Notre Dame published a mid-50% ACT of 33-35 for admitted students in the Class of 2017, inclusive of URM’s, First Gen, Recruited Athletes and Legacies - that is one of any examples amongst top-20 schools http://admissions.nd.edu/apply/admission-statistics/
I don’t have a dog in this hunt as my twin DD’s got into a top-20 school and my next DD is 2021, but having just gone through it in 2017 I read thread after thread on CC from students and parents wondering why they didn’t get into any of their reach or target schools - the take away was that the bar for ORM’s got higher…
@Chembiodad Interesting info from Notre Dame. Kind of surprised me that 42% were captains of a varsity sport. That’s high. And only 6% International, strikes me as low for a school of that caliber.
Every spring you do see a lot of posts here lamenting the fact that despite high stats, they didn’t get into top schools. And I agree with you, there can be a higher bar for ORMs. But I suspect that the result has less to do with a 33 vs 34, then it does with the intangibles. Most applicants think they have a strong essay. As Coms will tell you that most essays are mediocre. Most applicants think their recs will be good. As Coms are not looking for good recs, they’re looking for outstanding recs. And most applicants never see their recs, so they don’t really have insight to that important part of the app.
Once you get to a certain level of stats, it’s the other things that get you in.
@wisteria100, no desire to go back and forth, but I do have a close friend with two at Princeton and when I asked him whether a 35 as compared to a 34 was meaningful for an ORM’s admission his response was yes.
This list is from 2016, as evidenced by ND’s profile all of these schools likely stepped up 1 point in 2017; we also heard Hamilton had gone from a 32 to a 33, which is consistent with same. I believe all of these are reaches for an ORM with a 33 and should be included as such with a mix of target and safety schools.
Rank College SAT EBWR SAT Math SAT ACT
1 Cal Tech 750-800 780-800 1530-1600 34-35
2. Harvey Mudd College 710-770 760-800 1470-1570 33-35
3. MIT 720-790 770-800 1490-1590 33-35
4 Columbia University 730-800 730-800 1460-1600 32-35
5 Harvard University 740-800 740-800 1470-1600 32-35
6 Princeton University 730-800 730-800 1460-1600 32-35
7 Rice University 720-780 740-800 1460-1580 32-35
8 University of Chicago 740-800 750-800 1490-1600 32-35
9 Vanderbilt University 730-790 750-800 1480-1590 32-35
10 Johns Hopkins University 730-780 740-800 1470-1580 32-34
11 University of Notre Dame 700-770 710-780 1410-1550 32-34
12 Washington University in St. Louis 730-780 740-800 1470-1580 32-34
13 Stanford University 730-790 730-800 1460-1590 31-35
14 Yale University 740-800 740-800 1480-1600 31-35
15 Amherst College 720-780 710-790 1430-1570 31-34
16 Brown University 720-790 720-790 1440-1580 31-34
17 Carnegie Mellon University 700-770 740-800 1440-1570 31-34
18 Duke University 720-780 720-800 1440-1580 31-34
19 Haverford College 710-780 690-780 1400-1560 31-34
20 Northeastern University 700-760 710-780 1410-1540 31-34
21 Northwestern University 740-780 740-800 1480-1580 31-34
22 University of Pennsylvania 720-780 730-800 1450-1580 31-34
23 Williams College 710-790 700-780 1410-1570 31-34
24 Bowdoin College 730-780 720-780 1450-1560 31-34
25 Hamilton College 700-760 670-760 1370-1520 31-33
26 Cooper Union 660-750 650-800 1310-1550 30-34
27 Cornell University 700-780 710-790 1410-1570 30-34
28 Dartmouth College 710-790 700-790 1410-1580 30-34
29 Georgetown University 700-780 690-770 1390-1550 30-34
30 Pomona College 710-780 720-780 1430-1560 30-34
This is becoming a circular argument. No one suggested that these top 20 or so schools wouldn’t be a reach. Of course they are. But HM(et al) is a reach for even students with perfect scores. The issue isn’t whether the schools are a reach, or even will s/he will likely get in. OP’s question was “where can i apply?”.
OP has a strong score that no admission rep is going to scoff at seeing. OP’s score puts him/her within the middle 50 range at all but two schools. OP should understand that his/her score itself won’t be reason for admission to any of these schools, but together with a very, very strong supporting application OP could be admitted. So yes, OP can apply anywhere, but be realistic with regard to chance at admission. 5% odds are reaches for all.
How anyone can purport that your score is merely good and not great is just unfathomable. This is what I have taken greatest issue with in this thread. You are in the top 1%. I say that’s pretty great, even if you don’t get into a top 20 school. Would your chances be higher if you get a 35? Maybe, but a 33 with a stellar application is going to beat out a 35 with a weak application so focus on the extras now. If you have time and want to go for a higher score it’s up to you.
Chembiodad, I respect your opinion, but disagree. I’ll step away from this thread now.
@2mrmagoo, in order to evaluate one’s likelihood of acceptance you need to take into account that a URM, a First Gen, a student athlete, and a legacy is a hooked applicant, that they are incredibly talented academically and that hooked applicants are as much as 80% of acceptances at a LAC - it was that case at Amherst, Williams and Swarthmore.
Therefore those that slipped through the unhooked were ORC’s with 36 ACT, 40 GPA, EC’s that changed the world and essays suitable for publication.
It is indeed very difficult for an ORM without a hook to get accepted to the tippy top LACs, but that 80% number above seems exaggerated. Keep in mind that while 50% of the class may be students of color, that includes Asians which make up typically 15% of the class and are not URMs. Then 40-50% of the class is full pay. Sure there are overlaps by these groups, but 80% can’t be accurate .
Fwiw Williams reported average ACT of 33 super scored, and about 1450 on the new SAT for those admitted this year.
@wisteria100, glad we can agree that it’s very hard for an ORM without a hook to get accepted to a tippy top school, so with overall acceptance rates of 5-10% the ORM acceptance rate is half that.
An unhooked ORM with a 33 should view these schools as super reaches when applying - sure throw in a couple, but strive for a realistic mix of targets and safeties that one would be happy at or risk ending up at a safety that one never thought they would be stuck at.
@Chembiodad , there is nothing at all wrong with putting up a ranking list from Niche. Rugg’s Recommendations is highly respected and well recognized. It relies in large part on student feedback. If students like their programs, that is a seal of approval. They like them because they are getting excellent instruction, are engaged, and believe they get something out of it. IMO, @CrewDad using a Niche list is just as valid as anyone else using a USNWR list. All lists are flawed in some way. If we aren’t interested in kids being happy with their chosen programs at their chosen colleges, why are any of us on CC in the first place?
@Lindagaf, I agree that Niche is very useful for soft data - my twin DD’s thought it was the best, but I don’t think it’s the right spot to be evaluating the strength of academic programs; IMHO it would be like using Yelp to search for best doctors - while they may be nice, outcomes are key.
The problems with the Niche rankings for physics, particularly as they’ve been listed on this thread, would seem to invalidate the credibility of the source. For example, the first school listed in reply #11, Bates, does not appear in the top 25 within the original source. Regarding the methodology itself, even if it were to be accurately transferred to this thread, it factors in statistical red flags such as “SAT/ACT scores . . . self-reported by Niche users.”
But if “outcomes are key” in the ranking system, then the Forbes list would rule, as it is very outcome driven vs inputs driven, and people here seem to have a problem with the Forbes list.
That’s something to consider @merc81 , but as to the strength of any given program, I trust Rugg’s. Here is how they compile their recommendations:
“In addition to talking with hundreds of counselors, parents, and students, Rugg and his team evaluate college departments based on the numbers. The team of 3 starts with the departments with very high graduation rates in a major, like 10-12% of the student body. After that they look for departments that are very student-oriented, not departments where the faculty are completely immersed in research and publication. The Rugg’s team evaluates departments based on: size, quality of courses offered, department events, learning opportunities beyond the classroom, number and quality of internships, and diversity within the department, among other facctors. After this careful analysis, and after considering the feedback of counselors, students and parents, the team at Rugg’s updates and compiles each annual edition.”
I don’t actually know if Rugg’s rates physics at Bates or any of the other colleges on the Niche list, but if it’s in there, that’s pretty strong evidence of a good program. If anyone has access to Rugg’s, check it out and let us know. @MYOS1634 maybe?
So? I didn’t state the colleges listed were the top 25. I listed schools that may be of interest to Advipll because CC doesn’t allow one to link the Niche website.
I assumed anyone who is interested in the entire list would Google the Niche website, as you did.
In the future, I’ll list the entire list of the top 50 schools for physics in order to make you happy.
I don’t have an issue with self-reporting SAT/ACT scores. I’m of the belief that those contributing to the ranking have the integrity to report accurate scores. Perhaps I have more faith in our young adults than you.
@wisteria100, Forbes ranking system is only partially outcome driven, 20% is based on what they refer to as Student Experience. If outcome is a good indicator, which I agree with wholeheartedly. I would refer to the College Transitions results data as it comes straight from LinkedIn.
We have totaly diverged from the OP’s question, but this just highlights why no one ranking is the right one. I personally prefer any ranking list that puts my kid’s school as high as possible. Don’t we all?
@Lindagaf, agree. To answer OP’s question - based on profile provided and using NSWR ranking system, all top-20’s are reaches (as they are for everyone), #20-40 are matches and #40-60 are safeties.
