<p>Op,</p>
<p>Do you have or can you get a copy of the school profile that your HS sends to colleges?</p>
<p>I’m going to cut to the chase here. I think you already know the answer, and so does she, but you are hoping that there is an “out”. She is highly unlikely to get accepted to the most selective schools, the one that her crowd, her peers, her friends are all licking their chops and discussing because, yes, the schools will be picking the cream of the crop–with as many kids that apply , they can and that’s how they make the cuts. Unless she has some very strong hook, like being a recruited athlete in a sport the school loves, she isn’t going to get accepted to those ueber competitive schools. They have to cut somehow, and if you look at the number of kids there are with high gpas applying to such schools, (like over 90% can have great gpas, look at the charts), you can see that overlaying this with test scores is necessary. How are here SAT2s and AP test scores–a lot of those schools do use 5 SAT numbers, not just 3 in rating where a student stands in the test department? Also look at the Naviance chart if your school subscribes and other such graphs (parchment, maybe) and you can see what the chances are for her. Also ask her GC. The answer is that the results are not likely for a student like her to get accepted at a college where she is not in the upper 25% for test scores because she has no hook and is in an overrepresented demographic. </p>
<p>Yes, the FairTest schools are options she should explore. I have heard of mixed results about them, but my one son who tested very low, but was a good student in a rigorous curriculum at a tough college prep school, did very well with that group of schools. I did not send ANY test scores at all to those schools and he was accepted to all of them–Gettysburg. Dickenson, Holy Cross, Fairfield, all accepted him. Only Fairfield gave him some money, about $10K. We did not apply for fin aid, as we would not have qualified for any. I have no idea how things are with the Maine LACs also on that list or Wake. </p>
<p>But, no, no miraculous accept is likely. Why doesn’t she do well on the tests? Some just don’t. I have two kids and they are 800 points apart on their SAT1s. The one who got near perfect took it as a junior and just nailed it. Had just a 3.0 average whereas his brother was the better student. You go figure. It’s a shame because this is likely to be an issue after college too. My high test performer is making big money in an industry that does ask for SAT scores and tests rigorously for giving a job. My other guy, though doing well is college, is going to have an issue in terms of GREs and getting grad school money… It doesn’t end. I suggest if that grad school or med school is on the horizon, or an particular post bachelor’s program that requires a test, that continued test work be done throughout college, because in our case, it was and still is an issue. </p>
<p>Good luck. </p>
<p>No one here, including the OP, is saying that scores are the be-all and end-all. But neither is GPA, as evidenced by the countless students with perfect GPAs AND test scores who are routinely told that the process is a lottery and they have some nerve to be disappointed by going 1/10 of the elite schools they applied to. Why is GPA one of those things that fall under the rubric of “stats aren’t everything” in that case, but are overwhelmingly important in this one?</p>
<p>OP has already said that her D doesn’t have any major hooks or stand-out ECs. This isn’t the case of someone who is a prima ballerina, the CEO of her own company, or a seasoned vet of a national level political campaign, all cases in which the SAT score really isn’t going to matter as long as it meets some bare minimum. This isn’t even someone who is really great in one subject, but weak in the other. Those are the cases in which we’re most likely to see someone with a significantly lower than average SAT getting accepted.</p>
<p>Some people may not like the SAT. Some colleges don’t think much of it either, as demonstrated by the growing list of SAT-optional schools. But most schools still require it or the ACT, and still classify it as important. Given that, barring any other extenuating factors, then yes, getting a 1950 rather than a 2350, even with a very high GPA at a great school, is going to make a real difference. </p>
<p>If nothing changes, I would recommend that OP’s D, in addition to her safeties/matches, apply to schools in the range of Barnard, Oberlin, Haverford, USC, BC, and Brandeis, even though her SAT is still below the average for those schools. I think that is the level of school at which being in the top 5 % in an excellent HS will stand out, since those schools are great but not necessarily the first choice of the top of the class at TJ or Exeter. At Penn, Duke, or Northwestern, they’re already getting plenty of top students from top high schools who also have high test scores and, usually, something else as well. I just don’t think these kinds of schools are going to look at her app and say “Eh, 2400, 1950, same difference. They both have good grades, but her 500 word essay was more creative. Who cares about those silly tests anyway?”</p>
<p>I might apply to a couple of super-reachy schools, but wasting an early decision app on Columbia or Penn seems totally counterproductive to me.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Depends on the student. My daughter and son applied to the same types of grad schools. My daughter’s GRE’s came in similar to SAT’s – she worked very hard to prep, but she just doesn’t have a facility for math and it hurts her every time. She is also summa cum laude, PBK from Barnard. She got into all but one grad school that she applied to with generous merit offers from many, and is now attending school with a 50% scholarship.</p>
<p>My high scoring son had near-perfect GRE scores - he even ended up tutoring my daughter to help her prepare. He’s got roughly a 3.5 GPA from a CSU. Applied to a single program, got in, some merit money but not particularly generous. His school is less costly than daughter’s because he is at an in-state public. I felt that for him - the GRE was very important, particularly the math score, to offset whatever assumptions the grad school would make about his undergrad college. </p>
<p>For my d, I really didn’t think it would matter – and I think the results showed that to be true. The grad schools are also going to place a lot of weight on academic— though the situation might be different for law or med school admissions (But you specifically referred to GRE, not LSAT or MCAT- so that’s what I am addressing)</p>
<p>Obviously, it’s best to have high test scores plus high grades – but I think that all too often the kids who have a knack for testing internalize the message that they are so smart that they don’t need to study or prepare for anything…and that doesn’t work nearly as well in a college class as it does in the standardized testing room.</p>
<p>I’m also a good tester and I think I rely mostly on a gut level, intuitive sense for answering the questions. I think some people have that good intuition for choosing the right answer and some don’t. I’m also pretty smart, but I think that I had done more rationalizing and less intuiting on standardized tests, my scores would probably have been lower. I think my daughter’s problem is that she thinks things through and pays attention to detail in a way that I never did. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t have a clue. My daughter had a combined 1200 with CR/Math and a 730 in writing – was admitted to Barnard with those numbers- but that was back when the writing score was new, not when it was a soon-to-be- abandoned element.</p>
<p>My point is simply that the way that CC’ers look at statistical reporting of test scores is overly simplistic. If the colleges looked at them that way, then as colleges became more selective, you’d see their test score ranges go up – and the Ivies would be reporting that 99% of their students have midrange scores above 700. But they don’t – they still have that persistent ~20% below on their reported data.</p>
<p>CC’ers assert that those are all “hooked” applicants like URMs and athletes – but anecdotally that doesn’t seem to be true – and I think that based on an assumption that the colleges weight SAT scores in a very linear, isolated manner. And I don’t think that they do – I think they do set cutoff scores, but that the cutoffs are lower than CC’ers believe – and then they are focused on other factors with those students. Major hooks count, but so do minor tip factors-- other things in the application package that set the applicant apart. And at that point I think they are looking more for consistency in scores than actual numbers – they know that they will admit some poets who falter in math, and engineers who are not so great at the language-based tasks. They want those students. They just probably don’t want a prospective chem major who can’t break 700 on the math section … because there is a whole lot of math involved in mastering organic chem. </p>
<p>Take a gander at some schools that are reaches. There are some kids that are exceptions to the rule, such as Calmom’s DD and Mini’s DD. It does happen. But you cannot count on it, and yes, it is a tremendous disadvantage that your DD is coming from a school that tends to have high stat, high grad kids in an areas where there are many such schools, many such kids all applying to the same schools. Also, hooks are not the only things that can distinguish a student. An interview, something that makes that student stand out can make the difference, but that’s all up in the air.</p>
<p>I have friend whose DD was a great student, top 10% at a school as you describe, and test scores higher than your DD’s with great ECs, highly regarded by the school, excellent writer and supposedly had fantastic essays. Only weakness was the test scores that did fall slightly outside the cluster point for her high school She went for it–a lot of highly selective schools that she applied to, and was slammed. Hurt terribly. Not enough other choices, so it was really a bitter pill to go to a safety. I would temper that list with a number of schools that will take your DD, so it’s not like she has a list of all reaches and then the safety. That’s a recipe for a hurting. It is possible that something will stand out, and she will be an exception, but you cannot count on that.</p>
<p>My son with the low test scores was accepted to the same schools that many of his peers with substantially high test scores ended up selecting as the best schools that accepted them, so it’s not like he was so disadvantaged by his SAT/ACT scores. Frankly, I don’t think in his case if another 100 or even 200 or 300 pts (he scored very low) would have made such a difference as there is that huge divide when it comes to the ueber competitve schools. He got into schools like Northeastern, Drexel, Fordham, Penn State, UMD, UDel, Pitt , for example, with lower test scores than your DD, fully reported as well as the FairTest schools I listed. Only Villanova rejected him, though for NE and UMD, he was accepted in programs where he would have had to do something alternative first term rather than a straightout accept as a traditional freshman. Still, he and we were happy, and he felt good about his choices. You don’t want this to turn into a trauma as it did for my friend’s DD and for some other kids I’ve known. </p>
<p>I agree with those who say she is unlikely to be cut any slack on those scores. Kids coming out of schools like hers have all the advantages in this respect–a test-savvy community, well-educated parents, tutors, etc. She is not a poor kid who hardly even knew what this was all about and only spent a few days prepping because they didn’t even realize that anyone would spend months or years on that and anyhow they were too busy working to help out their single parent to have the time. I think it’s unrealistic to look and see that a few kids are admitted with those scores. There’s a reason for those admits. It’s going to be kids who are disadvantaged or who have outstanding achievements. </p>
<p>Grad school has changed a lot in terms of tuition remissions and stipends from my day, Calmom. My friend’s DD who also bombs on these test was a 4.0, summa cum laude from a LAC, got a prestigious job at a top 25 university as research tech for a year with top of the line recs in her field, but didn’t get money at any of her grad school choices. it’s a tough field, psychology, and she didn’t also didn’t get the accepts she had wanted. So her parents helped and she borrowed till she got her master’s and the green light towards the PHD and now she has a stipend and money, as she was top notch in her work these past two year–a huge relief to my friend. She was told straight out that her GRE was the reason she got no money for those first two years, and she outperformed most everyone in this program at a top national university, many who came for ivy league schools with great grades and top level GREs, in the two years of that master’s program (that morphs to a PHD program if accepted at that point). </p>
<p>The same with my friend’s DD with the summa and double major, graduated in 3 years but not hot LSAT scores. She is a partner now with a big time law firm but she was passed up twice by the top law schools because of her LSAT scores. Yes, those numbers can be an impediment and one has to look at other alternatives as more realistic when test scores just aren’t up there. But these days, so do those with top numbers too. Even they are no guarantee of a most selective school accepting a student, and those kids and their parents often get the worst bruising of egos and expectations. </p>
<p>I don’t think there is any way to predict admission outcomes for this student. A well rounded list of schools is essential!</p>
<p>Really? This kid is already stressed out about her SAT’s and you guys want to caution her about grad school and GRE scores?</p>
<p>give it a rest! This is a fantastic student who will find her “peeps” in college if folks would just stop the “her scores are too low” drum beat.</p>
<p>Yes, Columbia and Penn don’t seem realistic. So if you guys want to be helpful, how about sharing the collective wisdom about Rhodes, Elon, Beloit, Miami, Wittenberg, Skidmore, and some other schools which the D may not associate with “slacker kids from my HS go there”? I’ll assume that if this is Chappaqua or near by, throwing in the Maine LAC’s won’t help since they’re hardly off the beaten track. But still- take a look at the women’s colleges, particularly Mt Holyoke, since i think it represents a tremendous admissions “value” for a serious student who might not have the perfect application. They like serious students; they like admitting kids who love to learn, and her scores won’t be problematic in the context of the overall culture there.</p>
<p>I think stories about lawyers who were hurt by weak LSAT scores is just adding gasoline to the fire here.</p>
<p>
The experience I reported with my d. happened in 2013 (she’s just finishing up her first year as a grad student at NYU right now. She opted for NYU after turning down generous merit offers from JHU and Chicago because she decided to attend school part-time rather than full time, and NYU’s program is very flexible in that respect.</p>
<p>The point is-- great academics + middling GRE scores were no barrier at all to admission, and did not seem to be a huge problem when it came to merit money.</p>
<p>But there’s a difference between “middling” scores (like this thread is focused on) and “bombing” on the tests as well. </p>
<p>My point is that “middling” scores are never a plus factor, but they are often overlooked when other credentials are strong. </p>
<p>It might depend on type of program. I specifically said that I wasn’t equating the GRE with LSAT/MCAT situation. The GRE is more of a generalized test, and some of the grad programs my d. was applying explicitly say they give it very little weight. </p>
<p>But grad school admissions look at other factors as well. My kids are in grad programs that place more weight on post-college work experience - they like to see students who have 2 or 3 years of real-world work experience in related fields under their built, and they require the students who don’t have that to do internships. (My kids were exempted from the internship requirement at their respective schools, though my son ended up taking a paid internship anyway). </p>
<p>I’d like to add…her SAT scores are not middling! They are better than middling. </p>
<p>And yes…there are plenty of wonderful colleges between the Ivies and the local community college. </p>
<p>What about schools in PA…Muhlenberg, Gettysburg. What about Washington and Lee. What about the schools near Philly…Haverford, Lehigh, Villanova? </p>
<p>There are any number of larger schools if that is what she is looking for…Boston University, many of the flagship schools…Vermont, Delaware, New Hampshire, UMass, UConn or UPitt? How about Case Western or Carnegie Mellon? Connecticut College, Skidmore. LOTS of choices.</p>
<p>And we aren’t saying she shouldn’t include an Ivy type or three on her list. She should. </p>
<p>I have the feeling that all of my lined-up columns will shift all over the place, but I tried to copy over admit data by SAT score ranges. I am of the belief that while a high SAT score will not guarantee anyone’s admission, a low one will keep the student out. As several others have commented, the unhooked NYC area applicant of college-educated parents is expected to have scores close to the top of the range.</p>
<p>MIT:</p>
<p>Distribution of SAT Reasoning Test Scores (Critical Reading)</p>
<pre><code> Applicants Admits Admit rate
</code></pre>
<p>750-800 4,005 611 15%
700-740 3,431 376 11%
650-690 2,722 205 8%
600-640 1,995 116 6%
< 600 2,304 36 2%</p>
<p>Princeton:
(Middle 50th% of applicants, admits & enrollees)</p>
<p>Test Applicants Admits Enrollees
CR 640–760 710–800 700–800
Math 670–780 720–800 710–800
Writing 650–770 720–800 710–790
SAT II 690–790 740–800 730–800
ACT 29–34 32–35 31–35</p>
<p>Cornell:</p>
<p>SAT I CR Apps Admits
750 ‐ 800 16% 30%
700 ‐ 740 21% 29%
650 ‐ 690 23 22
600 ‐ 640 18 12
550 ‐ 590 12 5
500 ‐ 540 6 1
Below 500 4 0</p>
<p>This girl is going to get accepted to many wonderful schools. Thumper just listed a whole bunch of schools that would probably love to have her. There is nothing wrong with a 4.3 GPA and an SAT just under 2000- I am not convinced that this is a huge mismatch. Take the ACT and send in the higher score. </p>
<p>We live in a school district similar to the OP and in the same geographic area. I am familiar with all of the towns she mentioned. The OPs D may not get into Duke, but she will absolutely get accepted to many fine schools. </p>
<p>The problem with going to a top NE high school and being a top student is the buzz that’s going around right now. My one oldtime friend’s daughter went through that. Her test scores were quite good, even in her high rated high school, but not among her peers. And not for the colleges on her list. Sorry to say, but schools like Blossom and Thumper were named were disdained by that crowd and, sadly by the parents too. They were fixated on HPY, and the other ivies and highly selective schools, like the most selective, like Amherst, Williams, Swarthmore, and, yes Bowdoin would make the ears prick up, but as Blossom says the Maine trio are unlikely to cut much of a break for students in this geographic corridor. Too many top flight kids apply to the same old same old. I’m running into this with my son right now, despite all of the encouragement and exposure I’m giving to some good solid reaches for him. Looking for merit money is the only way I can get him to investigate those schools as the talk in the AP and honors courses about colleges seem to revolve so heavily around the big name schools. As seniors announce where they are going and really as their acceptances were made known, the kids can tell which schools get the oohs and ahs of admiration that are real. That is the sad state of affairs in a lot of the competitive schools. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But the statistics you posted show that the admit rate doesn’t fall off dramatically at any of the schools until the scores are below the 600 mark. </p>
<p>Again,obviously, the students with the relatively lower scores need to have other strong qualifications that act as a counterweight – but you have no evidence whatsoever that it would be a traditional “hook” as opposed to some other individual strength or characteristic. And it doesn’t have to be an astounding, “cured cancer” level of strength - just something that fits what the college might be looking for and is unusual enough that it would stand out within a particular applicant pool.</p>
<p>OP, I think you should start planning trips to visit colleges that are realistic matches for your D. I’d go by the range of SAT scores just to be completely prudent – if she’s in the 50% area for SAT scores, then her high GPA gives her a good boost for that school. Of course also add a few safeties as you fill out your list, but I’d start with some matches.</p>
<p>The reason I suggest this is because it sounds like right now, your D is looking at all colleges purely by the numbers – possibly straight out of USNWR’s rankings, possibly by just the “wow” factor among her classmates. In order to get past that she has to physically check out a campus and see for herself that a school is so much more than just those numbers. Once she sees a school with, say, a really beautiful campus, or a particular program that she loves, or a vibe that just feels right to her, those rankings will matter a lot less. </p>
<p>@calmom – agreed, but I like the odds better at 750+ than at 600-640. Using Cornell’s data as it includes both applied & admitted percentages, 16% of applicants had 750+ but 30% were accepted vs the 18% of applicants at 600-640 where 12% were admitted.</p>
<p>I think dustypig’s advice is good, and if she manages to significantly boost her test scores, she may still want to apply to those schools if she likes them or needs low match schools to round out her list. </p>
<p>I do have a question though: “she is taking a rigorous program. She will have 8 AP classes by the time she graduates.” Is that considered a “most rigorous” program at her school? I would have expected a bit more from a top student at one of the most elite schools in the country. Or is she also doing post-AP work?</p>
<p>I want to caution the OP that EVEN having a high SAT and those terrific grades does not ensure entry into a top school. My neighbor’s DD was turned down by Cornell despite legacy status, a gpa and rigor at a top ranked public high school and great ECs. She was their first child heading off to college, and despite all the talk on how difficult it is to get a spot in highly selective schools, the parents really thought Cornell was a shoo in for her, and that HPY and some other very selective schools were going to be the challenges. They did not “use” their ED option for Cornell thinking of it as a given. Nope. Yes, she was in the zone, but it did not happen. It was a rough ride for them as they really categorized all schools as matches or safeties, with only about a half dozen of the most selective schools they thought of as reaches. They learned and diversified a lot more with their second daughter who was also turned down by Cornell. Both WL with guaranteed transfer admissions with a B average after the first year, but both girls stayed at their chosen schools as they did enjoy it there that much. But what a blow when not accepted to a school that they really thought was a match.</p>
<p>So, I don’t think the focus should be on those SAT scores as the only thing keeping her from the brass ring. If she got her score up to 2200, you think she’d then be a shoo in? Nope. Doesn’t work that way. </p>