So Much Love, So Few Spots

<p>Thank Dan for clearing that up. That gives students' like me a little hope who doesn't do very well in SAT because of various personal and familial reasons a little bit of hope but I still think I am gonna get rejected. <strong>sigh</strong></p>

<p>Dan, one question though what's the lowest SAT Tufts has accepted in recent years (2006-2009). Do you think that a student with 1580SAT, strong academics and good essays and recs have any chance of getting into Tufts?</p>

<p>Plz, Plz, Plz answer this question.</p>

<p>Edit: Just wanted to know how much the optional essay increase one's chance of getting in? If a student is not a great writer, should he just skip the optional essay?</p>

<p>sowmit-
I doubt that an admissions officer would tell you to skip the optional essay, irrespective of whether you consider yourself a quality writer. As has been said many times on CC and elsewhere, those essays are about letting the Adcom hear your "voice"; they want to know what makes you tick and why you might make an interesting addition to the class they are constructing. My kid is not a superb writer, but he did the optional essay and by doing so told the Adcom something about himself. He was admitted ED1.
As for asking what the lowest SAT of a successful applicant has been in the last three years, I just don't think that would offer much insight. What if it was 800 (CR+M), but you might not know that the applicant was a demonstrated science whiz with dyslexia?<br>
As Dan said, the two most important factors (really three), in order, are: (1) your HS transcript, which shows (1A) how hard your courses were relative to the hardest courses offered at your HS, and (1B) how well you did in your courses; and (2) your board scores (either ACT or SAT plus 2 Subject Tests). An applicant with straight As and powerful scores is immediately put into a group with more favorable odds of admission than the applicant with a B+/A- average and 650-700 scores. The rest - and it counts for a lot - is all the subjective stuff: the ECs, recommendations, essays, etc.</p>

<p>^ But a B+/A- average and 650-700 scores are not bad. After all, those with 600-650 and B/B+ average are placed even lower!</p>

<p>Really? I think 600-650 is pretty good. I mean not that high- true, low- true but "well below Tufts average" -might not be. I think "well below Tufts average" will be somewhere like 500-599. But again that's what I think. I mean if Ivies accept someone with 540 average SAT (not gonna say where) why not Tufts?</p>

<p>edit: Just wanted to say that an A-/B+ average I guess pretty good, low for Tufts but still have a good chance. After all IT IS TUFTS. No one can be safe at least not 100%, not even 80%</p>

<p>neethus1-
Of course! Just giving an example. An applicant with 750-800 scores and As in a really challenging curriculum would be placed in a group that has better than a 50% chance of being admitted (probably significantly better), while a kid with 650-700 boards and a B+/A- average might be assigned to a group where the admission odds were more like 30-35%. If you've got 600-650 scores and a B average, I would guess that you're placed in a group with odds of less than 20-25%.
I think this is an approach used by almost all of the most competitive schools.</p>

<p>neethus1-
With 600-650 SAT and a A- average, I would say you have about 40-50% chance of getting in. I wouldn't say 20-25%. Why? Because not all the applicants applied to Tufts have 700 Maybe 500students have 700 average. But the rest is more likely 600-699 scale. So, I think you are in a very good situation (at least better than me. At least you have a little hope. I have no hope at all. So frustrating :( )</p>

<p>
[quote]
I don't think wanting a positive outcome after working hard for four years and involving yourself in the process is the same as it defining ones self-worth. If it does, of course, there's a lot more wrong than identity. Actually they are probably behind quite a few "chance me" threads.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's a fair belief, but defining a "positive outcome" as admittance to a handful of colleges is a limiting way to think of success. The point of my OP is that getting a waitlist or deny does not make past achievements any less important or future prospects unattainable. Too many families (check the parents forum) define high school success by the acceptance letters of highly selective institutions, and boiling the richness and growth of a high school experience down to something so simple feels wrong.</p>

<p>Underneath balletgirl's somewhat combative post there is an interesting idea with which I think I agree. There is far too much preciousness about "fit" and the faddishness of "selecting a well-rounded class composed of angular students." Admissions seems to follow fashions and trends and the current fashion is the "overcoming adversity" shows virtue one -- which was different than an earlier one of "trips to go help poor people in the third world" show character and passion.</p>

<p>Different schools do have different characters and there is definite merit to matching the person to the character of the institution, but at the level of 30K applicants for 1800 spots, the contortions the adcom has to go through to pretend that this set of decisions is not pretty random gets pretty silly (the top 500 people might be obvious but the rest could be picked at random from the next 6000 and the school might not be particularly different).</p>

<p>What seemed a bit sillier to me was the article in today's Boston Globe, referenced above. I believe that Tufts and Amherst used the opportunity to showcase their politically correct sides to the world and/or that the author was looking for that (or the opposite and all are happy he found that side), but it really did read as if a bunch of people were trying to use the college admissions process to do their bit for increasing social mobility of the lower class. The effect, as some of the posters have pointed out, is that kids who come from a typical suburban HS find their efforts essentially devalued. Hey, maybe the new fad that comes out of this will be to go and create some adversity for kids to overcome. In the same way that Kaplan began prepping the supposedly unpreppable SATs and organizations made businesses out of organizing social do-gooding trips for kids to distinguish themselves after this became something adcoms valued, here's a new business opportunity: Create adversity for college applicants to overcome.</p>

<p>sowmit-
I don't understand why you think someone with 600-650 boards and an A- average (you haven't described what type of curriculum - is it the hardest available, i.e., APs, etc?) would be in a group with a 40-50% chance of admission. Nor can I imagine where you get the idea that only some 500 applicants (out of what, 16,000?) have 700 average SATs. First, only 25% of applicants are accepted, which means that a much lower percentage is accepted RD (since about a third of the class has been accepted ED1 and ED2). Moreover, 75% of accepted students have SATs over 1380/1600 (or over 2070/2400). How then would you assume that someone with 600-650 has a 40-50% chance of admission (again, even assuming an A- average in a very challenging curriculum)? I can assure you that there are LOTS of applicants with board scores well over 700 and/or averages of A- or above who are rejected.
Of course, the "subjective" elements of an application can cause an applicant in a group with only a 20% chance of acceptance to be in the one-fifth of that group that is accepted, but that doesn't change the numbers I've noted above. I am sorry to say that you are wildly overestimating the strength of 600-650 scores and an A- average.</p>

<p>According to neethus1 she has a good amount of A.P. class that speaks for itself. Reading that I am gonna say that she has a pretty good chance. But as I said earlier, NO ONE can take Tufts as their safety (not even students with 700/+) But keep in mind that Tufts gives priority to Transcripts and neethus1 has A- in a very challenging workload, so I think she has almost the same chance as the others (although she has 600-699) Tufts, as Dan said accepts students with lower SAT (way below it's average). So, if you take that into count 600-699 is not that low. </p>

<p>Let's take Harvard for instance.What's the average SAT for Harvard? 2150. But there are cases that Harvard accepted students with only 1700. Tufts has a history of 1690. Compared to that if neethus1 has 650on average, her total score is 1950. So, she has a same chance as the applicants with 2100. Maybe they have 50-60% chance. That's why I said 40-50% chance.</p>

<p>WCASParent-- I agree with you that she has less chance of getting in (compared to others with 2100) but as Globe stated yesterday, SAT is not the only thing Tufts is looking at. It is important BUT not as important as academic transcript. I think DAN said the same thing. I understand what you trying to say BUT I am sorry to say that you are wildly overestimating the strength of SAT. After all it's just bunch of numbers it doesn't tell the Adcoms what you really capable to do or what your strengths are. It tells them that a student is a good test taker.</p>

<p>Wait, what? I didn't say that my comment was indicative of my scores! All of my board scores are 710+, and my average is about a 4.0 W. I have the hardest rigor...</p>

<p>But you have to understand that for Tufts, this is all about normal. It's average. And as Tufts compares people applying from the same school directly against each other, I highly doubt I'll get in. In another thread I asked if Tufts has quotas on the admitting of applicants. They don't - but it doesn't mean that they won't compare. :(</p>

<p>
[quote]
According to neethus1 she has a good amount of A.P. class that speaks for itself. Reading that I am gonna say that she has a pretty good chance. But as I said earlier, NO ONE can take Tufts as their safety (not even students with 700/+) But keep in mind that Tufts gives priority to Transcripts and neethus1 has A- in a very challenging workload, so I think she has almost the same chance as the others (although she has 600-699) Tufts, as Dan said accepts students with lower SAT (way below it's average). So, if you take that into count 600-699 is not that low.</p>

<p>Let's take Harvard for instance.What's the average SAT for Harvard? 2150. But there are cases that Harvard accepted students with only 1700. Tufts has a history of 1690. Compared to that if neethus1 has 650on average, her total score is 1950. So, she has a same chance as the applicants with 2100. Maybe they have 50-60% chance. That's why I said 40-50% chance.</p>

<p>WCASParent-- I agree with you that she has less chance of getting in (compared to others with 2100) but as Globe stated yesterday, SAT is not the only thing Tufts is looking at. It is important BUT not as important as academic transcript. I think DAN said the same thing. I understand what you trying to say BUT I am sorry to say that you are wildly overestimating the strength of SAT. After all it's just bunch of numbers it doesn't tell the Adcoms what you really capable to do or what your strengths are. It tells them that a student is a good test taker.

[/quote]

The mean SAT scores for the ENROLLED class of 2012 is 2124. I cannot seem to find the mean of ACCEPTED students but I would guess its around 2150.</p>

<p>3 600s will yield a total score of 1800, while 3 650s will yield 1950, both of which are significantly lower than the mean of accepted students. Most students accepted with sub-2000 SAT scores will be URMs and/or recruited athletes. Someone who is neither will have a significant disadvantage with those scores.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Academics, first your transcript then your testing, are the most important part of the admissions process. That's the quantitative side. The softer your academics are, the stronger your qualitative pieces need to be - recs and essays. Low is a relative term, but a student applying to Tufts as a 'stretch' or 'reach' school need their application to really sing; you want the people who read your application to fall in love with who you are and what you will bring to our community. We admit students below our averages all the time, some well below our averages, but we do so because we are compelled by the voice and talent presented.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Where do people with lopsided academics stand - valedictorians with low SAT scores, and the rare kid with a 2300+ SAT and mediocre grades? Are they they thrown in the reject pile, or are the qualitative parts of the application given a second look?</p>

<p>I saw one of the info sessions this morning. Definitely the best of the Tufts/MIT/BC/Brandeis/Harvard/BU tour!</p>

<p>sowmit-
Part of what you said is not well expressed, so I still don't know where you get your percentages from, but suffice it to say that you misunderstand the process and that your numbers are incorrect, especially that 40-50% chance of admission which you pulled out of thin air (or a miscalculation).
When an application is submitted to the majority of "most competitive" schools, including Tufts, one admissions officer reads everything in it. The most important thing is the transcript (with the difficulty of the curriculum usually coming first and the grades coming second, because a kid with a B+ average in all honors/AP courses is more impressive than a kid with As in courses that were of ordinary difficulty). The second most important thing is test scores. Then come things like ECs, recommendations and essays. THe admissions officer will loosely "rank" the quality of the application; at some schools it's a 1-6 system, at others it's 1-7 or 1-8, with a "1" being the best. If you are rated a "1," you probably have better than an 85% chance of being admitted. A "1" would probably have board scores close to 800, with As in the hardest courses and impressive ECs. Needless to say, it's pretty darn hard to get a "1," or even a "2" for that matter. Frankly, you are lucky if you get a "3," which is probably somewhere around the 700 mark in test scores with an impressive transcript and solid ECs. If you are designated a "3," you are in a group from which about 34-38% will be admitted. If you are a "4," which probably means you have scores in (no better than) the 650-690 range with a very solid but not overwhelming transcript, you are in a group where your admission odds are under 30%. If you are a "5" or below, your chances continue to drop. This does NOT mean that you won't get in - because obviously if you are in a group from which 20% will be admitted, you have a 1 in 5 shot of admission.
So, sowmit, you are correct that the SAT is not as important as the transcript; as I said, it's the SECOND most important thing. But it is a VERY important indicator of the strength of the application and the chances of admission. You must realize how hard it would be for a school that receives, say, 10,000 to 25,000 applications to focus the majority of its decisions on just the "subjective" factors, so putting applications into groups with rankings of 1 to 6 or 1 to 8 gets them off to a good start.</p>

<p>Valedictorian with low SATs is more impressive (especially if from a reasonably challenging school/curriculum) than an underachiever with great scores but mediocre transcript.</p>

<p>^ I agree with you but I don't take 1 or 2 into consideration as you said that it's very hard to achieve those numbers. So I take 3 as 2 and thus an applicant with 700/+ has 50-60% chance. I would say neethus1 will get about 4.5 which is like a 3.5 to me and thus she has 40-50% chance. Hope that explains the cloud. </p>

<p>BTW, there is an applicant here who got into Tufts (yes, this year) with 670 and 650 SAT scores. I mean if he got in, I would say neethus has a very good shot and to me that shot is 40-50%. Also, I did some research on Tufts admission and it turns out to Tufts essays, recs and SAT actually bear the same importance. Just follow the link.</p>

<p><a href="https://www.collegedata.com/cs/data/college/college_pg02_tmpl.jhtml?schoolId=155&previousPageSection=&popupNetCostDetail=false#selectionOfStudents%5B/url%5D"&gt;https://www.collegedata.com/cs/data/college/college_pg02_tmpl.jhtml?schoolId=155&previousPageSection=&popupNetCostDetail=false#selectionOfStudents&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>You can't just bump up the numbers like that... just because you don't consider them doesn't mean they don't exist! I understand your thought process, but it's very convoluted. Perhaps someone with a 700/+ has a better chance than someone with lower scores would, but it doesn't mean that the chance is objectively 50-60% chance. It's still 30%. The applicant with lower scores would just have a lower chance.</p>

<p>That absolutely true neethus1. That is actually a great thing you said there. But the thing is that during the regular decision process, both the applicants with the lower numbers and higher numbers have almost the same chance (unless u have some horrible score like 500-550).</p>

<p>I talked to a college admission counselor and what he told me that, during the EDs applicants with higher numbers has great chance and applicants with lower number have no chance at all (why cuz the colleges don't wanna give discounts. It is like opening a new shop. Give less discount when u open it, later you increase the number of the discounts you give) So, if you would have applied to ED, I would say your chance is 20-30% as WCASParent said. </p>

<p>But since the colleges tend to accept students with a little lower grades and low SAT scores during RD, you chance of getting in increase. So now ur chance is 30-40% maybe 40-50% (depending on your recs, essays, ecs and the review from the interviewer.) The students with 700/+ scores-- well, they are mostly ivy candidates. So as some ppl said, Tufts syndrome takes place and applicants with lower scores get accepted. People say ivies usually don't accept anyone with scores lower than 660.. But remember Harvard,Tufts and Brown are "holistic" in their acceptance process. Harvard and Brown often accept applicants with lower SATs than their average as do the other ivies and great schools like Tufts. So now u have a better chance of getting in than what you usually should have. I personally know a person who got into Brown with 1620. (No lie. I swear to God) And the "holistic" system of Tufts and Brown are almost the same. Check out Brown's acceptance under 600 (23% CR, 17% M and 21% under sat on average in the class of 2012). Colleges understand that SATs don't prove that much about a student (except that a student is a good test taker) and that's why Tufts started it's essays to get to know you more. As my interviewer told me-- Tufts wants to know the person-you, then comes the numbers.</p>

<p>Brown</a> Admission: Facts & Figures</p>

<p>But I seriously think DAN should come out and explin how Tufts feels about the SAT, if they have accepted any kids with lower SATs, if so how low. It is really confusing. I hear different things about the SAT from different people.</p>

<p>Not really - Dan has stated numerous times that first comes the transcript, then SAT scores... THEN come the subjective factors.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Academics, first your transcript then your testing, are the most important part of the admissions process.

[/quote]

^ Dan's quote.</p>

<p>My understanding is that students accepted RD generally have comparable or higher stats than those accepted ED because it's more competitive due to the larger numbers of applicants. I think the applicants you're describing who would have a better shot at RD don't exist, but would probably be deferred rather than rejected. I think Dan has said, though, that they do have more or less the same standards for ED and RD.</p>

<p>Also, I don't think the kid with a 2300+ SAT and "mediocre" grades is all that rare, especially compared to valedictorians with low SATs. Being valedictorian generally means that you tried your best throughout highschool, and it's possible to be smart and hardworking without being a good test taker. However, it's a lot easier to be just as smart (and a better test taker) except lazier, leading to worse grades but the same or better SAT scores. At my school last year there were at least 10 people with SATs above 2300, and while all the ones I can think of were still top 10% of the class by GPA, but there were definitely some who were a lot lazier than others.</p>