We weren’t shut out. Son got into 11 schools and was waitlisted at two more. The ones that people consider selective are more than happy to take our money----all of it. The state flagships were much more receptive.
My son has a 36 on the ACT and 800/770 on Math II and Chem subject tests. He applied to a range of selective private schools, with the highest admit rate at Case Western and the lowest admit rate Stanford. He really liked some state school options for his major (chemical engineering) that were high likelihood admits, so he didn’t mind “rolling the dice”.
Result from the privates: 5 rejections, 5 wait lists, no acceptances. He has great options nonetheless, but I have to admit we were both disappointed at his getting shut out from the private schools.
Goodness, what do you want happen? For 2400 SATs to be a requirement for the top 20 colleges, the only requirement? And 2250+ to be the only requirement for the top 50-20? And 2100+ to be the scores of the people in the top 100-50? etc., etc.,…
It may come as a shock to some, but a perfect SAT doesn’t denote a bright person all around. It denotes a person good at math through geometry, reading comprehension, and some techniques of writing. It says nothing about their personal character or individual abilities.
I don’t mean to say that all high stats kids are mindless, emotionless drones or that all lower stats kids are heartwarming, undiscovered geniuses. It’s just that there is a lot more to a person than SAT scores.
FYI, my oldest sister got a perfect SAT in one sitting - her first. And I would never want to be like her.
@albert69 You couldn’t be more wrong on so many counts.
- You better hope that a 2400 isn't a requirement for the top 20 colleges. About 1900 perfect SAT's to fill about 76,000 spots.
- Uh, wrong. Math thru trigonometry(and usually calculus), reading comprehension(at a college level) and a proficiency in writing at a college level. Also, ACT incorporates science.
- Finally, in case you haven't seen or known it before
@moscott I was referring to the main SAT test, not the subject tests. Is there really calculus on the main SAT? And I know that most kids at top schools don’t have 2400 SATs, it’s just that people complain that people with them don’t get in and I really wonder if what they want is an entirely SAT (or ACT) driven admissions process. Also, please show we a college class that requires you to write an essay in 25 minutes.
No, I hadn’t seen those specific articles before, but I have heard that. I would say that someone with a 2350 on the SAT is probably more intelligent than someone with a 1780; however, that doesn’t mean that their overall merit is greater. It also doesn’t mean it is lesser.
@moscott The SAT I does not test Trig or Calculus. Trig and calculus may be used as a means of finding an answer, but they are never the only way to solve a problem.
2400s or 36s don’t mean you’re a genius, and geniuses don’t necessarily get 2400s or 36s. Like others said earlier, true geniuses would have real academic awards like the academic olympiads on their resume. 2400s and 36s just aren’t that difficult to get.
@Imacompletetree …Once again, completely wrong! 1900 of 1.5 million received a 2400. About 0.001 percent. You have a better chance of hitting the lottery than getting a perfect score. But don’t let the facts in the way. Also, awards such as the academic olympiad are completely contingent upon the school even being able to attend the competition. My S placed 2nd in the state for science olympiad this year however the school can’t/won’t be attending nationals to compete for the award. Are ALL kids that get perfect scores a genius…no…but a great deal are. In fact I’d say most have either been identified as gifted or in a TIP program of some kind.
A bit concrete are we? Need it laid out concretely? Ok. On the original SAT continuum, using the SAT 1990 Reference group, all protocols that would have been assigned a 600 or above using the old scale would be assigned a 670 or above using the re-centered scores. The point is that parents may not realize that a score of 780 today would have been a 710 in the old system. Parents who attended school populated by upper middle class students may have had many friends with scores in the 600s but far fewer in the 700s. Today, upper middle class students may have many friend with scores in the 700s. It does not mean that there are that many more really smart students than there were in the past. But the re-centering of the SATs differentially impacted on the upper and lowest % of scores. Most students in middle or upper middle class schools have more students in the top part of that distribution then in the lower part. So to most parents, the fact that there are more higher scores is probably (but not for everyone in all cases regardless of everything-like an earth quake during the test may lower scores even for the very wealthy schools-let’s keep being concrete here) more apparent then the fact that there are also more very low scores. A 600 today was a 530 before. In my day, a 530 was considered quite a low score but a 600 was reasonable. But that 600 today would have been assigned a score of 530 before. Hence my suggestion that scores that would have been considered impressive in the past aren’t as much so now.
And because I did not realize the fact that readers couldn’t get that I did not mean genius literally. That would require an IQ test. And while the SATs are proxy for those tests, they don’t have a rubric to use to determine genius cut-off. LOLOLOL. Neither does life actually.