<p>I was wondering if the SSAT is the main factor in getting in school such as Taft, Lawernceville, St.Marks, etc. My SSAT score is not that good, but my GPA and EC’s are outstanding. So is the SSAT that important?</p>
<p>Overall the SSAT is not that important, but it is still a factor. As long as the rest of your application and stats are good it shouldn’t bring you down</p>
<p>The SSAT is not the main factor, but it is a definite factor. It would depend how bad it is, and what you mean by “outstanding”. If it is, say, low 80s, high seventies, and you have some ECs and grades that really set you apart, then it wouldn’t matter too much. But if you just have excellent grades and ECs that are nonetheless similar to those of other children applying, then it might be make a difference.</p>
<p>It’s pretty hard to claim they are not very important when all of the top schools have similar, high SSAT averages. For the unhooked, I think they’re very important. Make sure to add some schools where your score is at least their average.</p>
<p>suze, define hooked versus unhooked…do you mean athletes?</p>
<p>Athlets, legacaies, development and kids with a national level achievement. Just like for colleges.</p>
<p>So would competing in the National Spelling Bee, or winning a state academic competition be considered a hook?</p>
<p>SSAT scores are very important, actually. They’re the main test to get into high school; your other scores (GPA, averages) are simply dependent on how well you work, but the SSATs test your core skills.</p>
<p>So if you have the chance to take it again and if you’re applying to those high-end schools (Exeter, Choate) and don’t have scores in mid-eighties to nineties, then prep for it. </p>
<p>What were your scores?</p>
<p>Hmm, I’m not sure I agree. Three years of middle school course work is more important. One test will not outweigh a three years of work. IMO
Would a student with a record of say a B- average over the course of three years with an SSAT score of 94 have a better chance than a student with an A average and a SSAT score of say 80?</p>
<p>Probably not. But a student with a 3.0 who got a 97th-99th percentile might be likely to be viewed as a kid who was underachieving because they were unchallenged in their currant school, but who has great potential. They might beat out a 4.0 student who scored in the 75th-80th percentile, perhaps seen as an simple overachiever who might not bring something as special to the school, especially if their interviews reflected this.
I didn’t think it was very important at all, but last night I went to a presentation for Philips Academy and they repeatedly stressed how the SSAT was the “common denominator” and how it gave them a “clearer picture” of how students abilities were in relation to each other, since it was the same test. In some ways, I think that makes sense, as for very bright and gifted children, grades don’t measure progress, just performance, but on the other hand, kids have been taught differently, and some are given an advantage or disadvantage on the test that doesn’t reflect their true abilities. After the presentation, I’m much more concerned . . . thirteen more days.</p>
<p>I think I posted this a few weeks ago on a similar thread, but we visited 6 schools this fall. We asked admissions rep at all 6 schools how they evaluated all of the factors in admissions. At all 6 we left with the impression (and at two of the schools the admissions rep said this out right) that the SSAT was one of the least important factors. There certainly is a threshhold one’s score needs to be over that will have some relationship to the school’s average score, but we were told the distribution is pretty wide around that mean. As long as scores are in the ballpark, it seemed like hooks, grades and recommendations a lot more indicative of what the student brings to the school community.</p>
<p>I’ll repost an answer from “Rate the Following” (#10) about the relative importance of various applications factors because it fits this question. Personally the SSAT scores tend to validate the GPA and teacher recs and certify that a student has the requisite background to do the work. Nothing more. Nothing less.</p>
<p>My quote…
</p>
<p>prettyckitty, I would think schools would steer clear of an underachiever. Your point is well taken but, if someone is not challenged in their particular school, they better shine with what they have. IMO prep schools and colleges do not look kindly on underachievers.</p>
<p>We attended a Middlesex open house where they stressed the importance of not taking the SSAT without preparation. Still I believe grades, the interview recs and ec’s are more important in the totality of things.
Blunders such as arrogance, not making eye contact, etc. can kill any SSAT score.
One bad rec can sink you! For those of us that have been on the prep school threads for 2-3 years or longer, can attest to students getting rejected not because of SSAT’s but rather bad rec’s.
Closing note…I actually witnessed a young man at an open house speaking to an adcom lady about his math prowess while he played his gameboy never once making eye contact. I was stunned. Thank god you wonderful students on CC will never make such a blunder. I wish you all well</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Where were this kid’s parents??? On the cellphone? Doh!</p>
<p>goaliedad, His dad was sitting right next to him on the sofa. I remember like it was yesterday, the Dad’s torso was twisted on the sofa toward his son.The Dad did not appear to be annoyed or embarrassed. Of course he may have been. I felt so uncomfortable for him, his dad and the adcom person.</p>
<p>If your SSAT score is in the mid 80’s or better, it’s not important. If your SSAT score is less than 70-75, it’s very important.</p>
<p>Loophole, that sounds reasonable for schools with higher SSAT averages.</p>
<p>
I guess it made the adcom’s decision easy…</p>
<p>Prepparent, That’s my point. </p>
<p>For what it’s worth I have a good friend who interviews local students for an Ivy league school, a requirement for their application. She interviews both kids who attend school in a low performing school as well as kids who attend school in a high performing school district. The kids that she has interviewed from the low performing school district have included valedictorians and salutatorians with 4.0 GPA. However, their SAT scores have been in the 1100 range. None of these kids has ever been admitted. On the other hand the high performing school has had kids admitted. Their test scores are higher. My point is that schools (both colleges and prep schools) cannot rely on GPA. Their are too many variables. The SSAT and SAT normalize the difference between different levels of education.</p>