<p>The focus on astronomical SAT's seems over the top to me. Really. A 610 across the board puts you in the top quartile of test takers, and a 680 puts you in the top 10%.</p>
<p>I dunno. I've seen so many kids take and retake this test and study and go to special classes for it and stress over it, and it just seems dumb to me.</p>
<p>What is the value added? To qualify for state school honor programs, usually they're looking for a 1220-1300 range (CR+M)</p>
<p>I get that higher SATs MIGHT mean more scholarship money - but I haven't seen that happen that much for state schools. NMSF, yes, and I understand studying early to get that - but if you did not study, and did NOT get that, the ship has usually sailed by the time you get to actually TAKING and retaking the test.</p>
<p>It just has the feel of a show-dog jumping through hoops, but accomplishing....well, not much really.</p>
<p>I should qualify my post by saying - I understand that for those schools that truly represent entry for only the top 5% of test takers in the nation - I understand - it's required. But most flagships don't come close to requiring these crazy scores.</p>
<p>Public universities vary in admission competitiveness- if those scores are fine for your instate public and your student has a good GPA is not looking for honors college, then I agree with your assessment. If a student has a less than great GPA, a higher SAT score may help with admission at some schools.</p>
<p>As to honors programs, the SAT requirements also vary greatly among colleges. I believe University of Pittsburgh, for example, looks for about 1400 to 1450 M+CR for its honors program. Spots in honors programs are limited and SAT scores are an easy way for colleges to decide who gets in and who doesnt.</p>
<p>Higher SAT scores are often important for merit aid, which is especially important for students looking at out of state publics and privates.</p>
<p>If you want to get into the engineering honors program at UT-Austin, you supposedly need higher than 1500 M+CR. My son had just under 1500 and didn’t make it in. He was OOS but I heard that it’s equally as selective in-state.</p>
<p>With scores in that range, there is no guarantee that you’ll even be admitted to the University of Maryland, for example, and if you are admitted, you’re unlikely to qualify for the honors program.</p>
<p>Fair enough. I guess I’m looking at it through my particular lens, where 2 of my kids had above a 3.5 unweighted gpa and 30-60 hrs. of college credit upon graduation, and graduated in the top 5% of their class.</p>
<p>I suppose if SAT admission criteria would have been higher for the schools they were applying for - we certainly would have jumped through those hoops.</p>
<p>Again, I just don’t know what it proves. I have NO doubt that with special seminars, any studying at all, and retaking the test they could have improved, maybe VASTLY improved their scores. But they still would have been the same kids, performing class-work at the same level, having the same dreams and goals, I mean, you get the idea.</p>
<p>**And the other one had a terrible gpa, but was a NSMF. We had to bring that one HOME from college.</p>
<p>^^^ But they aren’t the same kid. I have three. Oldest is somewhat naturally gifted, took the test once, did well by normal standards (not cc standards) and was happy. He was accepted, got merit aid and is doing ok at the level college he made it in. His GPA matched his scores.</p>
<p>Middle son has similar talents, but is super self-motivated. He took the test once cold, almost matched oldest’s score (but was two years younger in school) and was not satisfied. He worked his tail off filling in the few gaps he had. He puts the same effort into anything he does. He got a tippy top score and had the GPA to match. He’s doing very well at his higher level college.</p>
<p>Youngest is pretty much equally talented, but only puts top effort into things he loves. Prepping for tests is not one of those, so he won’t. His scores are likely to be the lowest of the three (unless his attitude changes), but it matches what he will do in college. He’ll succeed well in a college that matches him, but top colleges aren’t it (unless he can pick only classes that interest him).</p>
<p>For a typical state school - non flagship? You don’t need stellar scores/GPA. For the top schools, they’ll often want high scores AND a high GPA showing both knowledge and the ability to work well for teachers. A low GPA should throw a red flag to those adcoms.</p>
<p>From what I’ve seen working in a high school for years, scores do tend to correlate with ability (though a 50 pt SAT difference is not enough of a difference). They do not show work ethic - that’s their drawback.</p>
<p>The one of mine that I had to bring home was a NMSF and almost aced the math portion of her SAT - her score was phenomenal - first time.</p>
<p>Her gpa was average - she did manage to graduate in the top 10%, and she was NOT college material.</p>
<p>I know that whether or not a kid is college material is hard to see in numbers on a paper, because other things figure in, maturity level, etc.</p>
<p>I guess my own experience has me a bit jaded in regards to “stellar” SAT scores.</p>
<p>My middle kid had above average (nationally - not by CC standards) SAT scores, an excellent gpa, ranked in the top 6% and currently has about a 3.9 gpa in college.</p>
<p>That’s what I mean about SAT scores not really being a great indicator.</p>
<p>Based on pretty much every study out there, a statistical basis, test scores are almost as a good an indicator as HS gpa. GPA+test scores is a slightly better predictor that GPA alone. GPA+subect test scores is better that GPA+SAT/ACT scores. And GPA+AP/IB scores is the most predictive.</p>
<p>Of course for certain STEM programs, particularly engineering, a high Math 2 test is de facto required. Otherwise, the adcom will be concerned that the student will struggle with the concepts.</p>
<p>Again, depends on the state and the honor program. At the University of Michigan, for example, the bare minimum for admission to the LSA honors program is a 1400 on the M+CR.</p>
<p>“Based on pretty much every study out there, a statistical basis, test scores are almost as a good an indicator as HS gpa. GPA+test scores is a slightly better predictor. GPA+subect test scores is better that GPA+SAT/ACT scores. And GPA+AP/IB scores is the most predictive.”</p>
<p>That makes sense to me, I guess - when you look at the whole picture together and also factor in AP scores you get a much clearer picture.</p>
<p>“Of course for certain STEM programs, particularly engineering, a high Math 2 test is de facto required. Otherwise, the adcom will be concerned that the student will struggle with the concepts.”</p>
<p>My youngest is going mechanical engineering next year. No subject test is required. She’s sound in math though. She’s taking AP Calculus this year for fun and doing well.</p>
<p>cromette - your NMSF had a GPA that didn’t match. The two should match for the best predictor. A mismatch is often an indicator that they won’t have success unless coming from a really tough hs.</p>
<p>Your other student - are they in a school where their scores matched or were on the high end? Then they should do well with a 3.9 GPA from school. They have proven they do well with their peers. Had they gone instead to a higher score school they may very well NOT have done as well.</p>
<p>That has been my experience anyway. A few students in the lower 25% of students can do well, but they generally aren’t in the “heavier” majors. There is no one predictor or combo thereof that will work for every individual - only for groups.</p>
<p>Or, if they are coming from a terrible high school. My DD had almost perfect SAT scores, including two subject tests, but a high B average in high school. This combo shut her out of top UC’s which, despite their holistic reviews, place a premium on GPA. She was admitted to every private U she applied to, but without $. She ended up at one of the mid-tier UC’s where she is thriving, taking upper division courses as a freshman. The course work is challenging and interesting, something that was lacking in high school. She has benefitted from the emphasis on essays and tests vs. the endless reams of busywork the high school dished out.</p>
<p>“Your other student - are they in a school where their scores matched or were on the high end? Then they should do well with a 3.9 GPA from school. They have proven they do well with their peers. Had they gone instead to a higher score school they may very well NOT have done as well.”</p>
<p>The 3.9 is in college. In other words, low (by CC standards), high HS gpa - GREAT degree of success in college.</p>
<p>ucbalumnus - thanks - that’s sort of the information I was looking for - but skimming it, it actually proves my point. Most of the automatic merit aid were for SAT scores in or about the range I cited.</p>
<p>^^^ I realize they are in college. I apologize for the confusion calling it a “school.”</p>
<p>What I wanted to know is if they were in a college where their scores matched or were on the high end. Different colleges have difference levels of scores for the majority of their students. A student who may succeed at one level may not succeed at another with different peers. A certain level is not necessary for “success” in life, of course, (both offer degrees) but the course content between the higher level schools and the lower level schools is not always identical - or even close.</p>
<p>IMO students should be matched ability-wise to their college (or honors level within some colleges) for the “best” results (based upon students returning and sharing experiences both good and bad).</p>
<p>MaineLonghorn: “If you want to get into the engineering honors program at UT-Austin, you supposedly need higher than 1500 M+CR. My son had just under 1500 and didn’t make it in. He was OOS but I heard that it’s equally as selective in-state.”</p>
<p>I am not surprised. UT’s admission standards are very high - PERIOD. The highest of all public schools in the state, and probably pretty high nationally too. Very good school. Admissions to Engineering may be even tougher, and admissions to HONORS Engineering - well, yea…not surprised.</p>
<p>Not sure what you mean by scores matching. Minimum honors entry criteria is 1220. She met that minimum. Is that what you mean? The school is definitely a good fit for her and is strong in her major. She’s just good at what she does - She would have been fine in ANY school as an English major, MOST schools as a music or art major, NO schools as a math or science major. The school is the same as she is - strong in some areas, other areas are non-existent. It’s a small regional public University. A good one.</p>
<p>I get that higher SATs MIGHT mean more scholarship money - but I haven’t seen that happen that much for state schools. NMSF, yes, and I understand studying early to get that - but if you did not study, and did NOT get that, the ship has usually sailed by the time you get to actually TAKING and retaking the test.</p>
<p>There are large non-NMF merit scholarships available for some publics…and some kids test and retest for the high scores to get those awards.</p>
<p>Most of the automatic merit aid were for SAT scores in or about the range I cited.</p>
<p>Your point was that mostly only NMFs get that money so why bother to try for a higher SAT or ACT. That’s not true.</p>
<p>I don’t agree that your point was proved. At the schools ranked about 100 or better, you’re not going to get much for the range you cited.</p>