<p>which student would you accept to a school high gpa/low sat or high sat and low gpa?</p>
<p>Depends, how low is low and how high is high? If it's a 2400 SAT with a 2.5 gpa, compared with a 1400 SAT with a 4.0 GPA, then i'd assume the first person was at a tough high school/tough courses, second person easy high school fluff courses and pick first. If the difference is smaller then they're roughly the same.</p>
<p>I'd pick high SAT/low GPA basically no matter what the GPA was, unless it was ridiculously bad like 1.6 or something. GPA means little to me, some of the most idiotic people I've ever met have good HS GPAs because they spend all their time studying, but add very little in terms of the intellectual environment of the school. They, of course, also have low SAT scores no matter how many prep courses they take.
Other people I know go to extremely easy HSs where anyone with half a brain can get a good GPA, and then they complain that their SAT score is so low but they have such a great GPA.</p>
<p>Depends on the class ranking and couse loads too...</p>
<p>Class rank means even less to me... which is better? 1st in a class full of stupid people, or second to last in a class full of highly intelligent people? I know which I would choose.</p>
<p>I would guess class rank is to measure grade inflation, having a GPA of 5.6 yet being placed 50 out of 500 students could raise some questions.</p>
<p>GPA is just too much of a variable depending on different schools, locations. THe same person doing exactly the same thing could have a gpa of 4.0 and rank 1 in one school, and a gpa of 3.0 and top 25% in another. IT doesn't make sense to compare applicants using something like this as opposed to a test that is the same for every single person taking it.</p>
<p>thats exactly my point. thousands of kids take the same SAT. yet colelge think that HS grades are important and are an indicator of how person A will do in college</p>
<p>I would at first look at how the kid is doing relative to others. </p>
<p>Even if there is no rank.. at least the Common App ponts out if a kid has a "6.3" GPA.. points out that the highest GPA in the class is a "7.8". </p>
<p>One reason why a kid with high SAT/low GPA will probably have an easier time getting in than one with a high GPA/low SAT is that GPA can't be standardized in the same way as SAT..</p>
<p>However, if the kid with the high GPA & low SAT took a rigorous courseload and has stellar EC's.. that kid may still get into an elite college.</p>
<p>I'd like to say that there is a balance between GPA & courseload.. an applicant with a 3.7 GPA and a 6 AP-courseload will probably have a better chance than an applicant with a 4.0 GPA and a 1 AP-courseload.. assuming that they go to the same school with similar SAT's and EC's...</p>
<p>Colleges think high school grades are important for the same reason they look at the SAT, it is a good indicator of success in college and life after college.</p>
<p>The SAT is four hours. High school, four years. How can you equate those two? While there is grade inflation and there are people who just aren't test takers, I would say thosle who are the most serious about college would have decent SAT scores in combination with a decent GPA...</p>
<p>SAT is considered important because it is a way of comparing everyone across the country and has some (even though quite small..) positive correlation with success in college. </p>
<p>I don't think either one is more important than the other.. whatever it takes to show that the applicant is ready for college-level work. The SAT tests abilities which are necessary to do well in college and GPA tests performance in an academic environment.. one tests aptitude, the other tests achievement.. both are important.</p>
<p>haru07, I highly doubt that you would have this opinion if you went to an extremely tough high school with highly intelligent people and therefore couldn't take many AP classes or get extremely high grades, yet had to work extremely hard and had the same (oftentimes much, much higher) SAT score as someone with a 4.0+ GPA and 100 APs who goes to an easy as pie public school with 40% of the kids not even going to a 4 year college</p>
<p>instead of worrying about this nonsense, just work hard and do well on both.</p>
<p>To me, GPA doesn't reflect intelligence, just hardwork. Weighting systems also do not always help honors students as much as they should. A 3.8 in all standard level classes should not be equivalent to a 3.3 in all honors...none of the systems account for the overall strain of a combination of multiple AP and Honors courses.</p>
<p>With hardwork, you can do good on the SATs, but I think there is much more intelligence involved in SATs because there is so much information on it that no student can simply "cram" the week before. </p>
<p>In my opinion, the interview reflects intelligence the most. There is no way to fully prepare yourself for the questions asked on an interview.</p>
<p>I might be a little biased however...a 3.2 student with a 30 ACT.</p>
<p>GPA means a lot if you take Ap courses and have a descent score a 5 or 4 on AP Test but have an average Sat scores , You could get in to an elite college than having a low GPA. But then again it is only my opinion plus some friends that got in. ( Scoring the same on Ap exams going to an average high school and elite high school would be something they would look at)</p>
<p>I hope that colleges like students with low gpas and high sats because thats what I am. I have a 3.5 uw and a 3.9 w but I have take 10 of the 13 APs offered in my school and I've gotten a 5,5,4,3,3 (one was self studied). I also have a 32 ACT score (33E, 33M, 35R, 27S, 11essay). I'm applying to some elite schools so I'm hoping they'll take my rigorous courseload into account when they see my gpa..</p>
<p>Most colleges say that a high GPA (and rigor of classes) can make up for 'modest' scores, but scores CANNOT make up for a crappy GPA.</p>
<p>Koolaznpygmy - the problem that you'll run into is that, unfortunately, you're not the only one who has challenged him/herself in high school, and further - many have challenged themselves and SUCCEEDED. A 3.5 certainly doesn't constitute failure, but the point is that there are others who have challenged themselves, succeeded, and gotten good test scores.</p>
<p>As much as I'd like to think so, there makeup of my high school does not reflect the total applicant pool. I think I'm at the near top of the kids from my senior class, but sadly there are others around the country who have completed more than I.</p>
<p>I agree with mlevine...without interviewing each kid, neither one is s sure bet and neither should be considered more than the other. As for the comment about intelligence predicited by SAT and GPA reflecting hard work--what does that mean? I would much rather have someone work for me down the road who works hard, versus someone who is intelligent and coasts. Interview and essay would be the deciding factor in both cases.</p>
<p>I don't think so - colleges report that if a kid hasn't challenged him/herself or hasn't gotten good grades, but has great test scores, the test scores won't do much to save the academic record. In almost all cases (except maybe big public universities) GPA/course selection trumps testing.</p>