<p>One’s GPA is NOT a better reflection of intelligence than one’s SAT, though it is typically a better reflection of work ethic. GPAs are far from standardized - some high schools practice extensive grade inflation to meet requirements, while others grade harshly and in some cases even practice grade deflation - while the SAT is the same for all takers, not just down to the subjects and the difficulty but the questions. Anyone can kiss up to his or her teachers - or just have parents who are well-connected enough to pull strings - and get a 4.0. Getting a high score on the SAT takes real intelligence, particularly in the Critical Reading section that is difficult to teach for, though it’s questionable that pure intelligence is really what makes a successful career. The magical almost-infallible correlation with intelligence that we expect GPA to have just isn’t there.</p>
<p>This is all to say nothing of the undue importance given to class rank; don’t get me started on that…</p>
<p></p>
<p>Yeah, I can rant for hours (and have), but part of it is that I’m upset that, though my standardized test scores are well into the 99th percentile, my GPA is lackluster (about a 3.73). It’s not because I’m lazy, though, and it definitely isn’t because I’m unintelligent. It’s because for a long time I just had poor organization and communication skills and now I’ll never get anywhere close to a 4.0.</p>
<p>Ugh.</p>
<p>It seems that everyone on here who is commenting by saying that “GPA tests over 4 years and is therefore better”, is kind of ignoring the general question as to the environment that one is growing up in. I’m not going to bother reciting everything, but there are too many variables associated with a statistic over that long of a period. The SAT on the other hand tests, as so many people have said on here, “your basic knowledge,” and it is therefore imperative that you do well on it.</p>
<p>You know what someone with a great GPA and a bad SAT shows? Grade inflation at the school, possibly easy classes, and not smart enough to master basic to intermediate reasoning skills on a standardized test.
You know what someone with a great SAT and a bad to okay GPA shows? Maybe lazy (can be ameliorated by EC’s), but certainly smart enough to display reasoning and analytical skills, a must for someone who wants to achieve in life.</p>
<p>You might argue and say that some people are just bad test takers. This is not an excuse, because once you enter college, and try for a masters or some other degree, you will be bombarded by even more of these tests: CPA, CCIE, OPFE, Cali - BAR, and LSDT are but a few of these.</p>
<p>I think the SAT is overrated and unfair. I scored very poorly on it but was consistently an honor student throughout h.s. and on the Dean’s list throughout college. I had a lot of trouble getting into colleges because of my SAT score (and I wasn’t applying to Ivys or even extremely competitive schools). Even though I had a great GPA and was an A/B student in h.s., I had to beg my way into college via interviews.</p>
<p>Neither is more important. You can’t really have one over the other. I’ve never met someone with a high GPA that got into a school without the SAT requirement and there are a lot of people in my school that fit that description.</p>
<p>Attractive vs beautiful? Which is more importamt? How about tall vs fit? I think we should aspire to make the most of the hand we are dealt.</p>
<p>Today, for me, that means a day off! Maybe I should get off of here!</p>
<p>What ParthivNaresh said.</p>
<p>It’s not that I don’t sympathize with people who have a high GPA and a low (or not high enough for the colleges they want to get into) SAT score; it’s just that GPA I don’t think shows anywhere near as much in terms of college readiness: it’s not only that it’s unstandardized and comprises numerous variables; it’s also that education will only become more test-based as one enters college. How many college professors do you think actually check homework assignments every day, give any kind of extra credit, and screw your grade over for not having annotated a book?</p>
<p>I think GPA should be considered in college admissions, but only as a crude estimate of effort, such as jobs held or extracurricular leadership. It’s not fair that they stack students up first by GPA (which typically means eliminating ones with, at the most selective colleges, below a 3.5 or so, without even looking at other factors), and THEN by SAT scores and other factors. In the most extreme example, one student could have all 89.5s and teachers who round them up to As, and have a 4.0, while another could have one 89.99, a teacher who does not round up, and 100+ in every other class, and be forever denied the opportunity to look like the perfect student. This is all to say nothing of class difficulty, harshness of grading, situations at home and in personal lives, etc. In contrast, the SAT is the same for everyone.</p>
<p>Those with high SAT scores might want to consider applying to schools in England and Sccotland, where they go much more by standardized test scores than in the US.</p>
<p>Well GPA various from student to student as well. For example if you take Spanish in my HS it is much harder to get an A/B while in German and Chinese even at the honors level 90%+ of the students get A’s. There are teachers withing subjects that are very hard. For example if you get Mr.X for English you are pretty much destined for a B-C while Mrs.Y gives out A’s for attendance. The students who are savy will optimize their schedules to take the honors/AP classes with the easiest teacher. That is why are Val has a SAT score of 1900 and has never gotten an AP score above a 3.</p>
<p>I agree with the premise that SAT’s should be given a larger eye than GPA. In my case, my private “liberal arts” esque school grades extremely “stingily” and doesn’t offer AP classes nor SAT prep. I have a GPA of a 3.6 (taking hardest classes possible), but that should be very high compared to my school. Unfortunately, my school also does not give a class rank (neither to colleges nor to students). My school though, (Park School of Baltimore), has an excellent rep sheet of colleges, in fact, probably the best or one of the best in Maryland. I believe that the SAT gives the students an opportunity to really show their knowledge in contrast to other schools. For example, a b-plus in my school is excellent, while a b or b plus in my local public school is not good at all. SAT ftw!</p>
<p>I think both can be flawed to a point but I think GPA can be more flawed than SAT scores. I know that in my school a lot of times the grades you get can be largely based on your teacher. In my 9th grade, there were 2 teachers that taught freshmen history. The average grade that 1 teacher gave was a 87, the average grade the other teacher gave was a 77 <— Big difference. With SAT scores, everyone takes the same test, but I admit even SATs can be flawed to in the sense that because the test is 4 hours, anything can happen, but at the same time, anything can happen in the school year too that can affect ones grade.
In my high school career, I can name 2+ times where I strongly believed I was cheated out of my grade not because I did something, but either because my teacher messed up or because of circumstances. In one case my teacher left 1 month before the end of the year due to a medical problem and we had a substitute give us a final exam on something we never learned and my grade just dropped bc of it.</p>
<p>So overall I think it is important to have both a high GPA and SAT, but I believe that SAT should be looked at more than GPA.</p>