<p>Here's a puzzle to think about: what is the value of a high SAT in applying to top schools, specifically Brown. Ask yourself what percent of students with 800s are accepted.</p>
<p>The answer is provided by Brown (my thanks to them):</p>
<p>Applicants with an 800 on any of the three SAT components have a 29% chance of being accepted. I would have thought it would be much higher.</p>
<p>Nearly perfect, at 750-790, drops the applicant to 20% to 22% (depending on the section).</p>
<p>I grant that I don't know if this is typical of other schools, or if Brown is unique.</p>
<p>I'm guessing that there is a very high correlation between GPA and SAT. I know that there are cases where people do well in one, but not the other - but I don't think that the 71% with 800s that were rejected all had low GPAs or a police record.</p>
<p>I pose this thought in the general admissions category, because it looks to me as if at least one school really means it when they talk about the importance of non-academic portions of applications. Otherwise - why did they not take nearly all the high SAT scores?</p>
typical among private schools and some state schools.</p>
<p>
the more prestige and the larger the applicant pool, the more selective the school can be.</p>
<p>
because perfect/near perfect SAT scores aren’t really that important and only show that you are good at taking the SAT. also, once you reach a certain score you will no longer be rejected solely because of test scores. these kids were probably rejected due to ECs, recs, essays, the likelihood of the kid enrolling even if he/she was admitted, etc.</p>
<p>That may be because the rejected applicants had low SAT scores in the other two sections. They may also have had a very weak set of extracurricular activities (one of the more common reasons why high test scorers get passed over at some colleges). </p>
<p>It’s not out of the realm of possibility, too, that Brown may practice strategic admission for yield protection, although I don’t know whether or not it does.</p>
<p>I personally didn’t do very well on the SAT. However, I have a pretty high GPA, take rigorous classes, and have an endless list of ecs. Clearly the SAT doesn’t represent the entire student.</p>
<p>I do think that the top school realize that an applicant is more than a score. THere are so many scenarios for this that it would be impossible to list them all. A few have been mentioned, low gpa (very common), no ec’s, no volunteering, low scores in the other 2 areas, not a fit for their campus, poor or uninspiring recs or essays…the list could go on. I think the thing that surprises people is that an 800 isn’t going to guarentee anybody anything. You really do have to be the whole package in relation to the very selective schools- I know we have incredibly intelligent kids who squandered away their freshman and sophmore years, who have dui’s or other brushes with the law, I just don’t think you can look at the college admissions and disect out one element - and wonder how can this be. It really is the whole picture and I also think that admin reps are much better at seeing “fit” than we give them credit. I don’t know how many times I have heard something along the lines of, oh my kid was denied at georgetown but excepted at MIT. That said, I’m sure there are certainly plenty of 800’s that just didn’t make it because the pool is so big.</p>
<p>i highly doubt brown suffers from the tufts syndrome</p>
<p>in my opinion, brown’s approach to college admissions is the most holistic of all the ivies, and many top-tier schools so ECS and other non-academic activities are weighed a lot, which is a possibility for all the perfect scorers who may not have a social life to have been rejected</p>
It’s may not as important as ppl make it to be. But SAT and AP scores are the only things that adcom could look at and compare two applicants from different schools. One may have a perfect 4.0 GPA and Val. from his school, but 1900 SAT. The other may have 3.7 GPA but 2300+ gpa from another no ranking school. Use common sense what tells the adcom?</p>
<p>^^^
i think you are wrong. as everyone has said, your test scores help you become qualified. after that colleges look at your transcript, essays, recs, etc, so i don’t think colleges will ever directly compare students’ SAT scores to make admissions decisions. (doing so would imply that SAT scores were the determining factor in the school’s admissions decision.)</p>
<p>also, you’re missing a key point which is that colleges assess your achievement in relation to the opportunities presented to you. </p>
<p>using the same stats:
4.0 GPA, 1900 SAT, Val from a poor urban school in the Midwest will have just as a good of a chance as the 2300, 3.7 GPA kid from some prep school in the NE.</p>
i hear a lot of people say that, but is it really true? besides, a good hs GPA could just mean that you are good at showing up to class (at some schools, anyway)…</p>
yep. also, keep in mind, that it is HIGHLY unlikely that students from this type of school score above average on the SAT or ACT. it is also unlikely that such students would even be applying to ivy league schools. more than likely they’ll be applying to less competitive state schools or even community colleges. so please realize that the scenario that you posted doesn’t even matter at most of the schools that CC’ers are applying to.</p>
<p>“4.0 GPA, 1900 SAT, Val from a poor urban school in the Midwest will have just as a good of a chance as the 2300, 3.7 GPA kid from some prep school in the NE.”</p>
<p>From my experience this isn’t true. If it’s a really good prep school then the 3.7 means a lot more than a 4.0 from a crummy public. I’ve seen a lot more 2300 3.7 prep schoolers get in than people like your hypothetical val.</p>
<p>Newjack88, I actually repeat what I heard in JHU’s open house admission session. The adcom was a very nice black man, he said what he presented were mostly true in top ranked colleges. He also mentioned sometimes the val from some schools mean nothing to them, he said it was a joke that some HS at middle west have 80 val. how can you take this seriousely?..SAT and AP are the only things they can OBJECTIVELY measure up students academic achivement across from different schools…one thing you are right though, the GPA from different schools has different quality. That’s why college adcom need to look at SAT, AP scores.</p>
<p>arachnop, a good hs GPA could also mean (not excludedely) the student took all easy courses. The same adcom said, if your took only one AP while your school offer 12, they will have a ? on how you chalange yourself enough. If they admit you, will you effeciently use the resource JHU provideded to you. ^-^.</p>
<p>Anyway you can’t just look at the GPAs from different school. The courses are taught in different level, the teacher’s score standards are different, student body are different, etc.. In our local public HS, there is no A+, some teachers don’t give out A easily, some just don’t give A…I think adcom knows how to read your GPAs against your school’s profile, read your SAT against the kids from other schools.</p>
<p>I’m sick of ppl saying how SAT score could be ‘bought’ by well of parents…most case a very convinient ‘excuse’ for those who can’t make the cut. And if you kept making excusing, you will never make the cut.</p>
<p>I mostly wonder about the whole “perfect/near perfect SAT scores… only show that you are good at taking the SAT” concept. For example, if there is a student from a “fairly good” school who has a 5.0 GPA and a 1700 SAT, you might think that he/she is just a “poor” test taker… However, it is quite possible that he/she is just not at the academic level that his/her GPA indicates. You could take a different student from the same school-let’s say he/she has a 3.4 GPA and a 2220 SAT-you could argue that this student is “just” a good test taker, but it is also just as possible that this student “knows his/her stuff,” yet doesn’t have as impressive grades as the first kid (for any number of reasons: laziness, family problems, learning disabilities, and/or other extenuating circumstances).</p>
<p>(sorry if this post is a bit unclear; hopefully you can still get a sense of my argument…)</p>
<p>I may be slightly biased on the subject but I do think SAT’s are somewhat of an indicator as to a person’s intelligence (taking into account some deviation). There IS a reason why the CTY (JHU’s gifted summer program) uses SAT scores for down to middle schoolers for people to qualify. Personally, I think SAT scores should be looked at with a significant weight, comparable to GPA (if that’s not the way it already is). The grading systems are different through every county/district/state you name it as well as the courses offered by each school and the course load taken up by the student. I go to one of the top ranked public high schools in the country and we have quite the course offering compared to other schools. Additionally the county we’re in has a fairly stringent grading scale (at least compared to other scales I’ve heard of). We probably have the most avg. AP’s taken per student (most kids finish out with around 7) and probably the highest averages on those AP’s as well as the highest SAT averages. This creates a very competitive environment and lower gpa’s then some ridiculously easy curriculum and grading scale would produce. I’m sure my school’s grades will be taken w/ the context in mind but I think SAT’s and AP’s are a good standardized comparison of students across the board. Additionally, let’s compare a person with the 1800/2400 SAT and the 4.2 gpa vs. a 2300/2400 SAT and a 3.5 gpa. I don’t know about you but I would bank on the latter being more intelligent 19 times out of 20.</p>
that’s pretty much what i was saying, “colleges assess your achievement in relation to the opportunities presented to you.”</p>
<p>
not sure why the fact he’s black is relevant… anyways, what you are telling me is almost irrelevant to what i was saying. i was saying that “once you reach a certain score you will no longer be rejected solely because of test scores.” i never said that we should get rid of standardized testing. </p>
<p>lastly, keep in mind that many admissions officers complain that the current standardized tests aren’t the best way to compare students or predict how students will do in college.</p>
<p>
i’m pretty sure though that the transcript/GPA are the most important parts of the application. pretty hard to argue against that…</p>
<p>
yea, but keep in mind that the SAT doesn’t test high school level curriculum. it’s not like the national exams that you see in Britain, China, etc. also, it’s sort of ridiculous that you can study for an “aptitude” test… i think that’s the issue that most people have with current standardized testing. i did it, but i think it’s dumb that in order for any relatively bright kid to score well he or she just has to take a few practice tests.</p>
<p>krazykool:
your reasoning is flawed. couldn’t it just be that there are way more prep schoolers applying than my hypothetical student? answer is yes. there are WAY more 3.7+ GPA kids with good test scores from good schools who apply to top colleges. if this isn’t true then why is it that so many qualified applicants with these stats get rejected? also, it’s highly unlikely that the kid from the poor urban Midwestern school would have schools like Harvard, etc. on his or her list due to financial reasons.</p>
<p>jcrew:
jcrew i’d say you’re a little biased but i’d agree with you if there were better standardized exams. one’s that tested over a rigorous national curriculum that everyone had the means to prepare for.</p>
<p>everyone:
you guys are picking HORRIBLE applicants to compare. please be more reasonable and quit working yourselves up over things that will almost never happen. lastly, colleges could careless who’s the most “intelligent;” it’s all about the corporate buzz words and finding kids who are bright nowadays. it’s not about bookworm types.</p>
<p>EDIT:
anotherNJmom part of your post seemed a little hostile towards the midwest, are you against colleges considering geographic diversity? if so, please keep in mind that a school in Kansas has no where near the same resources that a school in NJ has.</p>