<p>it seems that almost everyone has over 1500. and about half of you have around 1550. geez.</p>
<p>i have a 1490, it doesn’t count though… :(</p>
<p>Why doesn’t it count?</p>
<p>cause its not a 1500</p>
<p>It’s a perfectly decent score, and I think the question was just asking what scores, not who got above a 1500.</p>
<p>I have 1530 (740V+790M). </p>
<p>And i think 1490 is very ok. When i had my sat in june, i was hoping for a 650 at verbal, cause here, in romania, 1450 is generally considered ok (ouch - that sound awful, i know…). What i mean is that i know about 4-5 persons (last 3 years) who had 1460-1480’s and who are now at p, mit, harvard etc… i know this might not matter very much, but thought i’d say it. 
</p>
<p>so i am really puzzled about how much these figuers really matter…
Oh, and just a thought, but i’m sure i aint the only one who thought of this:</p>
<p>The pton ppl say that they don’t follow ANY formula or algorithm to evaluate an applicant. But this means that they don’t follow anything official, so the so-called flexibility means that they can do anything they want and answer to no one. I don’t reject the idea that they do have rules, un-written and maybe weiard… spooky… this way they can have some important rules, without everybody trying to suckup and look like an ideal applicant… … …because nobody knows what an ideal applicant looks like…</p>
<p>confusion… I mean the only thing i see and hear is “just be yourself”… yea right! which self?!</p>
<p>Fear not! I have a score below 1500 too. (Yay.) I took the SAT I fall of junior year and received a 1470 (800 V, 670 M). But I retook it yesterday. So maybe my math went up to a 700. (Doubt it, though.)</p>
<p>1510 (760M 750V) my junior year.</p>
<p>Retook it Nov 6, and am waiting for those results.</p>
<p>1490s represent! 800 verbal, 690 math</p>
<p>for SAT IIs - writing 800, u.s. history 740, math IIc 620 (ugh, I know, but I retook it yesterday and I think I did much better since I have a quarter of calc under my belt)</p>
<p>Did anyone here take the ACTs?</p>
<p>I did. Composite of 35. 36’s on Math and Science, 34’s on the other two.</p>
<p>33 composite for me, with 34 English, 31 Math, 36 Reading, and 32 Science.</p>
<p>Definitely hate the science and math; I admire anyone who is as good at it as you!</p>
<p>I have a 1550-780 M, 770V</p>
<p>But dont they compare your SAT scores to the rest of your area? I mean, a 1400 in the middle of a ghetto urban area has GOTTA hold more weight than a 1500 in an affluent, opportunity-filled environment. Right?</p>
<p>I’m angry at you 800 Verbal people, rawr</p>
<p>760- Math
700- Verbal</p>
<p>Way too low, but hey!, you never know</p>
<p>I would think so, hobbes <em>gulps for self</em></p>
<p>Well, max, I’m sure you did much better than me on your maths, so I wouldn’t be too jealous</p>
<ol>
<li>800 math 760 verbal. </li>
</ol>
<p>didn’t we already do this somewhere?</p>
<p>Yeah, we did all this in the roster section. Guys, don’t worry about scores, as long as you are within range, you will be fine. Also, unlike other schools, Princeton uses a 1-5 scale, not a 1-9 scale. So, whereas someone with a 1550 would be an 8 compared to a 1600 who would be a 9, all of them will be clumped together in the Princeton category 5.</p>
<p>I only have a 1460 (750m/710v) and I think that I am tied for lowest on the ED roster right now, lol. I don’t see any reason why a score wouldn’t be viewed in the context of the scorer’s environment…it certainly wouldn’t be fair to compare the score some rich kid at Andover received to the score a middle class kid from Iowa received.</p>
<p>I have 1240 (800M 440 V)(really low verbal but well I’ve been in Usa just for 2 years, I will try to retakeit in december) I look so bad next to you guys :(</p>