<p>SAT Critical Reading - 650 - 760
SAT Math - 680 - 780
SAT Writing - 670 - 760</p>
<p>92% in top 10th of graduating class
99% in top quarter of graduating class
100% in top half of graduating class</p>
<p>Penn stats...</p>
<p>SAT Critical Reading: 650 - 740
SAT Math: 680 - 780
SAT Writing: 670 - 760</p>
<p>99% in top 10th of graduating class
100% in top quarter of graduating class
100% in top half of graduating class
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>How can this be explained? I understand Stanford wants good athletes, but those stats are much lower than HYP, even when you do consider the athlete factor... Surely Stanford doesn't fill 50% of the class with low-scoring athletes?</p>
<p>The very best schools snatch away those high-scoring students with genuine potential and passion, and the remaining top schools have to pick up the leftover high-scoring students who aren’t quite so promising.</p>
<p>Stanford is in a whole different galaxy athletically than the ivies and doesn’t have to abide by the ivy league athletic agreements. They bend much more deeply for athletes and they have a lot of them. The unhooked are on par with HYP admits. In fact, even those with other hooks don’t get away with much–they take fewer legacies than any ivy.</p>
<p>And it’s a pretty valid question. Stanford’s usually considered top with HYP, but it has much lower SAT scores than even “lower” schools like Dartmouth and Columbia. I wanted to know why.</p>
<p>Stanford has 70% yield, and Penn has… 30-40%? Only Harvard and Stanford still care about yield. That means they can say no to you, but you can’t say no to them, at least they are trying to do so. When you have 30% yield, that means you are just begging people to come in.</p>
You’d be surprised. Being a truly competitive D1 school has major consequences in terms of SAT score range. Whereas many Ivy League recruits have the stats to normally get in, few of Stanford’s have the stats to get in without athletics. That is not to undermine the academic achievements of Stanford’s athletes; they are still strong and admirable, and I’m sure that there are quite a few that had very top academics as well. But when compiling strong teams for serious D1 competition, you can’t afford to have an academic index scale (which hinders Ivy League recruiting).</p>
<p>Unfortunately, I am well familiar with this because I’m a prospective athlete myself and getting into Stanford for baseball is so damn hard…:(</p>
<p>Stanford wants to prevent itself from becoming another UC Berkeley or Caltech with about 40% Asian. If Stanford keeps their scores on par with HYP, Asian will be about 35% to 40% of the student body,not the current 25% because of the large Asian population in California.</p>
<p>In addition to SAT, probably Stanford emphasizes more on essays, SAT subject tests, AP, extracurricular, plus passion and persistency. SAT is not an IQ test. You can not judge a person’s intelligience by his/her SAT score.</p>
<p>In terms of quality of faculty, only Harvard is on par with Stanford among the 8 IVY league schools.</p>
<p>I don’t buy the argument that Stanford’s stats are pulled down by athletics. Approximately 800 students at Stanford participate in varsity intercollegiate sports in any given year–or about 200 per class. Of those, about 300, or 75 per class, are on athletic scholarships. Even assuming that the 800 participants are all “recruited athletes” and given a special break in admissions on the basis of their athletic prowess, it’s hard to see how they’d affect the school’s 25th and 75th percentile medians all that much. Let’s assume, worst case, that the 200 varsity athlete in this year’s entering class are all in the bottom quartile of admitted students’ SAT scores. So what? With an entering class of around 1600, Stanford is going to have around 400 entering freshmen in the bottom quartile. Even assuming the recruited athletes are the worst of the worst academically, they won’t pull down the 25th percentile SAT score—because that’s determined by the 75% of the class above them, and by the top scorers in their quartile. And they surely won’t pull down the school’s 75th percentile score, because again, that will be determined by who’s in the top quartile. So basically, I think the whole “Div. I athletics pulls down the quality of the student body” at Stanford argument is bunk.</p>
<p>While not politically correct, Stanford’s over-reliance (I’d argue over-reliance, but I’m a bit biased, so I’ll concede down to ‘greater usage’) on race-based affirmative action is a large part of the explanation for their relatively low SAT scores ranges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Any reason Yale isn’t included in this elite company? You can’t honestly be implying Berkeley is a better university than Yale, can you?</p>