<p>I could understand if you have an 1800 or a 27 composite on your SAT/ACT, but if you have above a 2100~2200 then you're in contention and should be worrying more about your essays and making sure the admissions officers get the best image of who you are through your whole application, not just the numbers. I know many people who attend Yale, 1 who got a 1960 on his SAT (he's white and is not an athlete), and another who got a 2080 (once again, white and not an athlete). Sure they had pretty good ECs, but then again who doesn't if they're applying to Yale? They're strongest points were probably their essays and that's what you all should be focusing on. I think it's fine to take the SAT or ACT up to 3 times max (they took it twice and so did I) but if your score is at a 2100+ then you shouldn't have anything to worry about. If you're going to take the SAT or ACT over 4 times then you might as well list it as an extra-curricular activity.</p>
<p>because an increase from 2100-2200 does increase your chances. diminishing returns only really kicks in around 2300.</p>
<p>Not to mention while they may be diminishing returns, for the most part they are still “returns.”</p>
<p>its one of the few things you can actually do to improve your chances. Those people going “crazy” over scores spend tons of times working on their essays too.</p>
<p>^^^ Actual data shows even that to be untrue. At least from the study commonly cited by various CC members, there is an actually an exponential increase in acceptance rates for the highest category of scores (around 2370+ or so). Of course this is just observed correlation though.</p>
<p>If you are close to the average SAT score for Yale (2225) then you’re probably fine. However, higher is always better.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Anecdotal evidence is not entirely irrelevant. However, saying something is merely possible does little help. An applicant is looking to maximize his chances; a higher test score does that.</p>
<p>Similarly, although someone can get in with a terrible essay, you wouldn’t advise a friend to slack off on his just because it’s possible to still get in, would you?</p>
<p>Lol, you haven’t seen crazy. These juniors in my school are retaking for 2360’s & 70’s, which is freaking ridiculous. They’re all aiming for perfection… they’ve dedicated the last 3 years of their life studying for this test.</p>
<p>Yup, got a friend just like that. But at least he’s also doing hordes of other ECs and stuff, so he’s going to have a stellar app come next year.</p>
<p>I laughed at the last sentence.</p>
<p>Although higher SAT/ACT scores are better, higher scores will not guarantee admission. Many students with perfect scores are dumbfounded when they are rejected by their top-choice school. What many forget: There are 4 voices in every application: there’s the applicant’s voice with his/her GPA, test scores, essays, and extracurriculars; but there’s also the guidance counsellor’s voice (SSR report) and 2 teacher recommendations. All 4 voices need to be in sync to be accepted to a top college. It’s not about the scores, it’s about “the package.”</p>
<p>Question for sfxjumper:</p>
<p>How do you know you have gotten into Yale this early? (the only possible reason I can think of is that you were accepted last year and took a year off)</p>
<p>^xfxjumper got a likely letter. (Athletic recruits often get these in october-november.)</p>
<p>It’s just a letter telling them that they should expect an acceptance on the 15th if they don’t do anything wrong.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not following the logic. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone completely disregards all other factors in favor of a single score. But the idea that higher scores are better should not be forgotten either. Threads such as this have shown up thousands of times, and the invariable truth is that many factors affect an applicant’s chances, among which is the SAT/ACT score, a measure that is so focused on by applicants because of its quantitative and standardized nature: a 2300 is always better than a 2100, for example, but one essay is never objectively better than another. </p>
<p>And as long as the efforts to get as high of a score as one can are not at the significant expense of the other important aspects of the application, the applicant’s chances will be better for it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>An interesting, misleading statement. Yes, essay scoring is somewhat subjective. But if you have 20 essays, and a bunch of people read them, it will usually be completely clear to everyone which one or two are the best, especially if the readers share a common understanding of what they are looking for. The issue isn’t that scores are definite and essays aren’t. The issue is that in a forum like this, everyone can see and appreciate the difference between a 2300 and a 2100, but no one can read all the essays. </p>
<p>So people say “You can’t tell the difference between essays,” meaning THEY can’t tell because they haven’t read them. The admissions people, on the other hand, have absolutely no problem telling the difference between essays, or at least between the really good ones and most of the rest.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You, however, made a misleading statement by putting those words in Silverturtle’s mouth. </p>
<p>He only said an essay can never be “objectively” better than another. Doesn’t mean that the admission officers can’t agree on which essay they like; it just means opinions will always be subjective (even if they are professionals).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I disagree. Among the many college essays I’ve read, I would have significant trouble identifying my favorites; I can’t imagine that a group of people would “usually” unanimously reach a conclusion. In the consideration of a college essay, you have the subjective application of subjective criteria. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, that was one of the things that I meant to convey with “quantitative and standardized.”</p>
<p>I do agree that people should not “worry” about standardized tests too much, especially if “worry” in this case means studying for two hours each day to improve 10 points. One can claim that a higher score always means a slightly better chance of admission, but it takes at the very least 3 hours and 45 minutes on a Saturday to obtain it. One can use that time to improve essays, engage in extracurricular activities, or just do something like creative writing, which all appeal to admissions offices. Now here I am assuming that if a person actually “worries” about his SAT scores being 10 pts too low then he definitely does not have enough time already. I think most people who fret over SAT scores are actually worried about college admissions in general though. Sadly, I don’t really think improving 10-50 points are going to help as much as some people believe it to be.</p>
<p>@silverturtle</p>
<p>But nonetheless, a conclusion has to be reached. And I have no doubt that essays sometimes distinguish one applicant from another when test scores and other objective factors fail to do so. Of the many college essays /I’ve/ read, I can tell when as essay is good and when it’s great. I’m not so sure you’re right when you say 20 admission officers can’t “usually” unanimously distinguish the better essay. Yes, Yale applicants are mostly going to have essays in the “great”–or better than great–category. But the admission officers/committee know what they’re looking for. They’ve most likely had years of experience (not including the generations of inherited experience).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I did not mean to suggest otherwise; I was pointing out that the difficulty and subjectivity that go into the conclusion make unanimity unlikely. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree, of course.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But this wasn’t the scenario. If I were given twenty essays and told to pick just one or two that were the “best” and then tried the exercise one year from now with the same essays, I’m not completely sure that I would pick the same essay. This can be only exaggerated when a group of people, each of whom is approaching the writing with a different set of experiences, judges the essays.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, this was partly my point: they’ve established their subjective criteria for consideration. Is each of these criteria known to the applicants to such an extent that they can make changes to their essays with complete confidence that the alterations will be beneficial? No, unlike with standardized testing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, this experience probably makes them more confident and efficient. Does it lead to “better” evaluations of essays (i.e., considerations that lead to a “better” freshman class, whatever that means)? Does it lead to less variability in evaluation from one admissions officer to another? I suspect that, in many cases, the answer to both questions is no.</p>