<p>
Not quite.</p>
<p>You might want to review the admissions [statistics</a> for this incoming class](<a href=“http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/apply/admissions_statistics/index.shtml]statistics”>www.mitadmissions.org/topics/apply/admissions_statistics/index.shtml) as an example. As you can see from that chart, 97% of first-time freshman from schools that rank were in the to 10% of their class. This accounts for only 59% of the incoming class, however: 61% of the incoming freshmen were from schools that do not rank, and were not included in the above percentage. You may presume what you like about that 61%, but it would only be a guess.</p>
<p>From that table you’ll also see that among this year’s admitted students: </p>
<p>89% SAT Math 700+
11% had SAT Math scores below 700 (2% below 650, less than 1% below 600) </p>
<p>69% SAT CR 700+
31% had SAT CR scores below 700 (13% below 650, 4% below 600)</p>
<p>Is there any secret that most successful MIT candidates will score high on the SAT? Is there anything wrong with that observation? 185 students were accepted to MIT this year with CR scores below the 650 which Ms. Perez cited (and even 33 were accepted with Math scores below 650, although math is likely more important to an institute of Technology). I don’t see any reason to doubt what the Admissions Staff is saying: 650 and above may indeed be their test of reasonabilty. And by suggesting students not bother taking and retaking these tests in hopes of adding 20 or 50 points to their already acceptable scores, Admissions may be actually trying to put into practice the “calm down already and get a life!” approach Marilee Jones has been advocating. Without seeing the rest of the application packages and being part of the committee discussions, none of us have any real idea how those who were admitted with scores in the 650-750 range differ from those who were not admitted. It was almost surely not on those scores alone.</p>