<p>this may have already been covered, but I'm going to blab anyway. I visited columbia two years ago and the admissions rep for one of the US regions told our information session that they reject half the kids with 1600s. so bylerly has obviously got skewed info.</p>
<p>They all say that. Don't believe them. </p>
<p>Generally, if a 1,600 scorer is not a known psychpath, and is not suspected of being ticketed for another school higher up the academic food chain, he/she's in.</p>
<p>There are fewer than 1,000 1,600-scorers nationally in any given year, and I wager they do pretty well admissions-wise.</p>
<p>Generally, half or more of the SAT scorers apply to Harvard, although the precise number is not widely reported. For the Class of 2000, 365 1,600 scorers applied to Harvard out of the 688 total who achieved that score nationally.</p>
<p>688 is the single sitting total. Multiple sittings will raise this.</p>
<p>Byerly,</p>
<p>Even with the new writing section would an 800 math 800 verbal still translate to the traditional 1600? Of course I understand they will consider the writing score heavily as well, but would that be lumped with SAT IIs?</p>
<p>The answer to your first question is yes, at the moment.</p>
<p>It will be several years before Harvard or other schools pay much regard to the writing score. They first want to observe its correlation with the performance of matriculants over time in order to gauge its predictive value.</p>
<p>That is rather interesting. At my highschool there are approximately 6-7 perfect scorers in both math and verbal. It should be interesting to see whether the statistics pan out.</p>
<p>That seems to be then norm. The Presidential Scholars program, for example, is not yet using the new writing section for eligibility determination.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ed.gov/programs/psp/faq.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.ed.gov/programs/psp/faq.html</a></p>
<p>Haha yeah. I would have qualified for that stupid thing except I filed my citizenship application a month too late.</p>
<p>Too bad. I have a friend who won one of those "stupid things" and spent the next summer working in the White House -- for one of the President's chief economic advisors.</p>
<p>Yea.. shoulda filed earlier. But then again, I wouldn't be comfortable working for Bush :-)</p>
<p>Neither would I, although Bush's new chief economic advisor, N. Gregory Mankiw (who is, incidentally, a Harvard professor), seems like a very intelligent and reasonable person. Wonder how long he'll last...</p>
<p>useful and interesting thread...</p>
<p>Why is Brown so low?</p>
<p>What is "Tufts syndrome"?</p>
<p>Google is our friend. </p>