<p>Yes, they do. However, they don’t make him stand out, per se. Why should Brown pick him instead of (perhaps) 100+ other musically talented and dedicated students? It’s all about the edge.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Indeed, being interested in music is not particularly outstanding in itself, but I can’t think of any specific advice on that count (i.e., beyond the typical “make yourself stand out” line). In fact, I am encountering this same problem personally: I, too, have a significant passion for music (piano improvisation in my case) but do not know of many techniques for effectively leveraging this.</p>
<p>Well, it is good: they love passion. Well, it is difficult to just “make yourself stand out,” but think about your passions and take them to the next level; what have you been doing about your compositions? Have you been organizing or entering competitions or partaking in concerts? Just take your passion to the next level and you’ve got a pretty good chance.</p>
<p>A couple of quick thoughts…
- ‘subpar’ - it’s an interesting term. “Par” is taken to mean average,and does, in casual,non-golf usual. But, it is worth noting, perhaps, that it’s a very good golfer who actually scores at or under par. “Subpar” , seems to me, based on nothing very concrete, to have a somewhat derogatory feel to it. “Below average” or “below median” would be a somewhat better phrase, in my opinion.
- Brown’s scores:
for 2009 : 60% scored 700 and above in reading
63% scored 700 and above in math
63% scored 700 and above in writing
So, any score below 2100 is likely to be below the average.</p>
<p>nemom, you always seem to show up when I most expect you. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As I have indicated repeatedly, this was not my intention. However, because I recognized the potential for misinterpretation, I explicitly clarified my meaning very early in this thread. Nonetheless, I will certainly refrain from using that apparently contentious descriptor in the future.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It certainly is, and we could be confident that the average is a fair bit higher than that, and even higher for unhooked applicants.</p>
<p>Wow I see there has been a lot of discussion here! Thanks for helping me, this college application process is very daunting. Silverturtle, as per your question I am Caucasian and really don’t have a hook besides the fact that I am pretty good at the Double Bass. I will definitely be playing in their orchestra. I am planning on taking the SATs again and on a recent practice test I took earned a 2250. With this said, and getting a 2250 on the SATs, will my chances increase very much? By the way, lets keep in mind that getting a 2150 means missing about 10-15 questions out of 170 + an essay, which is not by any means an easy task. Could someone give me a percent chance of getting in to Brown with a 2250 SAT and my current GPA and ECs?</p>
<p>Thanks for the help everyone!</p>
<p>Silverturtle - as a note - I was not attempting to imply that you intended a derogatory slant. (Trust me, you’ll know when I am implying something. ) Rather , I was merely musing , in my middle-aged fashion on ‘subpar’. (As a very occasional golfer, I’m always amused by the phrase ‘par for the course’ - generally meaning ‘about average, and nothing exciting’, when in fact, for the vast majority of golfers, par is a pretty high goal.)</p>
<p>Kevan - no one can give you very solid odds. Really. Trust me. I know college admissions folks who have been in the game 10 to 40 years - they quail at attempting to give percent chances for any but the most extreme cases. That being said, a retake might be worth the candle. Although, really, the difference between 2150 and 2250 is only barely within the accuracy of the test, I suspect it has a certain affect. It’s not unlike the ‘19.99’ is less than ‘20.00’ affect. Humans tend to round, and not always wisely. So, your 2150 might tend to turn into ‘2100’ which is a bit low for Brown, while your 2250 might turn into 2200, which is fairly well dead on.</p>
<p>I love silverturtle your spreadsheet admission predictor succesfully predicted my acceptance to brown. So I believe anything you say lol.</p>
<p>Well, Hannibal isn’t completely incorrect. Asians who fail to score 800s on the Math section are…eh…LOL JK :),though they do have a surprisingly high math average on the SAT.</p>
<p>^Stressed, where can you find that spreadsheet admission predictor?</p>
<p>PM silverturtle about his chance tool he will send it to u</p>
<p>I couldn’t agree more with silverturtle. Fireandrain knows that BROWN wants the highest SAT scores possible. He’s acting like, BROWN is interested in the whole person when in reality they just want the numbers to apply so they can brag about how many apps they got and how many kids they made cry with they rejected them. If you don’t have 800s kiss that school goodbye.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s not what I’m saying. I completely believe the claim that admissions is holistic (meaning that numbers do matter, but so does a lot of other stuff).</p>
<p>oneeyedfinch, please don’t misrepresent my position. </p>
<p>If Brown only cared about accepting kids with the highest SATs, its mid-range scores would be significantly higher. Just look at what nemom posted above, restated:</p>
<p>for 2009 : 40% scored below 700 in reading
37% scored below 700 in math
37% scored below 700 in writing</p>
<p>Silverturtle you do so much for this community - don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
Your data is the most reliable and concrete resource an anonymous forum has to offer.
Offering true advice is better than buttered-up encouragement, in my opinion.
Now Kevan may wisely decide on whether or not to improve test scores.</p>
<p>I can only begin to imagine silverturtle’s future, at his college of choice, working towards the betterment of all humans ^.^</p>
<p>No one said he shouldn’t retake his SAT’s, don’t rehash an argument that has already ended lol</p>