Another ding from Darden(1st round)

Actually, I understand your point completely; I'm just pointing out that it is based on ridiculous logic. It should be obvious, but even if scores on the GMAT continue to rise, there will continue to be high scores and low scores. The generalization "if everyone gets a high GMAT" is just stupid thing to say.

The above is, of course, completely separate from the issue that schools are now selecting students bodies with higher and higher GMAT scores. This indicates that a high GMAT score is more important in their admissions decisions, while a low GMAT is more difficult that ever to overcome.

Regarding your last comment, so what? Even if that is true, I fail to see how it ties in to the discussion on GMAT scoring. Obviously, someone does not need a high GMAT score or an MBA to succeed in business, but I would bet money that graduates of top 10 MBA programs have representation in business leadership that far exceeds their overall numbers. Something far less than .01% of the population has an MBA from a top 10 school, however I'd guess that they represent well in excess of 10% of top management at most companies.

In my opinion, I should have concentrate on my essays in 2004. It was my first time application and I cannot receive any help from neighbors. Since 2005, I got much help from online and offline consultants but I think the competition has been more significant. This year I decided to put more efforts to choosing the right school and developing my own unique essays. But for Darden, I cannot receive any feedback(Interview invitation) and find me denied at decision date. It makes me discouraging because I know that average GMAT of Darden is below than mine and I planned to apply to other top schools whose GMAT is higher than Darden's. By the way, I think all your comments on my profile really help me because I could get some hint to improve my application and strategy. Thanks guys!!!

Mixed reactions to this reply.

1. Indeed, for certain candidates with strong GPAs, exemplary community service involvement, company sponsorship, and especially for those coming from an underrepresent minority, a stratospheric GMAT is not necessarily a prerequisite to gaining admissions to a trans elite school.

Pelihu's point is that a stronger GMAT score is one option that could offset socman's other stats. However, we all know that cramming for the GMAT while trying to apply in the the middle of R2 deadlines can be fatal, especially when one is trying to increase just a few verbal points from say, a 690 to a 710. (The best he could do in Q is pick up another point)

From an altogether different perspective, we need to consider socman's demographic and academic portfolio. First off, he appears to be Korean, which automatically puts him into the fiercely competitve Asian pool, a pool that is particularly intense amongst other Koreans. Next, he does have a low GPA, but adcoms will consider the rigor of his major. IMO, A 2.7 in M/E is somewhat near the equivalent of a ~3.2 in Liberal Arts. Then there are his schools of choice: Darden, Tuck, UCLA, Ross, Haas.. these are all stretch schools for anybody with a 2.7, but not impossible if accompanied with resonating essays. So I can't stop but thinking that he must have botched up his marketing pitch somewhere to keep getting these consistent dings.

2. Regarding the comment about "cheating GMAT websites," surely they must exist out there, but how many people do you think can actually remember ONE CR, or even an SC for that matter, verbatem? Let's face it, generally speaking, Chinese and Indian GMAT test takers tend to be math gurus anyway, so if they really wanted to cheat, they would memorize verbal questions (including the answer choices), and share such relevant info; a task that would take either a photographic memory or extremely sophisticated equiptment. Not to say that it's impossible, just highly improbable with the new erasable whiteboards, pre-screening biometrics, body cavity searches, etc.

Finally, you do make a valid point about reapplicants. It is an established fact that reapplicants at many transelites (and some elites) do stand a higher chance of admissions. Reapplying shows determination, provided the applicant has made some progress since the last application season. If socman took a few professional or university level English Business writing courses, he could potentially arm wrestle his way into at least one of his target schools.

I was a Darden reapplicant (originally applied in 2004) and was dinged for R1/EA. Based on admit rates, looks like I might have had a better chance had I reapplied last year.

I remember reading somewhere that Darden's reapplicant admit rate was not any higher than the general admit rate. I think they give feedback in the spring if you request it.

I agree that reapplying after a ding can be a good thing, but are people accepted when applying for a third time? I don't know but I can't see myself applying a third time.

I'm discouraged, too.

That's just it, take charge and maintain an open the line of comminication between you and the adcom. They are human beings just like the rest of us. Heck, even though I don't plan on applying there, at one time I even exchanged emails with the Dean of Admissions at the Wharton Lauder Center. It was through such dialogue that I got some good information.

Risky? Maybe. But if you are getting dinged multiple times by the same school, why not question authority?? Their feedback might help pinpoint the weakness in your application, therby giving you tips on how to enhance your position, and then you can reapply with confidence. If one reapplies under the same conditions, then there simply isn't any justification for extra merit.

By the way, just in case anybody cares: HBS allows THREE applications over the course of one's lifetime. This is a fact.

Maybe Darden is testing exactly how tenacious you are about studying at their program. I wouldn't cry uncle so easily.

I actually know about 10 people at top schools in US (MIT, Wharton, Darden) and Europe (INSEAD, Oxford) and all of them are INDIANS and NOBODY HAVE A 700+ GMAT score.

Don't take it personally but you (and many fellow GMATClubbers) put too much emphasis on GMAT. I agree that it matters but just by looking at GPA and GMAT, you can't say you are not competitive.

I think I agree with pelihu and ps_dahiya. The correct way of putting this is probably:

If we have to pick one entity that would be most important in determining if an applicant will get admitted to a certain school, assuming we dont know much about the other good stuff (GPA, quality of work ext, etc) then I would pick GMAT. It is the single most important factor.... So pelihu definitely has a point.

However, GMAT is NOT a majority factor. Meaning it does not have a big lead over other factors in terms of the how much it can influence and the advantage a good GMAT score offers can easily be beaten by any of the other factors. If this was not the case, Stanford's average Gmat will be 760 and 80% range will be 730-800. Hence, we see many exceptions like what Ps_Dahiya is reporting.