Relative "good" scores?

<p>If you were to be objective in regards to the "accept-worthy" test scores to the more selective schools, what do you think the cut-off is for a "great" score in Writing, Math IIC, Physics, Chemistry, and Biology?</p>

<p>for example I would say 770, 760, 740, 750, 750</p>

<p>"Accept-Worthy"?? Admissions are not simply based on these test scores. An international applicant with great EC's may have a 500 writing, whereas someone with an 800 might be rejected. </p>

<p>You're making it too one-dimensional.</p>

<p>I would say 750+ in Phys, Chem, and Bio and 770+ in Writing and Math IIC as "great" scores.</p>

<p>And, lindseylujh, he wasn't asking what scores to be accepted, just what are considered very good.</p>

<p>I am talking about scores alone, though. Not considering the other factors.</p>

<p>Well he did use the phrase "accept-worthy" and I was simply making the point that your test scores aren't going to get you in and in many circumstances aren't going to keep you out. </p>

<p>At the very top schools, even perfect scores aren't very unusual.</p>

<p>Wth?? I made a totally valid point. Harvard or Yale aren't going to pass out if someone's got a 770 for Writing or a 740 for Physics. Anyone could be accepted or rejected with those scores. They don't make any application stand out. My point was that you're not going to be accepted or necessarily rejected based on scores, which is absolutely correct.</p>

<p>yeah lindsey, but i don't think that was his point. 780+ in math 2c lol, 750+ in writing and the others.</p>