It seems common belief that top MBA programs seek students with a "threshold" GMAT score of 700+. Above 700, the value of higher score adds little to the application. A 700 indicates a minimum amount of intellectual horsepower. This is a good analysis but unfortunately, I feel it ignores the true reality of race and gender based admissions. In the aggregate, the argument stands, however, I tend to believe that the true picture of a threshold score is based on the "check the box factor". Let's say the threshold score for say Wharton is a 700. The true threshold sub scores most probably reflect something like this:
Minority Female- 620-650
Minority Male- 630-670
White Female- 650-680
White Male-720-750
I'd be willing to bet the bank that the breakdown is something like this. It is in my opinion, irresponsible to use an aggregate threshold score and possibly mislead the largest pool of test takers- white males. I also think that some foreigners from countries like India are held to a higher standard, too and that a 700 score or even a 720 just wouldn't allow someone to hurdle the GMAT barrier. Convincing EVERYONE of the 700 barrier theory would lead people into falsely over or under preparing for the GMAT. For example a non-minority white male with a "bubble" GMAT score like a 680-690 might think he has cleared the GMAT hurdle at a top 15 program. The reality may be though that he is 20-40 points below the target for his demographic. On the flip side, a minority female (extreme case) with a 640 GMAT score might well waste a lot of time re-taking the exam when she might have already been given the GMAT A-OK.
Any one else want to weigh in on this....is the argument off basis? If so, why? Thank you.