<p>^^^^ It is emphasized countless times that SAT is one of the measures looked at by the ADCOMs. I don't think they use SAT as an indicator of hardwork or motivation (although SAT scores may correlate with that, who knows), but mostly to confirm school work results. Recs and ECs are used to get a sense of other qualities of the applicant. Any one particular requirement can be questioned, but all together they give a more complete picture, so why not take SAT into consideration? A hypothetical example:
Two students from two different schools taking similar courses get 4.0 GPA. ECs, Recs and Essays are comparable, etc. Let us assume that if they took SAT with normal preparation, they end up with about 2100 each. (In real life, with thousands of kids applying to a given top school, it is quite likely that more than two kids have very similar credentials.)
Now let us say that kid "A" decides to study hard for SAT, takes prep classes, etc., and gets 2300. Without question, he will be preferred to kid "B" who didn't go the extra mile.</p>
<p>GPA can only go so far because it will differ greatly between two high schools next door. Forget about two highschools on other sides of the country.</p>
<p>ECs are also affected by where you live. I am in the DC area. We have the hill, NIH, NIST, NASA SHARP in PG county, UMD, GW, Georgetown, K street, and other internship/EC oppertunities that you can get to by public transportation. Someone in Iowa cannot do all of this without spending a fair amount of money for transportation and other costs.</p>
<p>Teacher recs are hard for some people too. At my school scheduals change every semester due to seveal semester long classes. I have never had an english teacher for a full year. I could probably point to sevearl students who only have a few teachers they have the full year junior year. If you do not connect with those teachers, it is hard to get a good rec IMO. Also, the rec has to be fairly specific and personal. I have teachers who teach 5 periods and have 150 students. I would have to do a lot to stand out and have several specific events stay in my teacher's memory.</p>
<p>SAT is the one thing that can level out all of the applicants. If you are applying to Harvard, I doubt your odds of getting in change much between a 2200 and 2390, but if you get a 2400, I would say it helps some. The other parts of the app (except maybe GPA) will vary so much due to interest, availability, etc, that SAT is the easiest way to compare applicants. </p>
<p>I have seen non hooked people with average GPAs get into top colleges. I have seen non hooked people with who probably got soso teacher recs get into top colleges. I have seen non hooked people do their essays the night before and get into top colleges. I have yet to see a non hooked applicant get into a top college with an average SAT (~1700-1900).</p>
<p>The SAT/GPA approach works best for state schools and big public unis. They admit so many applicants that it is easiest to accept every one who surpasses XGPA and Y SAT (so long as they show human qualities in ECs, essays, and recs) and reject everyone with less than a fairly low GPA and SAT. Private colleges will need more than number stats to admit/reject applicnats, but it is fair to say if you have a 2.0 and 1500 you are not getting into a top college. However, when students are in range, it is hard to say who will beat out who. Those with perfects are going to start out ahead in the game. I am not saying that SATs benefit anyone's inteligence, and SATs are just a factor in admissions. They are one of the more important ones though.</p>
<p>That happened to me too. I applied to all the schools and got rejected accept for my state school! When that happens it is the most devestating experience! You will be depressed for months. Why will you be depressed? Because you feel that your four years of high school is a waste! What really sucks is that my parents thought I wasn't going to do well in college and succomb to peer pressure. I proved them wrong. As of right now, I'm getting straight A's and I'm involved in alot of organizations. Yes, to all the people that looked down on me I proudly gloat in their faces that I'm having a ball and getting straight A's. In other words, if this happens turn it around and make it into your favor!</p>
<p>Brittany</p>
<p>On the subject of SATs:</p>
<p>A standardized test like the SAT measures something, but it does not measure anything and everything about a candidate. Yet that something it does measure is useful in admissions-- a glimpse at a combination of intellectual skill, academic preparation, and stress-management abilities that can help a college roughly approximate one's readiness for college. I say roughly approximate, however, for a reason. The SAT is a very small part of the picture in most cases. Yes, a person who gets an 1800 combined is likely on a different tier than a person who gets a 2300 or a 1500. But when it comes to smaller differences (2000 vs. 2100, 2200 vs. 2300), it is only meaningful in context with the GPA and other factors like courseload taken, extracurriculurs, etc. Subscores flunctuate at the drop of a hat. Kids can take the thing 5 times and while their scores might improve dramatically, their academic, classroom prowess in that area remains stagnant. I think adcoms recognize this fact. Obviously, a university has to rely more on numerical factors like GPA and class rank and SAT scores to make decisions (there's simply no way they could sort through all the applications otherwise!), but I think the more selective ones at least make an effort to examine other factors as long as the scores suggest an applicant in is the general ballpark of the student body. Now, part of the reason I like smaller, Midwestern LACs is that they admit some lower scoring (comparatively), but involved and interesting individuals because they have to time to actually read and review each application more thoroughly. I think some people that are genuinely bad test takers are just as or more intelligent and capable of insight as students who test 200 points above them. A more balanced look at all application factors, in my opinion, produces a more rounded class. But that's just my personal preference. </p>
<p>My 2 cents.</p>
<p>Leshachikha- I think you said what I was trying to say, but in a nicer way.</p>
<p>Yes, I agree a 1600 applicant is not in the same tier as a 2300 applicant. But as Leshachika is right that splitting hairs over 2100 vs. 2000 or 2200 vs. 2250 really doesn't mean anything. After a certain point, other factors have to take over (GPA, essays, recs, ECs, etc.).</p>
<p>But the SAT is not "God". The SAT is a very flawed (but still often beneficial) human creation, God is infinite, ineffable and infailible.</p>
<p>illinois_kid, I can understand SAT is not "God". But Ivy > SAT. Is an Ivy closer to being "God"? Just curious. Is there anything greater than an Ivy?</p>
<p>Going back to rolling admissions.... is November too late? I want to apply to U of Mich. as my sort-of-safety, but I didn't realize they were rolling (I know, major lack of research on my part). I am from a different state, but my stats/scores are higher that Michigan's average. Still, are my chances of admission drastically lower now?</p>
<p>Absolutely not. Ivy is greater than SAT, but is nothing compared to God. The Ivies may be great, but they are still flawed human institutions, where as God is infinite, and perfect. All worldly structures are nothing compared to God. </p>
<p>Sorry to hijack this thread with theology. I just am not a big supporter of the SAT and chimed in there. And then other people questioned my theology, which I responded to.</p>
<p>When I graduated from high school, I was accepted at 5 colleges, but I wasn't crazy about any of them. So I went to a junior college for 1 year. Then I transferred into a college that I REALLY wanted to attend, and graduated after 3 years. </p>
<p>Even though I spent 3 years there instead of 4, I DID get to graduate from a school I was proud to attend. I think this is an underused strategy. Unless you reall LOVE a college (safety, match, or reach), it seems like it would be better to go to a community college, get great grades, apply again, and get in a college your really really want to attend. You'll be listing your alma mater on resumes the rest of your life--why settle for a place you're not crazy about?</p>
<p>This approach might not work if you want to go to an Ivy, because their transfer admissions are sometimes even more competitive than their freshmen admissions. But for most other colleges it works--especially if your SATs are good and your high school grades weren't great.</p>
<p>I still think SATs don't measure everything. English is not my first language so I naturally score lower on the verbal portion. I have spent most of my elementary and middle school years at a school abroad. Even though the curriculum was based in english, we were taught buy teachers who did not speak or write in perfect english. So naturally I don't score high in the verbal section as others. Does that mean I am less intelligent than someone who has a similar math score but a higher verbal score?</p>
<p>I was talking in the perspective of a native english speaker, probably in the USA. That is why international applicants take the TOFEL and other tests to show that they are proficient in English. Also, I said the SAT is "god" lower case, not the great being, but a good SAT can open a door or two unlike a good GPA.</p>
<p>If helps any, every year there is a survey done by UCLA of most of the college freshmen in America. Every year, the survey shows that 85%+ are attending their first or second choice college. While there are always going to be horror stories, in truth, being rejected from every single college on your list is a relatively rare occurance, and is almost always connected to students who aimed a little too high or didn't treat their applications to their match/safety schools seriously. </p>
<p>This is an anxious time for everyone. One thing that can help minimize the anxiety once your applications are out the door (assuming you sent them to a realistic mix of colleges) is to back away from constantly mulling over and talking about them. Take a break from talking to others who are just as anxious as you - anxiety tends to breed more anxiety. Find something else to occupy your time and attention for the next few months, and trust that, for the majority of college applicants, things work out just fine in the end. As others have noted, even if the unexpected happens, it is NOT going to be the end of the world, and you WILL be able to deal with whatever comes down the pike in April. </p>
<p>So, my advice: Don't let anxiety and worry eat up your life over the next few months. If you did your best on your applications, sent them to a realistic mix of schools, you've done all you can do. Take a deep breath, stop obsessing over the results, and enjoy your senior year!</p>
<p>Nelle,
November is not "too late" for a rolling admissions school. </p>
<p>Whether UMich is a safety school for you, however, is another question, and will depend on how your grades/curriculum/test scores match up with what UMich typically wants in out of state students. UMich has also become increasingly sensitive to being viewed as a "Safety" school, so I would advise that your chances of admissions will go up exponentially if you have other reasons for wanting to apply to UMich. </p>
<p>Do some more research to make sure you're not just throwing UMich in the hopper out of fear. No school is a safety school if the thought of attending makes your skin crawl, and, to be honest, applicants often subtly convey that in their applications without realizing it.</p>
<p>Also, I said the SAT is "god" lower case, not the great being, but a good SAT can open a door or two unlike a good GPA.>></p>
<p>Actually, the opposite is true. Most colleges are more likely to take a chance on someone with a high GPA but lower test scores than the other way around. A good GPA in a solid high school curriculum opens more doors than a high SAT score with so-so GPA in most cases.</p>
<p>Agree with Carolyn, although I believe that SAT is an important factor in admissions.
Great SAT score points to good potential, I think. But a low GPA suggests that the kid is motivated or hardworking. A lazy kid with a good potential is probably not much liked by ADCOMs. However low SAT score does not necessarily mean that the kid is dumb: the kid may just be not good timed tests asking tricky questions. In real life one usually gets extra time and questions are generally straightforward. High GPA kid can handle those well.</p>
<p>"the kid may just be not good timed tests asking tricky questions"</p>
<p>So in college you have no timed tests and they do not contain trick questions? In life you do not have time limits and you never encounter tough questions? Noone has all the time in the world to do anything. SATs are just one timed test to see (well I have no idea what they see, but colleges seem to know how to interpret those scores).</p>
<p>The SAT is not perfect. Neither is GPA. Each has its own flaws.
GPAs in highschool are inflated at many schools. Different schools grade differently. At my public highschool it is very hard to get an A in AP English. At the public highschool 15 minutes away a lot more kids get As in AP english. We are in the same district and have the same curriculum. We are both affluent schools. You cannot compare two schools 15 minutes from eachother. How can you compare different ones across country?<br>
The problem with SATs is that scores will vary test to test. If you take three tests in a row, your score may be 700 math then 670 math then 730 math. It changes based on questions, curves, and other factors. The best student will get 800 all three times, but there is so much room for careless error that perfects are generally not possible. Colleges take SATs in ranges, so 30 or 40 points will not make or break you. e </p>
<p>"High GPA kid can handle those well."
And so can the other kid. The other kid may just be faster on his feet. He may be able to do even more than the "high GPA kid".</p>
<p>College admissions is not emperical and there is no set formula to get into any selective school. SATs are important or colleges would not ask for them. GPA is important or colleges would not ask for your grades. ECs are important or colleges would not ask for them. Same goes for recs, essays, interviews, displayed interest, and everything else that goes into applying for college. What is most important is probably a combination of SATs and GPA because if both are low, good luck. If both are high, you are half way to acceptance.</p>
<p>the best thing is to eat a year of community college and re-apply. Many states actually have special programs for people who transfer from community colleges to their larger universities.</p>
<p>Of course, this isn't really a problem at all if you include two or three safeties in your applications.</p>
<p>If you don't get in, you'd have many options including taking a gap year to travel, work a fulltime job or do volunteer work fulltime while figuring out a better application strategy. A productive gap year will make you a stronger admissions candidate, but still won't necessarily boost you into reaches that rejected you before.</p>
<p>^^^ That is a simplistic view. Pretty useless.<br>
Based on the discussion so far what one should do is this. Find match schools based on a realistic assessment of one's stats. Then a think a bit too highly of oneself and throw in a couple of reaches. Finally, be very pessimistic about the chances and look for "sure-bet" (=safety) schools that one would love to attend. Apply in time and wait. Do not worry too much. In the unlikely event that the applicant does not get in anywhere, it is not the end of the world. One can bounce back successfully by a variety of means, including a productive gap year.</p>
<p>I applied to 5 colleges that I wanted, and got rejected from all of them. I then applied to another university with later deadline knowing I was going to get in because of guaranteed admissions.</p>