Wharton, Princeton, Harvard chances

<p>and maybe Columbia or Yale, UCs for backup</p>

<p>Asian Male, California
Rising Junior, average public school
SAT I: 2270 (good enough? I'll probably take it again in a year but I don't plan on taking an SAT prep class at this point)
Haven't taken any SAT II's yet</p>

<p>GPA: 4.3/4.0, I don't expect any major changes next year
11 or 12 AP's by the time I graduate</p>

<p>ECs:
-Was in Ghana during spring break for a microfinance project/volunteer work, pretty interesting
-Started an import/export business: mid to high end watches
-Research with university professor about business growth, opportunities, etc. in Asia
-Internship at Merrill Lynch: wealth management, nothing too difficult, got a Bloomberg certification
-Founder/President of stock market club: $100 min investment to join, current $7000 AUM
-VP of speech and debate club
-Currently around 150 hours of community service through clubs and such</p>

<p>No real hooks, but I am definitely interested in business and finance, probably looking at banking/PE or consulting in the future.</p>

<p>As an Asian male from CA without a hook, you will want SAT scores as close to the 75th percentile at our schools in each section. For HYP thats 790 per section, Columbiais probably 770 or 780.</p>

<p>Are you val or sal of your class? If not, and even so, consider adding some schools between these and the UCs unless you would be ver happy at a UC.</p>

<p>Your chances right now, even though you are a rising junior, are very high. Your ec’s, gpa, etc are solid, and SAT is good but try to improve it a little if you want some satisfaction. The thing is that my professors (one was part of the admission comittee for p-ton) said that after a certain point, SATs do not really change the overall decision You obviously reached that point.</p>

<p>If you got 2270 your sophomore year with no SAT prep class, it should be easy to break 2300 by first semester senior year. Your chances look solid and you have some pretty interesting extracurriculars. </p>

<p>Like hmom said though, you might want to consider schools like Dartmouth or UChicago if you’re interested in business. Maybe Stanford/Yale for your reach list?</p>

<p>I dont think anyone here read your list of ECs. This kid fits perfectly. Merill Lynch, Stock market club, Import/Export business??!?!?! Very good chances. Dont even bother retaking the SATs, just try doing really well on the subject tests. Take 4.</p>

<p>Thanks for the chances. My school doesn’t rank but if it did I would be valedictorian. As for adding schools between UCs and WHYP–I figured if I didn’t get into my top 3 choices, I would just go to Berkeley/Haas and save $30k a year. </p>

<p>I didn’t put Stanford on the list because its strengths seem to be more in science/engineering and didn’t seem to have the same “old boys network” nor as strong a placement in the financial industry (especially in NYC) as the Ivies I listed. I might change my mind, and my brother has already graduated from Stanford so I guess I have sort of a legacy?</p>

<p>My friend’s older brother graduated from Stanford as an Econ Major and did extremely, extremely well in job placement (he currently works for JPM). </p>

<p>For an Asian male, I’m sad to say you’re SAT’s are slightly under par for these schools.
GPA is great though. (JW, 4.0 UW?)</p>

<p>I think if you went for Wharton, Princeton, Harvard, and Stanford, you would get at least one of them. </p>

<p>No matter what people say though, no one is guaranteed at any of these, no matter what you’ve done. </p>

<p>I will say though a few of your extracurriculars are unique and that will help (I particularly liked the Stock Market Club). </p>

<p>For some in b/w schools: Cornell, UChicago, and Columbia. All three of these would do better on Wall Street than Haas (imo). </p>

<p>It’s also nice to give yourself options. I applied to college and got into my number first and third choice schools (Harvard and Wharton), and ended up going to my number four after visits and deliberation (Cornell). So it’s just nice to have choices.</p>

<p>Good luck!</p>

<p>OP has a great chance at Wharton, Harvard, Princeton, and any top school. Unique ECs, clear passion, good scores (2270 on first try sophomore year?). </p>

<p>SMP = Speedmaster Pro? I think the Seamaster 300 looks better =)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>You’re crazy</p>

<p>Agreed with hmom</p>

<p>Positively22: Agreed, after about 700 a section, SATs don’t change the overall decision. SAT scores are so high for these schools because they are admitting fantastic students with a great deal of natural ability and a bunch of paranoid, but still fantastic, students that take the SAT every month to strive for that 2400. I very much doubt that a higher SAT score will improve the OP’s chances. Go ahead and take it again if it will make you feel better, but I imagine you have way better things to do with $50 and a Saturday morning.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Is the 75th percentile at Harvard really 2370? That seems quite high…</p>

<p>@Tapper7</p>

<p>No… so a 2100 is the same as a 2300? Not in the least.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Completely and utterly false as any common data set shows.</p>

<p>Harvard’s CDS only breaks it down by section, and it’s 790 per section.</p>

<p>Also note, a brother does not make you a legacy.</p>

<p>hmom5 and KRNpro: I’ve seen the stats you’re talking about for a variety of schools. But you’re forgetting an important foundation of statistics. Correlation does not imply causation. For example, some high scorers are naturally gifted, as such they are likely to get better grades and be attractive to the adcom in other ways. Other high scorers are paranoid and have taken the test many times. They are likely to be obsessive about perfecting their GPA and other aspects of their application as well. Just because a set of data shows that x% of students with a score of 750-800 were accepted while y% of students with a 700-740 were admitted does not mean that raising your score from one category to another changes your chance of acceptance from y to x.</p>

<p>@Tapper7</p>

<p>Now try convincing the admissions that a 2100 is the same as a 2400</p>

<p>First I’d like to clarify that I used 700 per section as the benchmark since I know that a senior admissions officer at MIT was telling students at info sessions that once they topped that, they needed to stop testing and start enjoying their Saturdays. It’s not as though 2100 is a magical number that will yield instant results. But saying that a student needs a 2370 to be competitive is just not true and is doing a disservice to already stressed out applicants. Scores will just get an applicant the chance to play the admissions lottery. Low scores will keep you out but high scores will not get you in. For the record, nothing in the 2000s is low enough to cause rejection in and of itself. A 2400 is always ideal, but that doesn’t make everything under it a low score. Sure, if you have an unusually low score for a school you’re applying to you’re going to have to be pretty awesome otherwise to avoid being placed in the reject pile. But if you have a 2400, you’ll still need to be pretty awesome to be accepted. The SAT score just isn’t as influential as many seem to think.</p>

<p>KRNpro: I’m not trying to convince people that a 2100 and a 2400 are the same score. A 2400 is obviously 300 points better. I’m just saying that there’s not this world of difference that many seem to think there is. I see, however, that I worded my original statement a bit strongly. I was trying to get across that there are many factors considered in the admissions process of which SATs are one of the least important parts. I should have said something more along the lines of “After about 700 points a section, SATs become far less influential.”</p>

<p>take the test again, any score over 2300 is fine</p>

<p>Thought I’d bump this again…see if there were any new opinions</p>

<p>I’d like to point out the fact that just because the 75th percentiles are 790 each doesn’t make the total 75th percentile 2370.</p>

<p>Also, Tapper7 is flat-out wrong in saying one’s score after 2100 doesn’t make a difference. In fact, it makes a large difference as any reasonable conclusion based on a thorough analysis of the data reveals.</p>