<p>do you think colleges should base admissions solely on SAT in order to separate the stupid from the smart people?</p>
<p>They play pleanty of attention to scores.</p>
<p>Oh come on, SAT isn't everything... I didn't do fantastic (r770, m770, w760) but I don't think I'm a total idiot... as one of my interviewer said, often times people with highest scores (ie 2400) are those who prepare themselves in that field the most. Most people have other interests. Some are athletic, some have great research experience, some are great public speakers,some are amazing musician, some work 30+ hours a week... I think it all depends the opp. that a person is offered and perhaps their priorities</p>
<p>
[quote]
I didn't do fantastic (r770, m770, w760)
[/quote]
hey, thats pretty good! Everything above 750... Not a lot of people get those</p>
<p>Ummmm, I'm fairly sure she knows that but ego stroking is always fun.</p>
<p>Um... no, I know several (ok, 3) people that have 2400, plus six math genius with sat m800 and one person with a r800 But I have to say two of the three 2400 people have no life...</p>
<p>^How many people do you know that has taken the SAT who don't scores more than 2350?</p>
<p>I only know one kid. I mean everyone else got 2350+s no sweat. That one kid was a complete idiot, always drooling over everything you know?</p>
<p>I can't believe someone didn't get over a 2350, that's so embarrassing.</p>
<p>Actually, I think colleges just use the SATs to see if your application is truthful or not. Ex, if you have straight As but an 1800, that's going to draw some eyebrows. They care a lot more about hard work.</p>
<p>You guys have got to be kidding. 2300 only decent? I have kids in my school who got 1600, and thats out of 2400. If you look at the statistics, most people in America can't even get out of the 500's in each section, many are in the 400's. If you can actually that over 700 on each section isn't fantastic, then you must either be kidding or just plain crazy.</p>
<p>Pay attention to the subtle sarcasm... ^_^</p>
<p>^^Sarcasm^^....part of critical reading...</p>
<p>kamikazewave: it was interesting to read your post because there are around 5 straight A's students taking the most rigorous courses at my high school scoring under a 1830 (one got an 1830, got accepted to Georgetown, and 4 got around a 1500). so yeah, they say adcoms uses the score to check for grade inflations.</p>
<p>SATs don't determine whether your smart or dumb.</p>
<p>actually yes SAT scores do determine- to an extent- how smart/dumb you are.....</p>
<p>You can't be a total idiot and score,lets say an 1800.</p>
<p>You can be smart and score around a 2000-2100. Our valedictorian scored a 2050 or something... But the salutatorian scored ~2300. </p>
<p>You can't be smart and get an 1800ish. It doesn't happen too often.</p>
<p>"SATs don't determine whether your smart or dumb."</p>
<p>No, being smart or dumb determines your SATs.<br>
I am kindof kidding here, there is no doubt that there is a strong correlation between intelligence and SATs but many smart people have low SATs and many dumb people have high SATs. It is not the end all factor but it is useful because it is so widespread and is standardized.</p>
<p>We can look at charts for people who have got accepted to certain schools from our high school, and it was very surprising to see that the same school wait listing people with 1450/1600 while actually accepting someone with an 800. I am not trying to make a point about AA or Athletes when I say this, but who scores a 400 per section and even goes to a good college, or even a bad college?</p>
<p>An 800....I would prolly kill myself if I scored that bad and tried.</p>
<p>This debate is like beating a dead horse.</p>
<p>Will non-academically talented students score in the top % of test takers? Probably not. Will academically talented students score poorly? Perhaps. There is a lot of gray area.</p>
<p>I don't know... but if I were a member of an adcom, I'd take the student who has put in four long years of hard work rather than a four hour test.</p>
<p>Just my $.02.</p>