<p>Hi, I'm not interested in Harvard or Stanford, but I have seen posts around here saying that Harvard and Stanford reject half of their applicants with perfect SATs. Does that mean that they reject half of the people with 2400s or half with 800s on a section?</p>
<p>That is unknown. Also, there has been no source provided for that statement either. I assume it's 2400.</p>
<p>However, on Princeton's admission statistics page, they say that about 15% of students with 2200-2300 SAT are accepted, and 24% of 2300-2400 are accepted. I assume the percentages go up in the brackets. Obviously, this would be composite. I can only guess that Harvard and Stanford have somewhat comparable statistics.</p>
<p>So 61% of those acceped to Princeton have an SAT lower than 2200?</p>
<p>No, that's not what they're saying. Out of all the 2300-2400 students who applied, twenty-four percent were accepted. They don't tell us what the percentage of the incoming class has what scores.</p>
<p>Oh, alright. That is interesting. Never thought the numbers would be quite low. It's the legacy!!!!!</p>
<p>lol SAT must be the first thing they look for when an applicant's profile comes to the table.</p>
<p>I wonder if there's a substantial difference between those with 2400s and 2300s with respect to admission rates?</p>
<p>I assume that the percentage is lower at the low point of the interval, then increases as the score does. This is completely unsupported.</p>
<p>That's what I would suspect. However, I'm sure there are quite a few "lazy geniuses" at the 2350+ range and I'm sure many 2300-2340s are more diligent, so that may distort the percentages somewhat. Although I can't say for sure.</p>
<p>Is there generally considered a difference between 2300-2340 and 2350+, or is that just where the 99th percentile becomes the 99+ percentile?</p>
<p>No, the scores become 99+ at 2290. I just picked 2350 as the arbitrary cutoff point because it's considered "middle-to-upper 2300s" instead of "lower 2300s".</p>
<p>Conventional wisdom says that there is no difference, and that differentiation stops somewhere between 2200 and 2300. Take that for what you will.</p>
<p>There's no way a 2200 is equal to a 2300. And there's no way a 2300 is equal to a 2400...</p>
<p>Though H has SAT scores all over the map (2150-2400), they do seem to
favor very high/perfect NMSQT+perfect SAT scores. </p>
<p>S does not seem to care about SAT scores in its SCEA but seems to
have given it some weight during RD this year. S does not care about
NMSQT.</p>
<p>Also a 2400 is perfection (within a limited context). It will get you
additional consideration. Everything else is just a score that falls into
bands:2340-2390 2280-2330 etc.</p>
<p>
[Quote]
S does not seem to care about SAT scores in its SCEA but seems to
have given it some weight during RD this year. S does not care about
NMSQT.
[/Quote]
</p>
<p>Stanford cares about SAT scores equally in both SCEA and RD, not a lot, but still a significant part of the admissions process. Neither school cares too much about National Merit standing because it's too common in their applicant pool. Lastly, I've been told that 770+ above each section is equal to a 2400 when it comes to admissions decisions. I.e., a person with a 2340 with 740 in math is not viewed like a 2400 while a person with 2310 with 770's across the board is. This makes sense because when you get back your score report if you get an 800 on a section, CB's range of comparable scores is 770-800.</p>
<p>Being the top school scorer in the NMSQT and clinching the
Presidential Scholar nomination is a ** sure fire way ** to get
an advantage at H.</p>
<p>9 out of 12 students that were admitted to H alongside me
(various schools) this year were presidential scholar nominees. </p>
<p>Usually the Presidential Scholar nomination means nothing. It
comes later in the year with no financial award.</p>
<p>Prior to hard data I have seen this year for H amongst acquaintances
and friends I was pretty sure NMSQT would not matter at H. </p>
<p>However it does matter since it directly impacts the nomination
the school puts up for Presidential scholar.</p>
<p>I think there are lots of kids getting >2300 on the SAT but are rejected to Ivy.
lol the admission process is somehow biased</p>
<p>It's not a matter of bias - it's a matter of numbers. A 2300 and a 2200 may not be "equal" but the difference between them is so small that it doesn't provide much grounds for an admission decision. Same thing with a 3.8 and a 4.0. When most of your applicant pool is about equally strong, your deciding factors are the things beyond SAT and GPA.</p>
<p>If you have a 2200+ your in good shape for the mid/high ivies +Stanford. Obviously if you have higher scores, its better and if you have a little lower its not awful. Yet, 2100+ used to be the surefire way to make sure you are really competitive now its really 2200 +.</p>
<p>Regarding post #16, Just wanted to clarify that I was referring to
12 students I know of from around where I go to school
not to a ratio as in 75% (9/12)</p>