<p>How would these scores be for admission to Stanford (white female):
SAT I: 2100
SATII:
Math: 660
History: 590
Spanish: 680</p>
<p>Too low. Even with an almost perfect to perfect GPA, you would need a much higher SAT score. Every single person I know or heard of that got in had at least a 2300.</p>
<p>In terms of your query, Badkarma89 is right - they are lower than average. You probably want to retake your history test so that way you can get rid of that 590. That of course is not looking at you, the ENTIRE applicant...</p>
<p>2100 should be alright, but you'd need some seriously good Subject Test scores, a perfect GPA, a stellar essay, and good quality ECs that involve leadership.</p>
<p>Badkarma...there are plenty of people who've gotten into Stanford with a 2100, but that wasn't the thing they were relying on with their application. I would say study a lot, and retake subject tests in October. Do whichever ones you believe you'd perform best on -- if you went for Spanish again, and got it above a 720, that would be good. If History and Math aren't your things, then trying a science and Literature, perhaps? At any rate, you'll need to prepare a lot for whatever suject tests you take, because you'll want at least 2 of them to be above a 720, if not all three.</p>
<p>Right. Stanford dream, i'm sorry if I came out too harsh. But I don't think I would change my opinion. There are "numbers" and then their are realistic chances. </p>
<p>I'm not arguing the fact that people have gotten into stanford with a 2100, but realistically, you really need a 2300 to get in. Those people with 2100's probably had some other part of thier app that was ridiculous, or like, legacy, URM, low income, instate, etc. </p>
<p>For the standard applicant, (barring URM, Low income, etc) you need a high 2200 to a 2300 to get in.</p>
<p>No way. The 2100s are recruited athletes, URMs, faculty kids, important legacies, development candidates, kids of the famous and powerful. That's half the class, so you're right, there are pleanty with 2100 and below, but they are HOOKED!!!!!</p>
<p>To have a decent shot at Stanford or any other top school you need 740 or so on all the SAT I sections and SAT IIs, and that's just to have a chance. As it stands right now, if you wanna keep the 2100, the SAT IIs are waaay too low. Do you think you could bring up SAT by 150 or so and improve SAT IIs by 50 pts? I don't even know why I'm saying all of this, as so many other factors come into play, it depends on what else you have going for you.</p>
<p>i'm pretty much otherwise just an average applicant, a 4.0 gpa and some ecs, but nothing standout-ish. I've been told that my SATs just won't cut it, so that's why I was asking. I don't expect them to be a hook or anything obviously, I was more wondering if they would doom me.</p>
<p>i believe one guy looks at all applications first at stanford and ranks students based on SAT scores FIRST. So your lower SATs would automatically drop you down.</p>
<p>haha, since when was a 4.0 "your average applicant?" </p>
<p>With a 4.0 UW (assuming) you have a shot at many other great schools. </p>
<p>Maybe Carnegie Mellon, Emory, Chicago, Michigan, Northwestern, etc.</p>
<p>I have a friend who got into Stanford with a 2050, but his essays were top notch, so assuming that your grades are good, anything is possible.</p>
<p>i didn't want to start a new thread, but im wondering, how much do SAT II's count for. my sat is mediocre (2260) but i have a math II 800, physics 800, and chem 790. will that make up somewhat for it?</p>
<p>LOL, now 2260 is mediocre. Perhaps, you'd only considered 2405/2400 and a personal letter from CollegeBoard's administration with them begin impressed by your answers as something slightly little than "mediocre."</p>
<p>No that's not what I meant. But mid-2200s are the median or so for Stanford admits, but a lot of the lower scores go to athletes and the like.</p>
<p>I misunderstood, pardon. I don't think 2260 is so bad for Stanford. Perhaps, GPA will play bigger role.</p>
<p>Just for the people who were saying that 2100 is too low unless your 'hooked' I have to disagree. I got 2160 in my SAT and I got in. No it wasn't the best thing on my application but it didn't stop me from getting in. And no I do not have a hook, I don't play sports, I know no faculty members, I've never even gotten any awards or worked on any project either! But then of course I live outside the country and maybe that makes a difference.</p>
<p>You all need to look at something. Stanford's applicants are NOTHING as good as the accepted class. Why? They only admit the 'best' 11-13%. Want me to prove my point? Let's look at last year:</p>
<p>Less than 50% of Stanford's applicants had verbal scores over 700.
Almost 40% had math scores below 700.
About 1 in 4 were not in the top 10%.</p>
<p>I'm not saying that Stanford's actual accepted students aren't very high caliber, but what I am saying is that 2260 isn't mediocre for the accepted students, and definately not for Stanford's applicants. A lot of people seem to think that great schools necessarily have incredibly difficult applicant pools--which they do. But the applicant pools are usually nowhere near the strength of the admitted students:</p>
<p>71% of the class had above 700 Verbal scores.
76% of the class had above 700 Math scores.
91% of the class was in the top 10%.</p>
<p>See the difference?</p>
<p>2260 is an average of 750 per section, good enough for any college in the US (inculding Harvard), if you look at the statistics.</p>
<p>I'm thinking of applying EA. Which of my scores (SAT I or SAT IIs) would be most important to improve? Or should I just give up on the idea of EA altogether?</p>
<p>A lot of people say that the EA pool is a lot more competitive.</p>