<p>They would never reject a kid for retaking a 2330, that is absolutely ridiculous. Once again, a 2330 is not a 2390, retaking it shows nothing besides the fact that you were not satisfied with your performance first time around. Really, a 2330 is not that outstanding with these schools, there is no reason why the OP shouldn't retake so long as he is sure he could do better in order to boost his numbers. The SAT is one morning long, I think humanity can go a morning without being saved by one kid. To everyone saying DO NOT retake, either you are concerned with competition or you have no idea what you're talking about.</p>
<p>Every year, kids with 2400 SATs are rejected by schools like Harvard. My suspicion is that many of those kids are exactly the type of kid who would rather retake the SAT with a 2330 than spend the Saturday morning doing something productive (and I include shooting hoops in that rather large category). I'm no admissions officer, but the ones with whom I've spoken abhor adult pressure on our talented youth to become admissions-obsessed automatons.</p>
<p>BS (your name's initials lol), I am not concerned over competition, nor is anyone here. CC is all about helping other applicants. His SAT, right now, blows most (at least my) SAT scores out of the water. I don't think a couple more points will be the deciding factor between my app and his. </p>
<p>You do not understand adcoms; they do not like number obsessive people. Going over the top with Ex-Cs (the few your passionate about, not many!) is ok because you are actually improving your knowledge/adding experiences; however, redo-ing an SAT does not do anything for you. The SAT is just used as a tool to compare other applicants. Once they see that your scores are academically viable with the rest of the scorers (which they obviously are at 2330), they then wonder what you can personally add to the college. Showing, an increase of 70 pts when you are already at 2330 does not give them a reason to accept you; of course, they wont reject you because you retook the test, but they might look down on that action.</p>
<p>I completely agree with pbr; I personally, do not think its a coincidence so many perfect scores are turned down.</p>
<p>Most adults, put too much pressure on their students that they become admissions zombies. All three kids at my school are applying to top schools because their parents forced them too. One of them will not get any financial support from his parents (who are wealthy) if he doesnt get into Harvard (No other school counts). I see the lack of actual passion and sanity for those applying to Ivy League schools. I only thought of applying to Harvard last year after I read about what the college can offer me and visited the campus. Others spend their whole HS years obsessing over anything and everything. THEY WILL CATCH THOSE TYPES OF APPLICANTS. Shooting hoops is definitely a worthwhile thing to do . Adcoms would like to see a candidate who can balance his time between academics and friends/life. In fact, if they see that "down to earth" factor in an applicant, THAT (not a 70 pt increase) will be the deciding factor for an applicant.</p>
<p>Once again, a 2330 is not a 2380 or 2390. He would not be hurt at all by retaking. A 2330 does not blow other Harvard applicants out of the water, in fact it is actually on the low side for regular applicants.</p>
<p>Where are you getting your information from? Are you kidding me!!, The middle 50% of accepted students range from a 2090 to a 2380. He is not in the top 25% of accepted students; but he is definitely above the 50% mark. (which is 2200? 2250?). Therefore, he blows most SAT scores out of the water, not 75% of them, but probably like 65-70%. This is the data for accepted students; not applicants! The accepted students percentages will be higher than the the percentages for all applicants. Therefore, he probably is in the top 25% for SAT scores out of applicants. Just to give you an example, two out of the four applicants from my school have SATs of 1810 and 1730. The two others (including my SAT) are sub 2200. If you play around with the AI, you will see how insignificant an additional 70 pts will be (when you are already at a 2330). Colleges use this tool to sum up you gpa and test scores. BS, please feel free to support your arguments with data.</p>
<p>College</a> Search - Harvard College - SAT®, AP®, CLEP®</p>
<p>In order to have a good shot at a school you want to be in the upper quartile. That accepted range relfects all students coming in, including all of the athletes and legacies and the kids that may be super-geniuses in one subject but not the greatest in another. Being in the mid-50% is not a good thing and blowing most SAT scores out of the water just isn't good enough for Harvard. If he wants a better shot, there is NO HARM whatsoever in retaking the SAT and may even be good in it.</p>
<p>Keep in mind this year will be the most difficult year to be accepted so far. "Blowing away" 60% of people means he gets "blown away" by 11600 others.</p>
<p>Actually, legacies, athletes, URMs usually make up the bottom 25% (sub 2090), and remember, he beats the SAT scores of 60% of ACCEPTED students, NOT applicants. He is not just blowing MOST SAT SCORES out of the water, he is blowing MOST OF HARVARDS ACCEPTED SAT SCORES out of the water. For the applicant pool I would say he is the the top quartile. Read my post about how a 2000 increase in students is not too much to worry about since its only a .5% decrease in admissions. I would imagine a lot of those 2000 are under qualified because they were solely attracted by Harvard's financial aid. </p>
<p>In conclusion, it could only help him a very insignificant amount. I already explained above how it does not increase your AI and how there are SO many risks you are taking when you redo it. A 70 pt increase in his SAT will NOT make or break his application. End of story.</p>
<p>woah guys chill out</p>
<p>I can't believe this thread is still going.</p>
<p>Lol were just arguing for the sake of arguing, nothing more. I have respect for all those who have argued against me (baelor, crazy vinese, and BS) because they are intelligent people (at least more intelligent than me ) and they bring up good points. Hopefully, a good amount of CCers get into their colleges of choice. Good Luck all.</p>
<p>I thought we were all angling for invitations to a Saturday morning hoops session sponsored by the OP!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Baelor, my point above is that, unless absolutely overwhelmed by the rest of the application, I would reject an applicant who retakes the SAT after scoring a 2330. (Why not spend that Saturday morning with Habitat for Humanity, or even just shooting hoops with your buddies?) You, on the other hand, believe there is no harm in the retake. Ergo, you and I would, I guarantee you, make different admission decisions.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>All you're doing is saying that you would reject qualified application based on irrational biases. I'm glad you're not an adcom.</p>
<p>Not everyone has volunteering opportunities or friends willing to "shoot hoops" at 8 on Saturday morning. I know kids with 500+ community service hours who have retaken the SAT. But you're right, they should have added 4 hours to their already-huge number or spend time with their friends that they could do the same things with Friday night, or Saturday afternoon, or etc.</p>
<p>Personal experience: I have not had any free weekends except 2 or 3 since the beginning of the school year. I still found time to retake the SAT II. I went from a 750 to an 800. I would do the same thing over again. Why? Because I have been incredibly productive, and that one weekend has detracted from nothing.</p>
<p>Do you understand this concept? That not everyone has a totally productive plan that they can just whip up Saturday morning? That taking four hours out of Saturday is not that big of a deal?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Every year, kids with 2400 SATs are rejected by schools like Harvard. My suspicion is that many of those kids are exactly the type of kid who would rather retake the SAT with a 2330 than spend the Saturday morning doing something productive (and I include shooting hoops in that rather large category). I'm no admissions officer, but the ones with whom I've spoken abhor adult pressure on our talented youth to become admissions-obsessed automatons.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And my suspicion is that the admit rate for 2400s is WAY higher than the overall rate. Plus, your argument falls apart once you consider that many 2330s are as lifeless as you seem to portray some 2400-scorers. They are just not as smart.</p>
<p>There is nothing unproductive about showing colleges your true ability. If the alternative is watching TV or sleeping in, I fail to see the problem. To say that it could be spent volunteering, etc. is just absurd. If taking the SAT is not a horrible experience, I fail to see how taking it is a crime while watching TV, for example, or shooting hoops, or whatever is perfectly fine.</p>
<p>The OP wants to take the SAT again. Unless all of his weekends are booked, I fail to see the reason why this particular weekend versus all the others should be used "productively."</p>
<p>
[quote]
I see the lack of actual passion and sanity for those applying to Ivy League schools. I only thought of applying to Harvard last year after I read about what the college can offer me and visited the campus
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Blahblahblah. What pompous self-importance. As if your experience relates to everyone's. Most applicants who are interested in universities (cf. LACs) can find that HYPS offers them something they like, financial support being only one of them. You seem to be mistaking those who apply partly for prestige with those who have done no research whatsoever. There is overlap, but it is not all-encompassing.</p>
<p>You don't even need to do that much to decide a school is a good fit. I went to a couple of info sessions about Stanford, did research online, and decided to apply. It's not necessarily a drawn-out process that requires days and days of analysis. </p>
<p>I would disagree with applying solely for prestige, but it's not as if HYPS aren't good fits for a lot of top students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Others spend their whole HS years obsessing over anything and everything. THEY WILL CATCH THOSE TYPES OF APPLICANTS.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Then let them. Retaking the SAT is not obsessing over anything. The OP could have awesome ECs that don't require an extra four hours. He could have no HW that weekend. Do you fill up EVERY moment of your time doing something "productive?" I know I don't. So calm down about 'obsession' here. </p>
<p>
[quote]
In fact, if they see that "down to earth" factor in an applicant, THAT (not a 70 pt increase) will be the deciding factor for an applicant.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Is he putting "shooting hoops" down as an EC? Is that going on the resume? If he shoots hoops after the SAT to wind down, is that unproductive? You're not making any sense here.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Where are you getting your information from?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>From my school:</p>
<p>Accepted from 2350-2400 bracket: 75% (Sample size 7-10)
Accepted from 2300-2350 bracket: 12% (Sample size 10-13)</p>
<p>I'd say that's a pretty significant difference considering the seemingly insignificant SAT difference. The sample sizes are pretty large as well. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Actually, legacies, athletes, URMs usually make up the bottom 25% (sub 2090), and remember, he beats the SAT scores of 60% of ACCEPTED students, NOT applicants. He is not just blowing MOST SAT SCORES out of the water, he is blowing MOST OF HARVARDS ACCEPTED SAT SCORES out of the water.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If 25% of students get above 2380, I seriously doubt that 2330 falls in the 60th percentile. In fact, I'm almost positive it doesn't.</p>
<p>And consider what demographic corresponds to what SAT score. For an unhooked, wealthy, white applicant, 2330 may not cut it.</p>
<p>Baelor, we just disagree on what constitutes a rational basis for rejection. I believe it's rational to accept a single-sitting 2330 SAT applicant, otherwise qualified, who appears to have achieved effortlessly, over a multiple-sitting 2400 SAT applicant who spent four years trying to game the admissions process. Neither you nor I have any basis to know, but I suspect most good adcoms have similar views. I'm also glad I'm not an adcom; given the extraordinary number of qualified applicants, it would be painful to reject so many who deserve admission--especially if I were told I had to place as much preference on a 2370 SAT over a 2330 SAT as you would dictate.</p>
<p>Baelor, I followed the same "research method" you used in selecting the schools I have applied to. But after reading so many of these posts, I see many applicants who have geared their whole HS career to get into Ivy-League schools. That is called obsession. Alot of new applicants had a reason to apply this year due to the increase of financial aid. good for them; however, those applicants are only few among what I like to call applicant zombies who apply to Ivy League schools solely on the basis of undergraduate ranking. I did my research, and Harvard was the only Ivy League school that I felt was a good match for me (compared to the non-Ivy League schools I applied to). How many applicants do you know who modestly applied to just one Ivy? How many have you applied to? Exactly my point. </p>
<p>Even if your not doing something important that day, you are still obsessing over your test scores, and yes, you cant put "shooting hoops" as an EC; but shooting hoops shows you have a life beyond trying to get into a college. I, the valedictorian of my school, put time aside every Saturday morning in the fall to play football with my rugby friends and other kids from my school. Retaking the SAT makes you look obsessed. I highly doubt adcoms use the SAT as the deciding factor between applicants in the (2300/2400 range). It is merely used to show the applicant is academically in line with the rest of the student body. Yes he maybe an unhooked wealthy white applicant, but the SAT will not make or break an applicant. He has got to show what he can add to Harvard's diversity; I dont think a higher SAT score shows diversity. </p>
<p>I guessed 60% because 2090 is 25% and 2380 is 75%. If you add those numbers and divide by two, you get 2225 at 50%. Of course, that doesnt necessarily mean 2250 is the 50% mark, but that's one way to estimate. Your school is just one example, not a representative of all schools. At my school, the only person who got in had a 1520 SAT (a white non-legacy, etc applicant) Two other applicants with SATs greater than 1550 got denied. In addition, your data does not hold other stats constant (gpa, etc.). I would assume a higher SAT = a higher class rank in comparison to those who have lower SATs applying to Harvard from the same school.</p>
<p>Baelor, we just disagree on what constitutes a rational basis for rejection. I believe it's rational to accept a single-sitting 2330 SAT applicant, otherwise qualified, who appears to have achieved effortlessly, over a multiple-sitting 2400 SAT applicant who spent four years trying to game the admissions process. Neither you nor I have any basis to know, but I suspect most good adcoms have similar views. I'm also glad I'm not an adcom; given the extraordinary number of qualified applicants, it would be painful to reject so many who deserve admission--especially if I were told I had to place as much preference on a 2370 SAT over a 2330 SAT as you would dictate.</p>
<p>I completely agree with Pbr; the adcoms probably would not reject someone with a 2330 because someone else had a 2390. They would look at other factors to determine admissions</p>
<p>I would not want to be an adcom either :(. How many apps would each one have to read if </p>
<p>the total amount of apps was 29,000! How many adcoms are there? Any of you have an idea?</p>
<p>Your error is in associating what I'm saying is the case with what I would love to be the case. I have absolutely not advocated for any particular admissions strategy here, nor I have stated that SATs should be emphasized more/less than they are.</p>
<p>I am simply pointing out what is the case. Check out my data. They speak for themselves. As do Princeton's. Whether the data should be as they are or vastly different is irrelevant so long as they are correct for right now.</p>
<p>In addition, you are setting up a strawman regarding the OP. Let's revisit his statements:</p>
<p>"Hi, everyone. I'm currently a junior interested in top schools. I'm ranked 1 at my school right now (in a very wealthy, East-coast, suburban district)"</p>
<p>"I took the SAT for the first time (not counting 7th grade CTY) in November without studying at all"</p>
<p>Check out the figures I posted from my school. I come from a very wealthy school that is very competitive. Like the OP. Standards are higher for different demographics.</p>
<p>Secondly, note that you said "multiple-sitting 2400 SAT applicant who spent four years trying to game the admissions process." The OP said that he had taken it once with no studying. Is there anything in his post that leads you to believe he is a number-whore? Is every valedictorian trying to game the system? Or was your statement simple a total irrelevancy?</p>
<p>I am talking about the OP and what is the case in college admissions. Note that the numbers clearly agree with me. If you want to start a new conversation about what you think I believe, feel free to do that on another thread. My points still stand.</p>
<p>OP, take the SAT again if you can get a better score and don't have to sacrifice anything to take it again.</p>
<p>And personal experience: I definitely wanted good numbers. The SAT II I mentioned earlier was actual retaken because I wanted a perfect test portfolio (I had gotten 2400/800/800. That score was the obstacle, and the only one I retook. That has not been a problem so far in the admissions process. The idea that adcoms would reject some who retook a "good" score is laughable. I knew I could do better. So I retook. And did better.</p>
<p>
[quote]
How many applicants do you know who modestly applied to just one Ivy? How many have you applied to? Exactly my point.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't know anyone else's college list. I applied to three schools total, Stanford and two Ivies (after SCEA acceptance at S). I can't help it if more than one of them are good fits. If Harvard is the only one for you, so be it. But not everyone who applies to three, even five is simple prestige-whoring.</p>
<p>"I, the valedictorian of my school, put time aside every Saturday morning in the fall to play football with my rugby friends and other kids from my school. Retaking the SAT makes you look obsessed."</p>
<p>Retaking it does not necessarily make you look obsessed. I've already explained why if anyone were to look obsessed over retaking a SUBJECT TEST (even less important than the actual with AP scores considered as well), it would be me. No one cared. Your statement has zero weight as far as I can tell. Again, an MIT adcom is the only one I have heard said that there is a threshold above which they don't matter. Not everyone enjoys playing rugby Saturday morning. Not everyone schedules "productive" activities for that time. If you claim that I'm extending my own experiences onto everyone else, you are definitely doing the same to an even greater extent.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In addition, your data does not hold other stats constant (gpa, etc.). I would assume a higher SAT = a higher class rank in comparison to those who have lower SATs applying to Harvard from the same school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Of course it does. Please, I wouldn't put up irrelevant data. GPA varies from about 3.8 to 4.0 roughly equally over that entire interval. A person with SAT 2380+ (accepted) had a GPA below 3.85. </p>
<p>Once past 2300, SAT does not correlate with GPA at all since our school's grading is so harsh.</p>
<p>Harvard will not hold the remaining points against you. You have crossed a threshhold that makes the statement you need and as much as you can get from SATs. You could ask them, if you felt better about doing so to be certain.</p>
<p>Look at my math with the AI. He can take it again if he wants and no the adcoms will not look at it in a negative or positive way. But, the numbers still put him as AI of 9. It really makes nill difference if he takes it again or not. SATs, grades, and SAT IIs are just used for preliminary elimination and (most likely) in final elimination of applicants. They will not make or break you if you have AI of 9.</p>