<p>That is a very dangerous approach to make. There would probably be some correlation between top 5% of class and 2200+ SAT scores and good applicants, but you miss out all the hidden gems below that threshold. I read some of the Harvard results threads and actually saw one person get in with 1800something, which is quite remarkable and must have had very important elements in his/her application outside SAT scores that pushed her forward.</p>
<p>I really think this absurd trend should stop, though I admit I don’t know how will it happen. With that many applications, I highly suspect most of the applicants colleges reject are not actually inferior applicants, but ones just as good as the admitted students but the class was too small. I mean, it’s not like the Harvard class of 1990 is any weaker than the class of 2016 despite the higher admit rate. If college applicants applied to fewer places but with a higher chance of admission, this massive waste of labor would stop and the time spent on evaluating applications would increase.</p>
<p>NOTE: I made a mistake in the original post. Harvard would need 15,000 man hours to read 30,000 thirty minute applications, not 7,500. The 8.35 hours per day per person calculation is still correct tough.</p>