<p>19382------It is ABSOLUTELY likely, povided other things point out one's incompatibility with the SATs. And there are many such examples other than these 2, but do you want me to clog this thread with those profiles?</p>
<p>The point I made above was that "The SAT1 is the LEAST important thing after GPA,Advanced courses,grades in advanced courses, class rank and SAT2s"
What this quote says is that great SAT1s alone will never get you in, but great "GPA,Advanced courses,grades in advanced courses, class rank and SAT2s" will offset low SAT1s.
Also, to put it another way, the SAT1 will hardly ever be the basis for your rejection, but other things might.</p>
<p>Conversely , high GPAs and low SAT1s do not REALLY say that you are a great student and you simply suck at SATs. If you have lots of other things to back up that high gpa(eg 5s on APs), only then do I think your SAT1s stop being important.</p>
<p>Also, to put it another way, the SAT1 will hardly ever be the basis for your rejection, but other things might.</p>
<p>I'm not basing this on any actual proof, but either way, I'm sure that a lot of colleges will immediately cut a student out if they see he is far below the SAT score of their average applicant. It would require more than a good GPA to remedy that. It would require some seriously profound hooks.</p>
<p>agree with waffle, but that's how our society functions. numbers won't determine us for the rest of our lives but they will most definitely play heavy parts, whether it's SAT scores, college exam scores, MCAT/LSAT scores or ultimately our salary figures. and even though my next comment pertains to posts on previous pages, i just have to say - newyitty, everytime you posted something, you just dug yourself a deeper hole and sounded more and more like an embittered SAT reject whose arguments and ridiculous assumptions were senseless at best. and the whole thing about how you'd rather go to school with "witty, street-smart" students rather than bookworms basically implies that there are absolutely no witty, street-smart people to be found in the Ivies, a statement which i'm sure you would retract if you could actually gain admittance into any of those schools.</p>
<p>I think the "bad test taker" theory is a myth. It is possible to bomb the SAT, but you can retake it. If you aren't good at logic and reasoning, you won't do well. It is a good medium between a pure IQ test and a sort of being smart and careful at school. While it isn't perfect, I would bet the correlation between SAT scores and actual intelligence is high. No true genius will score only 1500/2400, and no burnout/gangster/random dumbass will score a 2400. GPA is probably a better measurement but it too can be flawed as some schools are easier or harder than others and some kids not only work harder but are more organized, more liked by teachers, and generally more successful at school than their intelligence would predict. These are your "geniuses" who are "poor test takers" outside the comfortable realm of their beloved teachers class.</p>
<p>Basically, 100 is average. Anything over 130 and you're considered a genius.</p>
<p>Edit: Oh, and about percentile. I'm not sure. My mother had me tested and I had to pry the score out of her. She wouldn't tell me exactly. ): I think she has the report thing they gave her locked up in our family's safe. I'll have to sneak down and take a look.</p>
<p>So because, in your one case, your score didn't match up to your supposed 'genius status', you make the blanket assertion that the test doesn't test intelligence. Anyone see anything wrong with that?</p>
<p>And for the last time, SAT doesn't test anything else except your general logic......If the SAT scores and GPA doesn't match and GPA high- hardworking person.......and you've got a 150 IQ. So, you can't be a bad test taker...you just can't find out the answers hidden in a passage or do basic maths.......Pretty genius stuff.....</p>
<p>"SAT only measures how well you take the SAT" as said by many ppl.</p>
<p>True, but you cannot say that there is no correlation between the SAT and intelligence. I honestly think the SAT deserves more credit than it gets these days. Sure, I think its kinda somewhat stupid but I think it is definitely needed. Maybe Im just sayin this cuz I have a 3.0 GPA (and plz no one start callin me lazy cuz im not or sayin Im never gonna make it into any college) but the SAT is necessary. </p>
<p>I was at Harvard Summer School this past summer and of course there were loads of kids wit like perfect 4.0 GPA. They were like how the hell is ur GPA sooooo low?! I was gettin B's in this Calculus class (ended up wit a B+). Nuthin new to me. And then some of these kids wit their perfect 4.0s were gettin C's, D's, and some were even failing. Of course these kids were like "I didnt know they gave these out. And to me?!?!?!?" My point is that just cuz u have a high GPA at your own high school does not necessarily mean ur Ivy league material, eventhough I prob respect ppl wit high GPAs alot cuz I know theyre hard workers.</p>
<p>I hate that people who don't do well hide behind the "I don't test well!" excuse. Really? Lots of people don't naturally do things well, but that's why there are TONS of practice tests/materials available. I just don't think it's a good excuse. If you don't test well, then how are you supposed to survive in college?</p>
<p>Exactly 19382. Everyone has <em>SOMETHING</em> they're not great at it, but they'll have to deal with it for the rest of their life, so freaking get used to it! I don't manage my time well. Does that give me an excuse to have a low(ish) GPA? Absolutely not. </p>
<p>Not being able to manage my time well will hurt me in college. Not being able to take tests well will undoubtedly hurt others in college. I could work on my issues, they could work on theirs, but for the time being, colleges can see where our weaknesses lie. GPA and SAT are both good measures of skills you will need for college.</p>
<p>Bottom line... the SAT is the best way to compare differences in high school. All of you people on here who say you're from a "competitive magnet" or "top public" or whatever should use the SAT to show that your poor class rank is a result of tough competition. I figure that people at weak schools on here don't like the SAT but those from competitive schools do. That being said, those who argue that the SAT is prepable... PREP for it. You got a 4.0 at your school so you should be smart enough to do what it takes to score highly.</p>
<p>I don't think it's a test that strictly measures intelligence. Those people who haven't taken a practice test before will undoubtedly do worse. They might be able to answer all the questions, but aren't familiar with the test format, and therefore, they run out of time. </p>
<p>I think doing well on the test is more about becoming familiar with the format. The more practice tests you take the better prepared you are for what types of questions to expect. </p>
<p>Though many may do well on it the first time they ever sit down and take a practice test, the majority which does well have probably taken a lot more practice tests than the rest. :)</p>
<p>andrw313, seriously! im gonna kill someone if they say i come from a top public school or whatever, if you're smart u can do well, and it will show. whether you have a 3.0 or 4.0 colleges will know</p>
<p>None of theses scores matter in the end, people.
Live a good, clean life and make the most of what you have. What you do with your life, and how hard you work is what's important, not what your numbers look like or how "smart" you are.</p>
<p>Easy for me to say...I have a sucky GPA and test scores...Ha!</p>
<p>haha actually a lot depends on "what my numbers look like" having good numbers will hopefully get me into good college, then good graduate school, then off to a good careeer and then i become the king of the world, allllll because I went to an ivy league university</p>