How do top scorers on tests fail to gain admission to top schools?

[nngmm]

The difference between 770 and 800 on SAT math can be one careless mistake that has nothing to do with the student's mathematical ability (as probably will be evident from the rest of the application). Once the scores are "in the range" (which, generally speaking, means above 700 in all sections and SAT IIs), I doubt that the scores play any significant roll in the admissions decisions.

In addition to that, the AdCom is building a class, not just accepting the most qualified applicants. Their choice can sometimes be much more driven by what they are short on any given year then by what scores someone got on SATs. A student with lower scores may luck out if his/her area of strength is in demand at the school of his/her choice on a given year.

[marite]

Re: NSM's post #13.

In 2006, 132,809 students took the SAT Math2c, which is the one I expect applicants to Caltech to take. The mean on that test was 644. The College Board breaks down its report by tranches of 50. The number of students who scored 750-800 on the test was 28,997. If we assume that 10% of these received a score of 800, it would make for 2,899 students. The entire freshman class of Caltech numbered 232. It would be very easy for Caltech and other top schools to admit that many perfect scorers.

[emeraldkity4]

What do you advise that high school students bear in mind for preparing a college application besides test scores? What are cases you know of when a student with high scores was rebuffed by a college that appears to favor high test scores? What aspects of suitability for one or another college are not captured by admission test scores?

My daughter doesn't test well.
She is a senior, but will be very busy this year- not only preparing college applications, but taking heavy load and participating in sports.

She has in mind fairly competitive schools, not Stanford, but possibly just a couple millimeters below.

Very limited time- but I hate to make her cut her sports which she loves- I can't ask her to change her course schedule as this is the first year in high school that she has gotten to take electives & she will already be participating in an after school program designed to help minorities and 1st gen students get into college.
But she isn't a strong writer & she has lowish SATs.
Instead of a SAT prep course however, I feel that her time will be better spend working on her writing. One of her former English teachers- is running a college essay course- that looks to have a very flexible schedule- 3 students in each group. I think that will serve her much better in the long run, than trying to boost test scores because those writing skills will be used in college, whereas the exams she takes, will be different than SAT.

( Older daughter- tests much better- but writes even better than that and was admitted to a school where her grades and test scores were below median- but which probably considered that the colleges curriculum was writing intensive & that she already could show a good grasp of mechanics & style)

I would also say, that while school may favor high test scores, there seem to be so many that have counted on that criteria to mean everything- that other things actually are weighted more heavily

[curious14]

There are about 20,000 slots available, in each entering class, at the top 20 Univ. and Top 20 LAC's. If roughly 40% of these slots go to students with admissions preferences e.g. URM's, recruited athletes, legacies, etc., then there are only 12,000 slots avalable to students competing on the basis of a combination of academic merit and EC's (excluding recruited athletes). That is roughly 1% of the students who go on to college. It is no wonder that many students with stellar academic records and high scores are turned away.

[collegealum314]

There isn't a significant difference between a 770 and an 800, unless you are talking about the MathIIC which has such a generous curve that a 770 isn't that good. However, there is a big difference between a 700 and an 800; that's more than a couple of careless mistakes. With a string of scores at ~700 I doubt you're dealing with one of the top prospects in math or science anymore.

I also think NSM's characterization of Caltech admits as just about grades and test scores is misleading. Almost certainly these guys have destroyed math and science competitions, and fill up their extra time and summers with academic activities and extra classes. Also, they have the highest standards in the classroom instead of merely going for the "A". I knew guys who had perfect grades, test scores, great competitions, etc. Instead of founding an organization, they spent a lot of time trying to go from the top 100 in the country in math to the top 50. Not everybody can do it. The emphasis in admissions is on deep thinking and intellectual rigor rather than selecting guys that are pretty smart and have great test scores that spend their time juggling a hundred activities.

[marite]

^^ I agree with collegealum. Great test scores and high GPAs are not the be all and end all of admissions even at Caltech; or should I say, especially at Caltech? They are fairly minimal standards, after all.

Is there a more precise breakdown of SAT scores than by 50 point increments?

[collegealum314]

Re: NSM's post #13.

In 2006, 132,809 students took the SAT Math2c, which is the one I expect applicants to Caltech to take. The mean on that test was 644. The College Board breaks down its report by tranches of 50. The number of students who scored 750-800 on the test was 28,997. If we assume that 10% of these received a score of 800, it would make for 2,899 students. The entire freshman class of Caltech numbered 232. It would be very easy for Caltech and other top schools to admit that many perfect scorers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll add that when I took it (10 yrs. ago) that I think you could get 6 wrong on the MathIIC and still get an 800.

[curious14]

Just as an aside, I would be willing to bet that there are more students with perfect unweighted GPA's turned away than studnets with 2400's.

[marite]

Possibly. And GPAs are easily manipulable. That's why SATs and AP tests exist.

[mythmom]

Re NSM's post #10

Even those schools we imagine might be most numbers driven other factors can prevail. A close friend's son did not have numbers in the stratasphere in GPA or overall SAT score. He has NO interest in a well-rounded education.
However, he is an ENORMOUSLY creative thinker in computer engineering and was admittedx to MIT.

I found no real logic in DS's acceptances and rejections in terms of selectivity of schools. Sometimes yield management plays a role. However, amazingly enough, he was accepted at all the schools that were the best match for him.

My advice to candidates would be to know yourself, be yourself, perform at the level most fitting for you, creatively communicate who you are, find as many schools that you like across a fairly broad range of selectivity, apply to as many as you can and hope for the best.

[marite]

Mythmom, amen.

[siserune]

at a top ten LAC .... in 2005 the admission's committee rejected over 200 applicants with perfect SAT scores.

That's very, very unlikely.

At the top LACs, students with very high SAT I+II get in at rates near 100 percent on numbers alone, probably even without stellar grades (though bad grades may keep them out). It is questionable whether any LAC sees 200 perfect SAT applicants per year to begin with, as most people with those scores are applying to top 10 research schools. LAC are a smaller and self-selected applicant pool. Monster statistics will, apparently, set you apart at an LAC.

The LAC admissions officer may have been talking about perfect "superscored" SAT, a far looser standard, or applicants with perfect scores on one component of the exam.

[kelsmom]

To try to understand, look at a "flip side" example: A young man at my D's school was accepted to Harvard & Stanford last year ('06). He did NOT have particularly high SAT/ACT scores, nor did he have the highest GPA. In fact, he did not take the most rigorous schedule of classes by any means (although the school doesn't have any truly "easy" path). What he did have, though, was a million-plus dollar business that he established & ran by himself while a high school student ... including employees in CA (he lives in MI). His stats would never get him into Harvard. His LIFE did, though .

By the way, he decided to go to UMich.

[oaklandmom]

"If the top scorer also has top grades and dream school is a place like CalTech, Cooper Union or their instate public university, those select students primarily based on grades and scores, so the top scorer will probably get into their dream school. "

S was not a top scorer, his SAT scores were 2190. He did have 800's on the SAT II in Math & Physics. His GPA was 3.83 weighted. He was accepted ED to both Caltech & MIT. A friend of his with a 4.0 unweighted (and I don't know what it was weighted) & an SAT of 2350 & 800's on all his SAT II's was rejected by both Caltech & MIT. Clearly Caltech & MIT didn't just look at the "numbers" for these two students. S attended a rigorous private high school that had never had a student accepted by either MIT or Caltech in the past, his friend went to an Oakland public HS. Both took classes at UCB during their senior year in HS(both had A's in their classes at UCB). His friend in fact was only accepted UCB(though he applied to other top schools in addition to Caltech & MIT). Both planned on majoring in math. S however had demonstrated his passion for math by doing ARML, AMC, AIME & math summer programs (PROMYS & HCSSiM) along with a Math Circle. His friend did some math competitions with his High School but not at the same level as ARML or AIME and was not interested in Math Circle & did not participate in any summer programs. So at least in this instance, Caltech didn't just look at "scores" (unless the tip was my son had an AIME score and his friend didn't - but my son's AIME score was only 7 or 8). Just food for thought for those that may think "perfect scores" will get them into Caltech - it doesn't always work that way.

[marite]

oaklandmom:

Thanks for providing confirmation for my argument in post #2!