<p>Thanks for the info. I guess I need to expand on my 4.12 GPA, and better my EC’s other than a dedicated Robotics and MUN freak.</p>
<p>Well, obviously not too low of a score, but I assume at 2250+, it doesn’t make that much of a difference. (2210 SAT 35 ACT, into Stanford REA)</p>
<p>To “quote” text, simply do this</p>
<p>(quote) insert text here (/quote)</p>
<p>^replacing the parentheses with square brackets.</p>
<p>^^^
[noparse]
[/noparse]</p>
<p>And you get</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Edit: Whan got there before me</p>
<p>Hmm… I need to see what would best get into Stanford CS program, or MIT’s EECS or CMU’s CS program.</p>
<p>I think it really depends on the school. It also depends on how hard you are on yourself. Once I pass a certain score on a practice test, it’s considered low For me, 1600 was low, then 1800, then 1900, then 2100, and it looks like the cycle will continue up until I think 2400 looks mediocre. That is, if I ever get a 2400.</p>
<p>My advice:</p>
<p>Don’t worry so much about test scores, resume padding, and whatnot.</p>
<p>While you do need good test scores and activities, these are nowhere near central to HYPSM + tier 1. Retake if you got a bad score by all means, but don’t put so much effort into testing as to waste time (IMO) taking SAT classes and whatnot. Just buy a couple study books - it worked for me.</p>
<p>Rather, focus your time on doing what you are passionate about (for me it was Piano and Scientific/biomedical research). This is what I felt showed most greatly.</p>
<p>However, that said, I think tier 2 schools tend to be much more dependent on test scores. With a lot of applicants (such as USC, UCLA, etc.), they resort to relying more on formulaic calculations with test scores.</p>
<p>Your mileage may vary.</p>
<p>Lmao, prep classes I’ve heard are a waste. I guess I’ll focus on what I truly love, which is spending countless hours doing math proofs and Computer Science.</p>
<p>Oh, but also don’t forget to take your passions to competitions as well. Although it’s definitely good to have passions, it’s even better to take them and show you excel in them. There are plenty in the CompSci & Math fields.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are mistaken: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-preparation/865226-addressing-few-concerns.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-preparation/865226-addressing-few-concerns.html</a>.</p>
<p>Yeah, if the entire HL and SL math classes at my school didn’t think I was some crazy black mathematician who shouldn’t do AMC 12. But I am doing USACO. And hopefully I qualify for USAMO.</p>
<p>^Haha, well just whatever works for you </p>
<p>^^Hmm, interesting read, which sort of goes against my observations in the Stanford Results thread.
But, if that’s how the statistics sway…</p>
<p>Then again, this is not to say the statistics imply causation, where a higher SAT/ACT results in exponentially greater admission into a school. More likely, the high scorers also typically have better demonstration of passion in their interests</p>
<p>Also 98th percentile = 2140, and 99 is 2200. My example mostly regarded 2250+. I still believe that at 2250+, the scores are less material.</p>
<p>edit: Then again, I read that guy’s posts, and he does a decent job explaining the statistics. I simply feel that better EC’s + a 2250 will bode much better for you than mediocre ECs + a 2400. I don’t have godlike stats - I’m ranked #11/600, decent GPA, decent Testing, decent APs.</p>
<p>There is a guy in my class, ranked #1, 4.6 GPA, ~15 APs with all 5s, 2400 SAT 36 ACT 235 PSAT in one sitting, was my partner for the Siemens Regional Final, yet still got deferred from Yale SCEA.</p>
<p>no… the east coast snow postponed our testing. So now I wait for the rescheduling.</p>
<p>For myself or for other people?
Usually, if people are happy with the scores they have, I’m happy for them. Nonetheless, I was very disappointed in myself when I got a 2110. For myself, I don’t consider anything under about 2300 acceptable. In general, I guess, when I’m being rational, I think about 2000 is good.</p>
<p>Personal standards:</p>
<p>2310 - Acceptable
2350+ - Good enough to never retake.</p>
<p>At my school? Umm… depending on who you talk to, a 1800 or a 2300 could be good.</p>
<p>< 2400: Horrible
2400: Good</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>But anything in the 2000s is all right, I suppose. <2000 = swirly eyes.</p>
<p>If you are continuing education past HS, you are a winner already.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sometimes, setting ambitious objectives motivates us to accomplish in ways greater than otherwise possible. The solace of the national averages should only be exploited if we do not succeed.</p>
<p>^Lol - I agree (with what of that I understood) but I was making a different point.</p>
<p>Personally (and this is what I want from myself, not what I expect from others), I think a 2250+ with all subfields over 700 is good. A 2300+ is brilliant. </p>
<p>Generally, I think anything over an 1800 is good enough though.</p>