<p>“In the eyes of admissions, a 2100 is no different than a 2400.”</p>
<p>That’s probably not entirely true but it’d be helpful to elaborate on the figures a little bit. What’s the general margin in which admissioners use the same judgment.</p>
<p>Here’s my take on this as it relates to HYPS. Different applicants have different strengths. While nearly all successful applicants have strong EC’s, some rely on them more than others to gain admission. For applicants relying primarily on the strength of their EC’s, SAT scores don’t matter so much as long as they’re above 2150 or 2200. For students whose primary strength is academic achievement, then SAT matters a good deal more. I don’t think colleges distinguish much at all between scores that are within 50 points of each other.</p>
<p>The quote is misleading, but weasel’s explanation is good</p>
<p>First, I want to note that saying that 700 = 800 (which, I’m assuming, is what you’re asking) doesn’t mean that 2100 = 2400, it means that evenly distributed 2100 = 2400. I know I’m being nitpicky, but people shouldn’t think they can get 800, 800, and 500 in any case (well, I guess unless the writing section isn’t counted…).</p>
<p>I also want to point out that at competitive schools like HYPSM students can’t get in on marks alone (by that I mean simply GPA and SAT scores). Superior academic achievement (in the sense that it will be noticed by such competitive schools) can be shown many ways, but I don’t think GPA or SATs is the way to do it. Mathematics or Science Olympiads, science fairs, research; that’s how you show superior academic achievement on this level – SATs and GPAs are really only to show <em>competence</em>. By this I mean that a score of 700 shows the same basic understanding as a score of 800, except that there were a couple of careless errors thrown in. And in the same sense, a score of 800 doesn’t show you’re a genius, only that you’re really good avoiding those careless errors and doing so under pressure.</p>
<p>Think of it this way, admissions officers first ask themselves “Could this student do well here – could they pass all required courses, get good grades, and graduate without too much of a problem academically?” They can use SATs and GPAs to answer this question. Once this question is answered, however, they then look for a reason to admit the student. This reason is unlikely to be SATs or GPA (of which thousands of students can achieve), it’s going to be something special that this applicant brings to the table, be it EC involvement, <em>superior</em> academic ability, passion for something, hard work, motivation, a match with the specific school, etc. Admissions officers aren’t likely going to go back to the SAT scores, after they used them to deem the student competent (by seeing the 700+), and say “oh, also they are <em>superior</em> because they got the perfect 2400!!”.</p>
<p>I agree with parts of Star’s assessment and disagree with others. I share her view of SAT and GPA being used as an initial screen for competence; however, I don’t believe that the evaluation is binary (either competent or incompetent). Rather, SAT, GPA, class rank, etc. determine how impressive the rest of the application needs to be. For example, an adcom would open an application file, see that the student got a 2100, and think “This student is capable of succeeding here, but the rest of his application better be really good.” The same adcom could open another file, see that the student got a 2300, and think “This student has outstanding academic credentials, and I don’t need to see as many impressive achievements in order for me to give him the nod.” Just my two cents.</p>
<p>Can I get a figure on the SATs one should have if he has a mediocre EC?</p>
<p>By mediocre I mean:
sports: freshmen football, 10-12 crosscountry, 9-10 soccer, 11-12 tennis (with a special award)
science olympiad (national team qualifier 10-11 and probably 12 too), GPML (math thing; state individual qualifier 9-11, hopefully 12 too)
1 yr of newspaper (actually 1 sem)
college classes: 2 maths, 1 science, and entrepreneurship. and a fall physics internship. <— my ELP teacher tells me this is GOOOD because it’s better than AP
volunteering: Lib volunteer, Iowa summer games volunteer, after school tutoring
playing in the Iowa summer games
smaller things: FRISBEE, some indoor soccer, table tennis, orchestra 9-12, mandelbrot, AMC10/12, math club</p>
<p>one thing that scares me is leadership and awards. I’m not sure where I can get some of those</p>
<p>btw I am and have been taking a ton of AP classes. Getting most of those scores back any day now…<em>fingers crossed</em></p>
<p>You should get them today or tomorrow. I got mine two days ago (N. Cali). Anyway, those aren’t mediocre ECs (ok, well maybe compared to the CC crowd). I go to a boarding prep school and most of us don’t have near that.</p>
<p>Your EC’s are weak in that they don’t show much commitment (none of the sports were 9-12) and are mostly related to academic subjects. Academic EC’s generally don’t help much unless they are really impressive and you have high stats to go with them. I think you should be shooting for 2200 or 2250 to have a shot at HYPS. Even then, it seems like a pretty big reach.</p>