<p>Failboat is correct in general admissions offices work with a SAT cutoff. At the top schools applicants with scores in the 2100 to 2200 range are viable. By the way, most of the applicants (70% to 90%) to the top schools are qualified (based on GPA and SATs) as a result admissions staff are always looking for reasons to reject an applicant. When I worked in admissions we always kept an eye out for those applicants that placed too much emphasis on SATs or had an excessive number of ECs.</p>
<p>
Data from CC is most definitely not random.</p>
<p>Furthermore, this research has ALREADY been done to a much higher degree of rigor. Clearly, you didn’t even bother to read the study referenced, which draws an entirely different conclusion: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-preparation/865226-addressing-few-concerns.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-preparation/865226-addressing-few-concerns.html</a></p>
<p>
Top admissions officers have time and time again stated that there is NOT an SAT cutoff. That’s generally only true at large state schools.</p>
<p>
I don’t see how taking the SAT twice could be interpreted as “too much emphasis.”</p>
<p>I am also in a similar situation. My scores (first time) were:
CR: 800
M: 800
W: 740 (77, 8e [?!])</p>
<p>I’m leaning towards retaking the SAT test in October. I’m fairly confident that I can increase my writing score and want to give the “2400” a shot. There doesn’t seem to be any negative in doing so.</p>
<p>Note: I don’t think a higher score will significantly increase my chances of admission. I just want bragging rights. :D</p>
<p>I’m your fellow high school-er and probably have very little idea how things work at the admission office, but I truly think that a 2400 will give you no significant advantage over a 2360. Re-take the SAT for personal satisfaction if you want, but it will not make that much of a difference for college admissions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Taking the SAT twice means too much emphasis? What school’s admissions office did you work for?</p>
<p>It might come off as an obsession if your first score was already near perfection.</p>
<p>kameron, why did you bother making this thread if you’re already so convinced that you should retake?</p>
<p>I’m not. I’m still undecided.
I just want to hear alternative arguments.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, his statistical analysis did do a simple random sampling. The only problem is his sample of a narrow population. Although the research is done with a higher degree, it does not mean we can doubt the data. There are some confounding variables.</p>
<p>
True. While a random sample, his sample frame is flawed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe that you may not truly understand the connotation implied when I stated that I did my own research. To that end, I am not a bumbling idiot looking to modify my research in order to conform to the traditionally observed sets of data. If you cannot even take that away from my post, then the fault is of your own ignorance, not mine. Please do not take on the presumptuous and condescending view that my research is somehow inferior to someone else’s study based on several unjustifiable qualifiers. As such, since you clearly have no intention to treat my work with the respect that it deserves by actually critiquing the quality of its content, I will outline my own qualifiers as to why my work is of equal statute to those presented in <a href=“http://www.infogoaround.org/CollegesChinese/RevealRanking.pdf[/url]”>http://www.infogoaround.org/CollegesChinese/RevealRanking.pdf</a></p>
<p>First of all, did you read the study? I am asking you this because you obviously cannot see the scope of mine. The above document bases the entirety of its research model on the simple presumption that a uniform correlation exists between SAT and acceptance probability. They’ve never formally shown that premise to be valid, and for good reasons.</p>
<p>Mifune’s conclusion is a great interpretation of the data presented in the above document, as such I have absolutely no problem with his conclusion. In fact, I admire his ability to condense the effects of the document into a single thread. I do however have problems with the document that the data is take from. Primitively, the method of ranking admission probabilities is assumed to be the sample probability and not the population probability, as the paper states that the data is surveyed from 3600 “highachieving” students. Both I and the document acknowledge that neither of our data are representative or displays normality when taken as a whole of the population of applicants. As both statistics are created by marginal comparison without the requirement of the normality of the sample, we’re not disturbed by this. However, the underlying premise of their research is that a correlation between SAT and admission probability exists which then qualifies the data presented on figure 2.1 I am investigating the actual premise that the correlation is significant. As the modeling technique of the document uses a logit transformation model for likelihood in order to smooth the probability model, a lack of correlation between the variables could invalidate mapping. As such, my conclusion is that there exists no correlation between SAT scores and admission past the 2100 window, something that the document itself support if you actually look at the graphs…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you have any idea of what you are even talking about? My sample is indeed smaller in size, but only marginally deviates from those used in the research in terms of spread and distribution. In fact, it undertakes similar surveying premises and is therefore representative of the data used by the other document. Do you want to criticize their lack of uniform distribution?</p>
<p>Your presumptions only paint you as an arrogant ass in my mind, as such, I will start treating you as one. Why are you so obsessed with something as trivial as the SAT’s? Do you really believe that wasting your prime time on that last few points will guarantee your admissions to your “dream school?” But more importantly, let me ask you this: do you even know where you want to go?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This was a major irritant while conducting the research as I had to use similar sampling windows as those used in the original document, but the same bias is carried over to preserve authenticity.</p>
<p>Such big words O.O</p>
<p>In my opinion,</p>
<p>If you’re taking it to improve your chances of college admissions: </p>
<p>By the law of diminishing returns, it won’t help you given the time and stress involved with it.</p>
<p>If you’re doing it for personal satisfaction:</p>
<p>Go for it.</p>
<p>What <em>are</em> your qualifications?</p>
<p>
Yes, I do. I am fascinated by statistics and have taken AP stats.</p>
<p>Specifically you are using the frame of CC applicants to analyze a much larger population.</p>
<p>However, I am interested in this and would love to see further results from you. You do know what you’re talking about and I firmly believe more empirical research needs to be done on this.</p>
<p>
I’d argue that their frame is more representative than yours (CCers), which is disproportionately populated by SAT-obsessed students.</p>
<p>
What’s the point of that question? It has ZERO relation to the topic at hand. I have already stated that I want to go to a top college. Whether I’ve specifically decided on a top choice is not important, and I believe it is foolhardy to do so before having acceptances.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The problem is that we don’t know what their sample consists of, but once again, as we’re both using paired analysis to forgo the requirement of a uniform median/mean value analysis, I merely need a corresponding sample window with similar distributions, which I assume is covered in the subjectively described “highachieving” condition.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>More or less, why do you want to go to a top college? I had lots of friends who went to top ivies and ended up being miserable.</p>
<p>Also, I apologize for my rather harsh assessment of your personality, it was a bit impulsive of me to judge you so.</p>
<p>failboat: I believe the frame used in their study was from prep school students. While that itself may have flaws, I do believe with SAT analysis specifically CC is extremely flawed. Essentially, I think the variable of “CC membership” is more confounding that simply being “high achieving.”</p>
<p>
Thank you, and I am sorry if I dismissed your study. It’s great to see more work being done and you clearly do have qualifications.</p>
<p>
Again, zero relevance to the current topic. I don’t need to justify myself just because you have anecdotal evidence of miserable students.</p>
<p>Though I do know I won’t be going to Cornell. Clearly everyone there is depressed and suicidal. :P</p>
<p>kameronsmith: “Unfortunately, the rest of my package isn’t spectacular. My ECs are pretty run of the mill, and my GPA is less than perfect (3.93).”</p>
<p>For Harvard, the rest of a student’s package is extremely important. Please see 2009 NY Times Blog with William Fitzsimmons: </p>
<p>[Guidance</a> Office: Answers From Harvard’s Dean, Part 1 - The Choice Blog - NYTimes.com](<a href=“http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/harvarddean-part1/]Guidance”>Guidance Office: Answers From Harvard's Dean, Part 1 - The New York Times)</p>
<p>"Our goal in admissions is to attract the best students to the college. Many people believe “best” ought to be defined by standardized tests, grades, and class rank, and it is easy to understand why. Such a system, another Harvard dean of admissions, Bill Bender, wrote in 1960, “has great appeal because it has the merits of apparent simplicity, objectivity, relative administrative cheapness in time and money and worry, a clear logical basis and therefore easy applicability and defensibility.”</p>
<p>While we value objective criteria, we apply a more expansive view of excellence. Test scores and grades offer some indication of students’ academic promise and achievement. But we also scrutinize applications for extracurricular distinction and personal qualities.</p>
<p>Students’ intellectual imagination, strength of character, and their ability to exercise good judgment — these are critical factors in the admissions process, and they are revealed not by test scores but by students’ activities outside the classroom, the testimony of teachers and guidance counselors, and by alumni/ae and staff interview reports.</p>
<p>With these aspects — academic excellence, extracurricular distinction, and personal qualities — in mind, we read with care all the components of each application.</p>
<p>Efforts to define and identify precise elements of character, and to determine how much weight they should be given in the admissions process, require discretion and judiciousness. But the committee believes that the “best” freshman class is more likely to result if we bring evaluation of character and personality into decisions than if we do not.</p>
<p>We believe that a diversity of backgrounds, academic interests, extracurricular talents, and career goals among students who live and learn together affects the quality of education in the same manner as a great faculty or material resources. . ."</p>
<p>And</p>
<p>"Personal qualities and character provide the foundation upon which each admission rests. Harvard alumni/ae often report that the education they received from fellow classmates was a critically important component of their college experience. The education that takes place between roommates, in dining halls, classrooms, research groups, extracurricular activities, and in Harvard’s residential houses depends on selecting students who will reach out to others.</p>
<p>The admissions committee, therefore, takes great care to attempt to identify students who will be outstanding “educators,” students who will inspire fellow classmates and professors.</p>
<p>While there are students at Harvard who might present unusual excellence in a single academic or extracurricular area, most admitted students are unusually strong across the board and are by any definition well-rounded. The energy, commitment, and dedication it takes to achieve various kinds and degrees of excellence serve students well during their college years and throughout their lives."</p>
<p>gibby: I realize it’s an uphill battle with that GPA & standard ECs (debate captain, started web design company, etc.). That doesn’t mean I’m not going to try to maximize what I can.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The study uses voluntarily surveyed data from 110 high schools across the United States. As such, as long as we have data from all around, the sample frame is sufficiently (if only barely, but nonetheless sufficiently) representative as the distribution of the data are similar (there were points all along the 2100+ corridor)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not advertising for Cornell nor am I trying to dissuade you by making an observation. All I’m saying is that you should at least have an interest in mind from which your decisions are oriented around. It could be something specific or it could be something like a preference of selectivity. Your next major challenge in this grueling college app process is to write an amazing and passionate essay, not your SAT’s. It’ll be much easier to write that amazing and passionate essay on something that you love rather than something that you think the colleges will want you to write about.</p>
<p>Did I ask for advice about anything besides my SAT?</p>
<p>That is the advice, your SAT scores should now be secondary to everything else.</p>