Which colleges have majority student body of very bright kids but not brainiacs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With so much talk about colleges that TO, even Dartmouths with only 1/3 submitting as the rest likely scoring under 1450 if they had submitted...which colleges have a majority student body of say 1540 SAT without heavy prepping?

Our DC got 1540 with some self prep and no tutoring. We know she doesn't belong in a MIT, Caltech, Chicago type genius schools full of high scoring geniuses, but so many T30 seem to have at least 1/2 scoring under 1500. Which colleges have majority who could score in mid-1500 without tutoring and superscoring?

You do you, but I consider this a silly pursuit.

SAT scores are only one part of the equation, of course. They're a measure of many things, including how good a kid is at taking that type of a test. Some kids are naturally good (or already prepared!) for that exercise by the time they take the test. Others are not or require practice to get to the same place (1540 in your example.)

But beyond that point, I think that it hilariously narrow to define your DC's ideal classmates as those who scored a 1540 on the SAT in one sitting without tutoring.

(And before you dismiss me as someone who is bitter because my kid is not x, y, or z, I will share that DC scored a 1570 in one sitting, though they also did some tutoring and self-study before taking the test.)

Again, you do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP's obsession with fine graduations of score as determinant of personality and compatibility is lunatic.

Indeed. It's also very amusing. I love discovering new flavors of DCUM crazy . . . .

[Anonymous]

Do you really mean high IQ students who are more type B in their approach with solid EQ? You can find those types at most good schools. My type B student with a high IQ had decent, but not stellar, test scores. His roommate had a 1560. Mine has a solid GPA, very involved on campus, fraternity. Living a fun college life. His roommate is barely passing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some flaws in your first post:

Dartmouth is on year 2 of test required.

Chicago takes a lot of middle-of-the-road private school kids who apply ED and are full pay. There may be some geniuses there but also a lot of completely regular kids who got a great great education at a strong private in NYC, Boston, DC but were totally average kids.

A big flagship like UCSD probably still have a larger number of "genius" kids (whatever it means) than Chicago.

UCSB is a party school and still has a ton of geniuses- especially in CCS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you are assigning value to the SAT that isn’t true. Lots of brainiacs at many schools.

I don’t think you can tell the difference between a kid scoring a 1540 and 1400 if you meet them on the street.

OP here. Please no flame, but at our school, DD and 2 close friends who are similarly smart but not genius types scored 1530-1540 first try, minimal prep. While a true brainiac kid who has been brilliant since 1st grade scored 1600 first try, no one was surprised. Other friends told us their kids scored in the 1300s and need tutors to get up to 1450-ish. Those are the kids who always needed tutors and consistently performed a band under the 1540 kids (bc the school have different tracks for core subjects since middle school) and def under the 1600 kid. We have known all these kids since K and it's been very consistent. I disagree you can't tell the difference between a 1540 and 1400 kid, just as I can tell the difference between my 1540 kid and the 1600 kid. I have also seen kids who were happy in normal courses and got pushed by parents to get tutored into the advanced track math and chem classes and ended up having to drop back down to non-advanced track the following year.

I truly think kids do well in the track they naturally excel in but all have a chance to be very successful when they grow up if they learned in an environment where learn with peers with similar aptitudes and build confidence.

So I’m going to tell you a story about my Ivy kid.

1400 first try no prep. With a few attempts, up to 1540. It’s test prep. Whatever. Private HS.

Now at Ivy - their “brainiac” friends are in the library nonstop. Devastated they don’t get into the right business club. Devastated with choices with Greek life. Devastated by not getting the next “rung” (internships, coffee chats, etc).

Then there are other kids that are really low-key and easy-going that end up rolling with the punches. None of this makes or breaks them. Now those low-key kids (including mine) are in the ultimate student leadership positions of the Ivy and no one knows how it happened. The PE internships are just falling in their lap.

Strange tbh. Those other kids - my kids friends - intuitively have perfect stats, perfect scores, perfect college grades (which mine definitely doesn’t have) perfect everything. But they are frankly just overwhelmed by constantly seeking perfection. They almost can’t cope or deal with the fast balls that come their way.

What you think is the perfect environment for your kid may actually not be. We have been so surprised.

My kid always said they were bottom 50% of the class when they matriculated. But now? Leading everything. President of uni knows on first name basis on speed dial.

I wouldn’t over rotate on your kids perceived strengths. What you think of is a strength man being a weakness and vice versa.

You can’t over engineer this. Cream rises. Let your kid figure it out.

Spot on. My deepest desire is for my child to develop self-direction and the ability to overcome adversity. True success in adult life is measured by growth and problem-solving, not cramming for tests or the mere pursuit of outward appearances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you are assigning value to the SAT that isn’t true. Lots of brainiacs at many schools.

I don’t think you can tell the difference between a kid scoring a 1540 and 1400 if you meet them on the street.

+1

It's really not an important part of life. Just like, go check where everyone you work with attended college. Good chance most are not T30 schools (or even T50). Good chance you report to someone (or a few levels up from you) who didn't even attend a T100 school.

Yes, but I think the subtext here is that OP wants DD to be educated in such a way so as live and work in a world without encountering people unlike herself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With so much talk about colleges that TO, even Dartmouths with only 1/3 submitting as the rest likely scoring under 1450 if they had submitted...which colleges have a majority student body of say 1540 SAT without heavy prepping?

Our DC got 1540 with some self prep and no tutoring. We know she doesn't belong in a MIT, Caltech, Chicago type genius schools full of high scoring geniuses, but so many T30 seem to have at least 1/2 scoring under 1500. Which colleges have majority who could score in mid-1500 without tutoring and superscoring?

This list is a good starting point: https://www.collegeraptor.com/college-rankings/details/MedianSAT/
Some of the top schools are test optional, so the high score is artificial, you need to discount that.

That list is weird.

It has UC berkeley on there, but UCs absolutely don't accept SAT scores.

UMD is higher than UMich and GA Tech. Clearly, UMD's TO skews the numbers.

[Anonymous]

You shouldn't think like this, OP. I've got college and high school kids, running the gamut between highly gifted and merely above average, and college admissions are not just about academic brilliance. It would be so much easier if they were!!!

Most families cannot afford to send their kids just anywhere. You will find brilliant kids in many flagship state universities. You will find less academic kids that have arrived at top-tier institutions, through various athletic and geographic diversity initiatives or other special interests that intrigued the readers of their applications.

Anywhere your child goes, they will find a variety of intelligences: cerebral, social, emotional, etc. It is up to your child to expose themselves to as much of it as possible, and find their close circle of friends.

Your child needs to have reach, target and safety schools. PP is correct that some departments are stronger than others in the same institution. And then neither you nor your kid will have control over the outcome. You will choose from colleges who admit your kid, based on personal preference and financial concerns.

That's all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you are assigning value to the SAT that isn’t true. Lots of brainiacs at many schools.

I don’t think you can tell the difference between a kid scoring a 1540 and 1400 if you meet them on the street.

OP here. Please no flame, but at our school, DD and 2 close friends who are similarly smart but not genius types scored 1530-1540 first try, minimal prep. While a true brainiac kid who has been brilliant since 1st grade scored 1600 first try, no one was surprised. Other friends told us their kids scored in the 1300s and need tutors to get up to 1450-ish. Those are the kids who always needed tutors and consistently performed a band under the 1540 kids (bc the school have different tracks for core subjects since middle school) and def under the 1600 kid. We have known all these kids since K and it's been very consistent. I disagree you can't tell the difference between a 1540 and 1400 kid, just as I can tell the difference between my 1540 kid and the 1600 kid. I have also seen kids who were happy in normal courses and got pushed by parents to get tutored into the advanced track math and chem classes and ended up having to drop back down to non-advanced track the following year.

I truly think kids do well in the track they naturally excel in but all have a chance to be very successful when they grow up if they learned in an environment where learn with peers with similar aptitudes and build confidence.

It sounds like your DD has gone to school with many types of smart kids. Some are "naturally" more gifted than her, some are less, and some are similar.

Here's my question: How was that experience for her? Was she ok being a part of this mix of kids?

The fact is that all T20 schools (and arguably T50 schools) have a similar mix of kids. Some crazy gifted kids (natural 1600s) take a full ride at a T50 while some high-effort kids leverage their superscore 1550 (among other assets) into a T10.

The idea that your DD should be in a college enviornment with kids exactly like her on this very narrow dimension strikes me as incredibly strange.

Not only is this only a small indicator of . . . well, anything . . . but also, it's strange to aspire to send your DC to a school with such a narrow type of peer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With so much talk about colleges that TO, even Dartmouths with only 1/3 submitting as the rest likely scoring under 1450 if they had submitted...which colleges have a majority student body of say 1540 SAT without heavy prepping?

Our DC got 1540 with some self prep and no tutoring. We know she doesn't belong in a MIT, Caltech, Chicago type genius schools full of high scoring geniuses, but so many T30 seem to have at least 1/2 scoring under 1500. Which colleges have majority who could score in mid-1500 without tutoring and superscoring?

This question is everything that is wrong with this forum. For many of the reasons other posters have noted but also because in the real world, you interact with all kinds of people and, at least in my life, gain genuine value from those interactions - people express all kinds of intelligence from emotional to intellectual and your student can learn from engagement with all types, maybe even benefit from sharing their ease with schools/tests with others. Acting like your DC will somehow "suffer" if exposed to kids who struggle is the very definition of elitism and is doing your kid a disservice. My DC is dyslexic, graduated in top ten (not top 10%) of their class, got into several top 10 colleges and is excelling at the one they chose to go to. We decided early on to go test optional to avoid the stress of prep, etc for a kid who is not a good test taker. They did take the SAT with no prep when the school had all juniors take it and got an 1150 - is that kind not "good enough" to interact with yours?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you are assigning value to the SAT that isn’t true. Lots of brainiacs at many schools.

I don’t think you can tell the difference between a kid scoring a 1540 and 1400 if you meet them on the street.

OP here. Please no flame, but at our school, DD and 2 close friends who are similarly smart but not genius types scored 1530-1540 first try, minimal prep. While a true brainiac kid who has been brilliant since 1st grade scored 1600 first try, no one was surprised. Other friends told us their kids scored in the 1300s and need tutors to get up to 1450-ish. Those are the kids who always needed tutors and consistently performed a band under the 1540 kids (bc the school have different tracks for core subjects since middle school) and def under the 1600 kid. We have known all these kids since K and it's been very consistent. I disagree you can't tell the difference between a 1540 and 1400 kid, just as I can tell the difference between my 1540 kid and the 1600 kid. I have also seen kids who were happy in normal courses and got pushed by parents to get tutored into the advanced track math and chem classes and ended up having to drop back down to non-advanced track the following year.

I truly think kids do well in the track they naturally excel in but all have a chance to be very successful when they grow up if they learned in an environment where learn with peers with similar aptitudes and build confidence.

It sounds like your DD has gone to school with many types of smart kids. Some are "naturally" more gifted than her, some are less, and some are similar.

Here's my question: How was that experience for her? Was she ok being a part of this mix of kids?

The fact is that all T20 schools (and arguably T50 schools) have a similar mix of kids. Some crazy gifted kids (natural 1600s) take a full ride at a T50 while some high-effort kids leverage their superscore 1550 (among other assets) into a T10.

The idea that your DD should be in a college enviornment with kids exactly like her on this very narrow dimension strikes me as incredibly strange.

Not only is this only a small indicator of . . . well, anything . . . but also, it's strange to aspire to send your DC to a school with such a narrow type of peer.

Err is the highlighted line true for MIT or Caltech?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you are assigning value to the SAT that isn’t true. Lots of brainiacs at many schools.

I don’t think you can tell the difference between a kid scoring a 1540 and 1400 if you meet them on the street.

+1

It's really not an important part of life. Just like, go check where everyone you work with attended college. Good chance most are not T30 schools (or even T50). Good chance you report to someone (or a few levels up from you) who didn't even attend a T100 school.

Yes, but I think the subtext here is that OP wants DD to be educated in such a way so as live and work in a world without encountering people unlike herself.

+1

Which again, I find hilarious.

Perhaps the funniest part in this is the hubris. Any parent who thinks they know exactly who their teen is - and who they will become - has a lot to learn.

Good luck with your quixotic effort, OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you are assigning value to the SAT that isn’t true. Lots of brainiacs at many schools.

I don’t think you can tell the difference between a kid scoring a 1540 and 1400 if you meet them on the street.

OP here. Please no flame, but at our school, DD and 2 close friends who are similarly smart but not genius types scored 1530-1540 first try, minimal prep. While a true brainiac kid who has been brilliant since 1st grade scored 1600 first try, no one was surprised. Other friends told us their kids scored in the 1300s and need tutors to get up to 1450-ish. Those are the kids who always needed tutors and consistently performed a band under the 1540 kids (bc the school have different tracks for core subjects since middle school) and def under the 1600 kid. We have known all these kids since K and it's been very consistent. I disagree you can't tell the difference between a 1540 and 1400 kid, just as I can tell the difference between my 1540 kid and the 1600 kid. I have also seen kids who were happy in normal courses and got pushed by parents to get tutored into the advanced track math and chem classes and ended up having to drop back down to non-advanced track the following year.

I truly think kids do well in the track they naturally excel in but all have a chance to be very successful when they grow up if they learned in an environment where learn with peers with similar aptitudes and build confidence.

So I’m going to tell you a story about my Ivy kid.

1400 first try no prep. With a few attempts, up to 1540. It’s test prep. Whatever. Private HS.

Now at Ivy - their “brainiac” friends are in the library nonstop. Devastated they don’t get into the right business club. Devastated with choices with Greek life. Devastated by not getting the next “rung” (internships, coffee chats, etc).

Then there are other kids that are really low-key and easy-going that end up rolling with the punches. None of this makes or breaks them. Now those low-key kids (including mine) are in the ultimate student leadership positions of the Ivy and no one knows how it happened. The PE internships are just falling in their lap.

Strange tbh. Those other kids - my kids friends - intuitively have perfect stats, perfect scores, perfect college grades (which mine definitely doesn’t have) perfect everything. But they are frankly just overwhelmed by constantly seeking perfection. They almost can’t cope or deal with the fast balls that come their way.

What you think is the perfect environment for your kid may actually not be. We have been so surprised.

My kid always said they were bottom 50% of the class when they matriculated. But now? Leading everything. President of uni knows on first name basis on speed dial.

I wouldn’t over rotate on your kids perceived strengths. What you think of is a strength man being a weakness and vice versa.

You can’t over engineer this. Cream rises. Let your kid figure it out.

Spot on. My deepest desire is for my child to develop self-direction and the ability to overcome adversity. True success in adult life is measured by growth and problem-solving, not cramming for tests or the mere pursuit of outward appearances.

100% agree with you and PP. All the way.
The OP has no idea what's coming her way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you are assigning value to the SAT that isn’t true. Lots of brainiacs at many schools.

I don’t think you can tell the difference between a kid scoring a 1540 and 1400 if you meet them on the street.

OP here. Please no flame, but at our school, DD and 2 close friends who are similarly smart but not genius types scored 1530-1540 first try, minimal prep. While a true brainiac kid who has been brilliant since 1st grade scored 1600 first try, no one was surprised. Other friends told us their kids scored in the 1300s and need tutors to get up to 1450-ish. Those are the kids who always needed tutors and consistently performed a band under the 1540 kids (bc the school have different tracks for core subjects since middle school) and def under the 1600 kid. We have known all these kids since K and it's been very consistent. I disagree you can't tell the difference between a 1540 and 1400 kid, just as I can tell the difference between my 1540 kid and the 1600 kid. I have also seen kids who were happy in normal courses and got pushed by parents to get tutored into the advanced track math and chem classes and ended up having to drop back down to non-advanced track the following year.

I truly think kids do well in the track they naturally excel in but all have a chance to be very successful when they grow up if they learned in an environment where learn with peers with similar aptitudes and build confidence.

It sounds like your DD has gone to school with many types of smart kids. Some are "naturally" more gifted than her, some are less, and some are similar.

Here's my question: How was that experience for her? Was she ok being a part of this mix of kids?

The fact is that all T20 schools (and arguably T50 schools) have a similar mix of kids. Some crazy gifted kids (natural 1600s) take a full ride at a T50 while some high-effort kids leverage their superscore 1550 (among other assets) into a T10.

The idea that your DD should be in a college enviornment with kids exactly like her on this very narrow dimension strikes me as incredibly strange.

Not only is this only a small indicator of . . . well, anything . . . but also, it's strange to aspire to send your DC to a school with such a narrow type of peer.

Err is the highlighted line true for MIT or Caltech?

Good point. Without spelling it out, I had already eliminated them from this analysis because OP seemed clear that MIT and Caltech were not good fits because those schools are full of "brainiacs"?

[Anonymous]

Op, what happens if your kid picks a major at some place like Berkeley, and 95% of their cohorts are athletes, who got in solely for their athletic capabilities?