coasts conglomerate) I'd be an auto-admit at Wharton?</p>
<p>I'm pretty sure Percy means there's no auto admit, and he was pretty much saying that it also depends on your background, for example, if a very broke black kid made a 2100, it'd probably be more impressive than a wealthy black kid making a 2300.</p>
<p>I'm guessing everything intertwines with each other when it comes to admissions.</p>
<p>Fred, I don't think there are any 100% aut0-admits any more (except maybe for certain athletes that the football or basketball coach really really wants) but a black kid with a 2370 comes awfully close. A 2370 puts you in very select company - all the black 2370s in one year in the US would fit in one not very big room. Congratulations, BTW. Admission at Wharton or any other school of your choice would be basically yours to lose - for example if you wrote your essay using a crayon and your recommendations were horrible, if you had an extensive criminal record, a 2.0 GPA, etc. If the rest of your package is anywhere close to acceptable, then I'd rate your chances extremely high.</p>
<p>I think you will find at application time that schools will be chasing after you and throwing $ at you. A black 2370 is every adcom's wet dream. You seem very modest about this (which is good) - I don't think the impact of what a rock star being a 2370 URM makes you has sunk in.</p>
<p>Percy, I think it makes a difference whether the black student is of native US or immigrant background. 2370 is more common among the immigrants, many of whom also have merit scholarships to fancy private high schools (i.e. a 2400 is less of a big deal if your high school is Dalton). Alumni and on-campus black student organizations have started to raise eyebrows about the 40+ percent of African and Caribbean immigants among Ivy league black student enrollment, as somewhat undercutting the original intent of affirmative action.</p>
<p>Also, there is yield management. The lesser Ivies may not automatically admit a 2400 SAT, math olympiad winning, American-born black student from the ghetto if they consider it certain he will exercise his options at MIT or Harvard.</p>
<p>Siserune - I wasn't aware that Fred was the OTHER kind of African-American (the kind who is actually from Africa or whose parents are). Officially, that kind still "counts" as AA, just like Barack Obama does, I think. I know there have been complaints from the American black community but this is getting to be really sour grapes - now not only do you have to be black (and most Africans are "blacker" than American blacks) but you have to be the right kind of black - give me a break. Carribbean is particularly puzzling - are you a real URM if you ancestor's slave ship ended up in Charleston, but if the boat docked in the US Virgin Islands you aren't? At what point would African African or Caribbean descendants "count" as URMs under this crazy system - what if Fred married a girl with one Jamaican parent and one American black parent - their kids would be 1/4 "historically" American black - would they count as URM? At some point it gets ridiculous. Instead of whining about this, American blacks should be figuring out why 1st generation immigrants whose parents may not even speak English are beating the pants off them academically. But again I think the official policy so far is that the immigrant blacks are still counted as URMs, period, regardless of how much the American brothers moan. Whether on an informal basis immigrants don't get "spotted" as many points as "real" American blacks I dunno. Again 2370 is so spectacular that I think Fred is likely to get in even if he didn't "count" as URM at all, but he does.</p>
<p>As for yield management - I don't think this is a consideration at Wharton, which has yields that are similar to HYP - for their crowd (kids who have demonstrated on their app an interest in business) they are pretty confident that they are #1 and are on a level field even with Harvard. Certainly in the ED round this is not a consideration.</p>
<p>Telling American blacks what they should do is ridiculous, and glosses over the small matter of the entire US school system being a disaster. Whites are not exactly high performers. The SAT is easy enough that it doesn't reveal the true level of mediocrity.</p>
<p>Anyway, some schools ask finer-grained demographic questions, such as whether a "black" applicant is from the US, Africa, or the Caribbean; or the more specific national origins of an Asian applicant. One's chances as an Asian applicant are different if from an underperforming population such as Laotian Hmong or Cambodian, than if a child of Chinese engineers in Palo Alto. Such distinctions will be made increasingly over time for as long as AA survives, and indeed may help extend its lifetime.</p>
<p>What if applicant #1's parents are doctors from Cambodia and #2's parents are dishwashers in a Chinese restaurant - who is the "real" URM?</p>
<p>I always thought that if you were born in the US or became a citizen you were an American, period but I guess not anymore. It sounds to me like instead of relieving racial tension, AA makes it worse by further dividing us - now we get broken down into ever more "fine grained" categories - I think this can only end up where all ridiculous racial classification systems end up - in the garbage bin of history. Are we going to do genealogical research like the Nazis did to find out whether applicants have the "right" ancestors? At what point is the blood of a Hmong too impure to be a URM? - what if he has a Chinese grandmother? I think (or at least hope) this will have the opposite effect - instead of lengthening the life of AA it will expose its ridiculousness even more and kill it sooner. If you want to give individuals extra consideration because they come from a disadvantaged home or difficult circumstances, OK but don't put them in baskets based on skin color or whether their grandmother was born in Laos or 50 miles away in southern China.</p>
<p>Oh man I smell an AA debate.</p>