<p>800 Verbal</p>
<p>I pretty much got the 2nd option. I think the 800V 700M is more impressive though. 800V is a very hard score to get.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you believe SAT scores are going to get you into HYP, look at the threads containing the many rejected with higher scores than those you quoted (how do you explain all the 1600 scorers who are rejected?).
[/quote]
Lets face it, there's a lot of 1600s today, and more importantly, a lot of 1500s and above. When a 1600 gets rejected instead of a 1590 or even a 1500 I have no real problem. When they start taking 1350s and 1400s over 1500+ because of their wonderful bs ECs, URM, legacy etc, I think its sheer arrogance on the part of the adcoms that they "know" the real person. Getting a 1500 is still pretty impressive, and it should REALLY matter because collge is about academics, scholastics and future leaders, not choosing the members of a country club.</p>
<p>Mensa, thats the problem with the College Admissions Game Book (and a reason why it flopped). Scores do count at HYP, but not nearly as much as some would think. It is true those schools could fill their classes with 800 scorers with all As. But that is not necessarily the type of person they want. Today, good or bad, you must have a hook. Whether it's athletics (being the very best at a sport, not just a varsity player) or music (again one of the very best with an instrument) or theatre or focused academics (being one of the best in a particular field) or minority status, you must have a HOOK. This explains why you see so many high scorers being rejected (they don't have hooks). To many kids grow up thinking the SAT is the be all and end all. It's important, but HYP want more (and when your like Princeton with 15,700+ apps for 600 spots, your in a position to expect it).</p>
<p>Does this mean that with an 800V and 600M I'm still considered a competitive applicant? Not for Ivies but NU, USC, Chapel Hill etc. I always thought that a high math score looked better. Unfortunately I suck at math.</p>
<p>800/600 is definitely competitive at the schools you listed.</p>
<p>Prettyfish, Are you following me? lol</p>
<p>shhhhh it's a secret ;)</p>
<p>Mensa160 is off target on that opinion, I think. Schools want people who will contribute to the community and rich, lively academic atmosphere. Perfect scorers are a mix of types, and one of the mix is the grade grubber who just cares about themselves and their grades and won't put time into the community because it will detract from their own time getting perfect scores. You can only have a limited amount of these types.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Perfect scorers are a mix of types, and one of the mix is the grade grubber who just cares about themselves and their grades and won't put time into the community because it will detract from their own time getting perfect scores. You can only have a limited amount of these types.
[/quote]
I'm only asking for one space.</p>
<p>i'd go with the 800v/700m. (in part because it's what i have.) strong verbal skills are good for any field, even those engineers out there. and getting super-high verbal is rarer than super-high math, outside of the 1600 applicants. but they'd look at everything in context too. to whoever said 700 was a low score, i think it's all right if you have an 800 or two in your deck of cards.</p>
<p>"I'm only asking for one space."</p>
<p>Prob there is not room for you, in the scenario I described.</p>
<p>Mensa, you still don't get it in terms of what are legitimate contributions to an academic community: I completely understand why HYPSetc takes some 1350's and rejects some 1600's. Roughly half the 1600's, in fact.</p>
<p>But just as there no absolute rankings of students, neither is there an absolute ranking of colleges. If there were, Harvard would take the top 1650, Yale the next 1800 or whatever, Princeton the next.... It doesn't work that way and for excellent reasons.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But just as there no absolute rankings of students, neither is there an absolute ranking of colleges. If there were, Harvard would take the top 1650, Yale the next 1800 or whatever, Princeton the next.... It doesn't work that way .....
[/quote]
According to Mr. Byerly it does...</p>
<p>Mr. Byerly has delusions of adequacy.</p>
<p>I know it ain't a choice by 800v/750M. However, I would go with 750/750 cuz both are a strong score. Like someone else mentioned earlier, take sat iis to show your strengths, but trust me, 750/750 will not go unnoticed in the admissions process</p>
<p>hey bluedaisy, I just got my Feb 5 SAT scores and got the same breakdown as you. 800v, 750m. Yay.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Mr. Byerly has delusions of adequacy.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm sorry, but that just made me bust out laughing.</p>
<p>Hahah. Nice burn.</p>
<p>Mensa's first post did not say that he expected high SATs to get him in. He stated that one study showed that higher SATs lead to higher acceptance rates. You don't have to go to NBER to see that. There are many ot her sources. Many schools (I think BRown is one) show acceptance rates for different SAT levels. There's a site I can't name here where applicants list their stats and admissions decisions. Many high schools publish scattergrams showing SATs and acceptances for their students. In every case, on average, higher SATs result in higher admission acceptances. Not a guaranteed space, not a way in, but a better chance.</p>
<p>Thedad's admonishment that 50% of 1600s are turned down by Harvard bears this out: it means they have a 50% acceptance rate. That certainly isn't true of applicants with 1420's. We may wish it to not be thus, but it is.</p>
<p>I wonder if anyone has ever really looked at admit rates when comparing scores of 1500 or above during a single test sitting, versus those received after multiple test sittings. I know that composite scores or second or third scores are often used, but somehow I would have to believe that the adcoms may look more favorably upon a single sitting high scorer. Maybe not.</p>