1600 and Rejected?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how so many of you can be so flabberghasted that 1600s get rejected. Colleges have been saying forever that test scores aren't the be all and end all.

But not their special snowflake....Colleges want balanced classes and balanced people. Perfect scores are not the entire package.

Yes, you always need the right color balance.

Perfect scores are not the entire package, but usually perfect scores are only earned by students who are the entire package. The Asian-American students who get 1600 in AT and 4.0 GPA, are also the ones who have impressive credentials, social skills, know several languages, excel in ECs, volunteer records, jobs, internships and placements in competitions. So lets keep that one fallacy to rest. A kid who is not shining bright in ECs and Academics will probably not be getting 1600 in SATs.

This is all in your imagination! Perfect scores are NOT usually earned by students who are entire packages. Are you serious? They are the ones who are most clearly academically-inclined and some of them MAY have excelled at a sport or playing a musical instrument or founded a refugee business (that's the popular one these days). Many of them are 1600s and high GPAs, with random ECs, half-hearted volunteering that is so obviously done to game the system and whose parents create the Save the Refugees and Immigrant businesses.

[Anonymous]

Yes, my bf in high school had a 1600. She was rejected by Princeton (1st choice), went to Harvard, went on to get a PhD and become run of the mill academic. She's not wildly successful, but she has her own lab at a mid-tier uni.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, my bf in high school had a 1600. She was rejected by Princeton (1st choice), went to Harvard, went on to get a PhD and become run of the mill academic. She's not wildly successful, but she has her own lab at a mid-tier uni.

PP's bf was a she.
Sounds confused. Or he was confused. Or maybe she was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how so many of you can be so flabberghasted that 1600s get rejected. Colleges have been saying forever that test scores aren't the be all and end all.

But not their special snowflake....Colleges want balanced classes and balanced people. Perfect scores are not the entire package.

Yes, you always need the right color balance.

Not at all what I was talking about at all.

They want the right balance of people as people. Kids to fill the Orchestra, dance, sports, various majors, kids who truly give to the community with their volunteer work vs those who just do it to check boxes, etc. Kids from all states and different countries. They want humans, not just some academic robot.
Shocking, I know, for some of you to realize that a 1500 kid is just as "smart" as your 1600 kid and might even have more to offer in the overall picture. That's what colleges are looking at.

It would be boring to be on a campus with all 1600/4.0UW kids---and I wouldn't want my kid to experience that.

Not at all. MIT and Caltech are two schools that's less PC and mostly stats driven. That's why no one ever question their grads. An URM graduate of MIT or Caltech is no less of a genius than white or Asian graduates.

+1 look at the thread about the OP lamenting how their URM kid at an ivy has to work harder to prove that they didn't get in due to the color of their skin.

That's what happens when colleges play the race game.

Everyone knows that caltech grads got there due to their smarts, just as no one questions the abilities of an Asian American student at an Ivy league.

If non-URM students are not concerned that they had less than a 1600 and got in over a 1600 student that was rejected why are you so concerned and focused on URM students who are typically a much smaller percentage of the applicant pool? What game are colleges playing to select the non-URM students over the 1600 SAT person that was rejected? Is it Uno, Euchre, Bid Whist?

Non-URMs presumably have something to offer to overcome the lower stats. The full pays or donors, for example, are subsidizing lower income students.

What do URMs have to offer other than the skin color?

A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Unfortunately, this seems to apply to only URMs regardless of their SES. Most of the Black students are recent very well educated immigrants from Caribbean, S America, Africa and other countries. Very few Blacks are from the American families of slaves.

Still, regardless of this fact - as an Asian-American, I would not want to become a Black person or a Hispanic person in USA today. However bad it is for AAPI members, it is worse for Blacks and Hispanics. So, I would be for giving preference to URMs over ORMs or Whites in elite colleges. But, this works for us only if the scales are balanced in some way for ORMs (Over Reprented Minorities AKA Asian-American). My kid got generous merit scholarship from UMD. This offsets any disappointment for not getting into MIT.

If MIT meant a $100,000 loan, it was never meant to be. And I doubt it was an URM that took your son's spot at MIT. Anyone who took your son's MIT spot did so on merit.

If by "merit" you mean skin-color, race, gender, nationality, diversity, ability to play bongo etc...sure. Academic or EC merit? Nope. Let put that one to rest.

MIT does not mean a $100,000 loan BTW. It is around 80K per year. $80K without adding cost of travel. If we add 5k as cost of travel etc, then it would be arund 85K. So anywhere between $320 - $340K.

https://sfs.mit.edu/undergraduate-students/the-cost-of-attendance/annual-student-budget/

With out HHI, we would be 100% full pay. Never a loan because we had saved the money to pay for all education cost for our kids. But, that is an expense of $340K we would rather not incur. Especially when 4 yrs of UMD costs us only >$40K for room and board, and tuition is free.

Your kid lost our to a better qualified applicant. MIT doesn't give much weight to skin color. Ones nationality, skin color don't solve MIT problem sets. Academic ability does. Keep on believing your less-qualified kid lost our to URM types, if that makes your rejection easier.

+1
They will never admit this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how so many of you can be so flabberghasted that 1600s get rejected. Colleges have been saying forever that test scores aren't the be all and end all.

But not their special snowflake....Colleges want balanced classes and balanced people. Perfect scores are not the entire package.

Yes, you always need the right color balance.

Not at all what I was talking about at all.

They want the right balance of people as people. Kids to fill the Orchestra, dance, sports, various majors, kids who truly give to the community with their volunteer work vs those who just do it to check boxes, etc. Kids from all states and different countries. They want humans, not just some academic robot.
Shocking, I know, for some of you to realize that a 1500 kid is just as "smart" as your 1600 kid and might even have more to offer in the overall picture. That's what colleges are looking at.

It would be boring to be on a campus with all 1600/4.0UW kids---and I wouldn't want my kid to experience that.

Not at all. MIT and Caltech are two schools that's less PC and mostly stats driven. That's why no one ever question their grads. An URM graduate of MIT or Caltech is no less of a genius than white or Asian graduates.

+1 look at the thread about the OP lamenting how their URM kid at an ivy has to work harder to prove that they didn't get in due to the color of their skin.

That's what happens when colleges play the race game.

Everyone knows that caltech grads got there due to their smarts, just as no one questions the abilities of an Asian American student at an Ivy league.

If non-URM students are not concerned that they had less than a 1600 and got in over a 1600 student that was rejected why are you so concerned and focused on URM students who are typically a much smaller percentage of the applicant pool? What game are colleges playing to select the non-URM students over the 1600 SAT person that was rejected? Is it Uno, Euchre, Bid Whist?

Non-URMs presumably have something to offer to overcome the lower stats. The full pays or donors, for example, are subsidizing lower income students.

What do URMs have to offer other than the skin color?

A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Unfortunately, this seems to apply to only URMs regardless of their SES. Most of the Black students are recent very well educated immigrants from Caribbean, S America, Africa and other countries. Very few Blacks are from the American families of slaves.

Still, regardless of this fact - as an Asian-American, I would not want to become a Black person or a Hispanic person in USA today. However bad it is for AAPI members, it is worse for Blacks and Hispanics. So, I would be for giving preference to URMs over ORMs or Whites in elite colleges. But, this works for us only if the scales are balanced in some way for ORMs (Over Reprented Minorities AKA Asian-American). My kid got generous merit scholarship from UMD. This offsets any disappointment for not getting into MIT.

If MIT meant a $100,000 loan, it was never meant to be. And I doubt it was an URM that took your son's spot at MIT. Anyone who took your son's MIT spot did so on merit.

If by "merit" you mean skin-color, race, gender, nationality, diversity, ability to play bongo etc...sure. Academic or EC merit? Nope. Let put that one to rest.

MIT does not mean a $100,000 loan BTW. It is around 80K per year. $80K without adding cost of travel. If we add 5k as cost of travel etc, then it would be arund 85K. So anywhere between $320 - $340K.

https://sfs.mit.edu/undergraduate-students/the-cost-of-attendance/annual-student-budget/

With out HHI, we would be 100% full pay. Never a loan because we had saved the money to pay for all education cost for our kids. But, that is an expense of $340K we would rather not incur. Especially when 4 yrs of UMD costs us only >$40K for room and board, and tuition is free.

Your kid lost our to a better qualified applicant. MIT doesn't give much weight to skin color. Ones nationality, skin color don't solve MIT problem sets. Academic ability does. Keep on believing your less-qualified kid lost our to URM types, if that makes your rejection easier.

No. Not feeling bad if lesser qualified or even better qualified URMs get in to better colleges then my kid. They had a horrible history and lots to overcome. Trust me, there is not one iota of envy because not in a million years would we want to be in their shoes, in their family or in their community. Their history, present and future - everything is hard. MIT admission does not even qualify for a fraction of restitution they are owed by this country. The only consolation we have is that we were not their oppressors in the past of the present. That is good enough for us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, my bf in high school had a 1600. She was rejected by Princeton (1st choice), went to Harvard, went on to get a PhD and become run of the mill academic. She's not wildly successful, but she has her own lab at a mid-tier uni.

PP's bf was a she.
Sounds confused. Or he was confused. Or maybe she was.

Maybe you're confused. BF clearly stands for best friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, my bf in high school had a 1600. She was rejected by Princeton (1st choice), went to Harvard, went on to get a PhD and become run of the mill academic. She's not wildly successful, but she has her own lab at a mid-tier uni.

PP's bf was a she.
Sounds confused. Or he was confused. Or maybe she was.

Maybe you're confused. BF clearly stands for best friend.

What does BF mean on messenger?
The abbreviation BF is most commonly used with the meaning "Boyfriend". Other abbreviations for "Boyfriend" include: BO, BOO.
https://www.facebook.com › photos
All Acronyms - The abbreviation BF is most

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, my bf in high school had a 1600. She was rejected by Princeton (1st choice), went to Harvard, went on to get a PhD and become run of the mill academic. She's not wildly successful, but she has her own lab at a mid-tier uni.

PP's bf was a she.
Sounds confused. Or he was confused. Or maybe she was.

BF=best friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I heard recently that Cornell rejected ~88% of applicants with a 1600. Other ivies are probably similar.

That would be one way to get around the problem of Asians and whites needing hundreds of points higher than blacks to be accepted.

Have a finding that you don't think high scorers are good for the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard recently that Cornell rejected ~88% of applicants with a 1600. Other ivies are probably similar.

That would be one way to get around the problem of Asians and whites needing hundreds of points higher than blacks to be accepted.

Have a finding that you don't think high scorers are good for the school.

Cornell FA is poor. They probably reject 1600s needing FA. They will go elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how so many of you can be so flabberghasted that 1600s get rejected. Colleges have been saying forever that test scores aren't the be all and end all.

But not their special snowflake....Colleges want balanced classes and balanced people. Perfect scores are not the entire package.

Yes, you always need the right color balance.

Not at all what I was talking about at all.

They want the right balance of people as people. Kids to fill the Orchestra, dance, sports, various majors, kids who truly give to the community with their volunteer work vs those who just do it to check boxes, etc. Kids from all states and different countries. They want humans, not just some academic robot.
Shocking, I know, for some of you to realize that a 1500 kid is just as "smart" as your 1600 kid and might even have more to offer in the overall picture. That's what colleges are looking at.

It would be boring to be on a campus with all 1600/4.0UW kids---and I wouldn't want my kid to experience that.

Not at all. MIT and Caltech are two schools that's less PC and mostly stats driven. That's why no one ever question their grads. An URM graduate of MIT or Caltech is no less of a genius than white or Asian graduates.

+1 look at the thread about the OP lamenting how their URM kid at an ivy has to work harder to prove that they didn't get in due to the color of their skin.

That's what happens when colleges play the race game.

Everyone knows that caltech grads got there due to their smarts, just as no one questions the abilities of an Asian American student at an Ivy league.

If non-URM students are not concerned that they had less than a 1600 and got in over a 1600 student that was rejected why are you so concerned and focused on URM students who are typically a much smaller percentage of the applicant pool? What game are colleges playing to select the non-URM students over the 1600 SAT person that was rejected? Is it Uno, Euchre, Bid Whist?

Non-URMs presumably have something to offer to overcome the lower stats. The full pays or donors, for example, are subsidizing lower income students.

What do URMs have to offer other than the skin color?

A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Unfortunately, this seems to apply to only URMs regardless of their SES. Most of the Black students are recent very well educated immigrants from Caribbean, S America, Africa and other countries. Very few Blacks are from the American families of slaves.

Still, regardless of this fact - as an Asian-American, I would not want to become a Black person or a Hispanic person in USA today. However bad it is for AAPI members, it is worse for Blacks and Hispanics. So, I would be for giving preference to URMs over ORMs or Whites in elite colleges. But, this works for us only if the scales are balanced in some way for ORMs (Over Reprented Minorities AKA Asian-American). My kid got generous merit scholarship from UMD. This offsets any disappointment for not getting into MIT.

If MIT meant a $100,000 loan, it was never meant to be. And I doubt it was an URM that took your son's spot at MIT. Anyone who took your son's MIT spot did so on merit.

If by "merit" you mean skin-color, race, gender, nationality, diversity, ability to play bongo etc...sure. Academic or EC merit? Nope. Let put that one to rest.

MIT does not mean a $100,000 loan BTW. It is around 80K per year. $80K without adding cost of travel. If we add 5k as cost of travel etc, then it would be arund 85K. So anywhere between $320 - $340K.

https://sfs.mit.edu/undergraduate-students/the-cost-of-attendance/annual-student-budget/

With out HHI, we would be 100% full pay. Never a loan because we had saved the money to pay for all education cost for our kids. But, that is an expense of $340K we would rather not incur. Especially when 4 yrs of UMD costs us only >$40K for room and board, and tuition is free.

Your kid lost our to a better qualified applicant. MIT doesn't give much weight to skin color. Ones nationality, skin color don't solve MIT problem sets. Academic ability does. Keep on believing your less-qualified kid lost our to URM types, if that makes your rejection easier.

No. Not feeling bad if lesser qualified or even better qualified URMs get in to better colleges then my kid. They had a horrible history and lots to overcome. Trust me, there is not one iota of envy because not in a million years would we want to be in their shoes, in their family or in their community. Their history, present and future - everything is hard. MIT admission does not even qualify for a fraction of restitution they are owed by this country. The only consolation we have is that we were not their oppressors in the past of the present. That is good enough for us.

A MIT near miss means PP's son probably got into Caltech, ivies, or ivy pluses. Instead, it's UMD. UMD ain't no MIT. And notice UMD has to pay the student to come there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just getting a good board score is not enough to gain admission to any school.

And the applicant was likely rejected from Michigan because they showed zero interest in actually attending.

This, and he also probably has zero social skills. Harvard sounds perfect for him.

Friends kid has 1600, not superscored. Rejected at a bunch of schools, but not Harvard. This applies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just getting a good board score is not enough to gain admission to any school.

And the applicant was likely rejected from Michigan because they showed zero interest in actually attending.

This, and he also probably has zero social skills. Harvard sounds perfect for him.

Friends kid has 1600, not superscored. Rejected at a bunch of schools, but not Harvard. This applies

If the other schools know, he’s likely going to get accepted to Harvard, that may play a role in why they are rejecting. This is because of their yield.

[Anonymous]

This happened at Tulane. Very frustrating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just getting a good board score is not enough to gain admission to any school.

And the applicant was likely rejected from Michigan because they showed zero interest in actually attending.

This, and he also probably has zero social skills. Harvard sounds perfect for him.

Friends kid has 1600, not superscored. Rejected at a bunch of schools, but not Harvard. This applies

If the other schools know, he’s likely going to get accepted to Harvard, that may play a role in why they are rejecting. This is because of their yield.

That's very frustrating. Similar thing happened to my DC. Rejected at lower tiered school and deferred at higher tiered school. Was a bit surprised at that. Not that we expected admitted, but the rejected at the lower tiered school while deferred at higher one seems odd. It's very confusing.