<p>For heaven’s sake I never made any of those claims.</p>
<p>I claim that a) a higher SAT score makes a student more qualified, all else being equal, b) there is a correlation between SAT and any reasonable measures of intelligence. I have seen figures of r = 0.7 between SAT and IQ. c) Harvard is not indifferent to the difference between 2100 and 2400.</p>
<p>My understanding is that at a place like Harvard there is a category of super-geeks (selected on sheer brain power and to heck with the 500 volunteer hours), a category of super-achievers in something like music, and a category of ‘bright well-rounded’. </p>
<p>Of course they want diversity, but an Idahoan (?) with 2400 is better than one with 2100.</p>
<p>Poor anyones who have the stats have the advantage. The problem is that they don’t. The link between economics and high test scores/ academic achievement is very strong. </p>
<p>Some of the stats include ALL URMs vs “poor” white students. Those URMs may include some kids from well to do families, legacies, connections, athletes etc whereas the kids not flagged as URM are not. The only study I saw, a few years ago which was by PELL grant eligibility to break out the “poor” found that URMS did not fare that well. Many of those accepted that were PELL material were immigrant kids from Eastern Europe, the Far East and India. The problem was that there were simply not many kids who were PELL eligible of any ethnic group that could even make into the consideration pool or had such a strong hook that it pulled them out of the reject pool.</p>
<p>Also bear in mind that there is not a category for perfect test scores. Kids that are being assessed for admissions usually are put in a category for test scores and the top category is going to have a break point less than 2400 on the SAT1. Also the top schools take 5 test scores most of the time; the ones that require SAT2s. So a perfect score kid will get the same points as someone who is at the cusp of that top category.</p>
<p>No, but again, if H wanted to enroll only the 2400s, and then after that the 2390s, and so on, they would do so. Clearly they don’t, which tells you that they don’t value it to the extent that you want them to.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course. But they may not have that choice, and they might decide that the Idahoan with the 2100 is more intriguing / brings more to the table in terms of life experiences than Yet Another Suburban Boston Kid with 2400. </p>
<p>But Yet Another Suburban Boston Kid with 2400 (YASBK2400?) complains that “his spot” was taken by the black MA kid a few towns over with the 2100 and not the white Idahoan with the 2100. Why is that, do you suppose? Why is it that when he thinks about the black kid, he perceives that his spot was “stolen” whereas when he thinks about the white Idahoan, he can acknowledge that maybe he was just one of too many look-alike suburban Boston kids and that it’s good for H to have someone from Idaho?</p>
<p>Sigh. So if a higher SAT store makes a student more qualified, why doesn’t Harvard admit all the 2400’s, then fill in with the 2390’s, then drop down to 2380’s if need be? Obviously what YOU think makes a student more qualified isn’t what H thinks.</p>
But more qualified for what? How would you quantify “compassion for the sick” and say that Buffy and Suzie are “equal” in possession of it, and that therefore Buffy with her 2400 is more qualified to study nursing at Sorghum University, than Suzie? Everyone is different, so “all else being equal” is pretty hard to objectively quantify.</p>
<p>My friend who is married to an African American man, has had to field some remarks that I feel are downright rude. Her D was accepted ED to an ivy league school. Top prep school, in the top 10%, taking top courses. Her SAT1 scores are not the very tip top, but what few people know is that she scored perfects on the 3 SAT2s she took. Many people make these remarks without knowing the whole story.</p>
<p>Sorghum, you can claim what you want. The top schools are not buying it. Yes, the SATS figure heavily in the equation but they are not the sole arbiter all of the time. And at what point should one SAT be considered higher than the other? Should kids be layered by SAT scores, or in categories? The way it is done now is usually by categories that the schools feel demonstrate their break points in what makes a difference in their personal experience. I think they are in a better vantage point to make those categories.</p>
<p>OTOH, my nephew, who is going to Princeton in the fall, can claim Hispanic credentials through his father, who is Cuban. They are well-off, the family was well off in Cuba – and while he was certainly qualified from an academic, EC and athletic standpoint, he probably got a tip from that that my kids won’t have. Oh well! So what? I should cry my eyes out over this? What a loser attitude.</p>
<p>Sheesh, I don’t know what part of all else being equal is not getting through. People here are saying there is so little difference between 2100 and 2400 that you might as well draw names out of hat. I disagree that the colleges view it that way.</p>
<p>And you really, really, have no idea the “extent that (I) want them to”. </p>
<p>Let’s try again. Two URM oboeists from Idaho apply, equally talented and in all regards but one essentially equal. Harvard has a spot for exactly one oboeist. I think they will take the 2400 oboeist over the 2100 oboeist. You think they will toss a coin. Fine.</p>
<p>shawbridge - interesting info about Canada. It puts things into perspective a bit. </p>
<p>About those poor kids with military experience - it’s even sadder because so many of them join the military as it’s the only way they can afford to go to college. If they survive…</p>
<p>Many times admissions doesn’t sit there looking at two candidates and try to decide between them. That 2100 oboist just might get accepted if lucky enough that his/her app is reviewed before the one with 2400 and there is a big fat OBOIST written on the college wish list that admissions is supposed to fulfill. And then the 2400 can be out of luck when that is crossed off, filled by the first kid who might be a legacy to boot and from Idaho and, hey maybe American Indian. There is some luck in the process. The only time some direct comparisons are done is in about 10% of the cases which go to committee and when looking at parity within schools. To avoid internal inequity outcries, a val or sal could be waitlisted when a lower ranking student is accepted. from the same school. The courtesy waitlist does fulfill that purpose.</p>
<p>A higher SAT score makes a student MORE QUALIFIED THAN A STUDENT WITH A LOWER SAT SCORE!!! Is that so difficult??? But other factors are OF COURSE used as well.</p>
<p>And cptofthehouse:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes the SATs figure heavily thank you !!!</p>
<p>WHO EVER said they are or should be the sole arbiter all the time??? That’s the weakest straw man I’ve seen in quite a while.</p>
<p>I do not believe that’s a true statement and I do not believe that’s the way elite college admissions offices look at it. I think that, instead, they tend to look at bands or tiers of SAT scores and to view all of the applicants in a band of scores equally in that regard. I don’t think small differences in SAT scores, say between a 760 and a 780, have any effect on admissions at the elite colleges. At these schools, everyone’s got SAT scores, so it’s fairly useless as a selection criteria.</p>
<p>My older son (760 on math and then 770) is not dumber than one who got an 800 in math. He’s just more careless. (Really, the problems he missed on each test could have been done by a 4th grader.) He’s also not better at critical reading even though he scored an 800 every single time he took the test. He regularly got B+'s in English, and never even took AP English. I think one of the big mistakes CC posters make is thinking the SATs are more accurate than they are. Most admissions officers know better. That isn’t to say that 2400s aren’t generally accepted at higher rates than the 2300s (at the schools that bother to report this), but that may be because the 2400s also dot their i’s and cross their t’s on the rest of their applications as well.</p>
<p>An admissions officer faced with a 2100 oboeist and a 2300 oboeist is just as likely to make the decision based on the comments on audition tapes, or teacher recommendations or even the essay. Or even perhaps the mix of grades and courses that make up the same GPA. Every single article I’ve ever read where someone was allowed to be a fly on the wall at an admissions committee and my own experience on admissions committee suggests to me that these decisions are made much more by gut feelings than any strict analysis of the numbers.</p>
<p>To answer OP’s question, I’d say that diversity of college admissions may have a lot to do with maintaining high quality of the school.</p>
<p>For those arguing about test scores, is there any difference between the following 2 students: one has ACT 36, SAT 2400, SAT IIs 800/800/800, and the other 35/2390/790/790/790, everything else being equal?</p>
<p>There is always going to be some friction. Nobody wants to go to a school without any racial diversity and many people find it abhorent that race is used as a factor.</p>
<p>As far as SAT scores. Many school use them to find a floor, once an applicant is above that floor, the gradual increase in score has a diminishing benefit. Not everyone with a 2400 is going to get admitted to a particular school.</p>