<p>I know that many colleges who accept SAT I require SAT II, so how do they weight the two tests? Are they about equally important? Is one MUCH more important, or just a little more important?</p>
<p>I'm asking because I used to think SAT I was more important, but now that I look at the subjects, I think that students take the subjects that they excel in, so the SAT II is an indicator of students' performance in their best subjects (and likely the ones they are going to major in)... it seems now that SAT II is more important.</p>
<p>SAT II seems as if it'd be more important, considering you're supposed to be a specialist in that particular field; it's a talent you're meant to do well in.</p>
<p>Flippy, thanks for the info! I didn't know they were that oriented towards the SAT II's... but then again, Caltech is a specialty school, so it seems more likely that they would care much more about the math/science areas than the SAT I which covers a broad range. </p>
<p>atrophicwhisper, that's what I was thinking as well... I really hope I did super super super super well on the SAT II (I took them in December). I did well on the SAT I, but SAT II might be a even bigger chunk of your college resume.</p>
<p>ah shoot you serious? i didnt even know that the SATII's were that important until this year, so i didnt quite study for my chemistry. blahh. so if you had a mediocre SAT score (~2000), but a couple high SATII's(780+), vs a 2300+ SAT score and some 600~ SATII's, which one would be better? and im talking about aiming for the top 20 colleges.</p>
<p>and eck, would a 750 in chemistry be alright for a top college? only better than 82%...</p>
<p>750 is great for a top school. It seems kind of low, but you realize that the percentiles on these test are skewed because of the sheer number of qualified students taking them. Really, anywhere from 750-800 is great for top schools.</p>
<p>I think the SAT is more important than the SAT IIs. For some reason, it seems easier to get high scores on the SAT IIs than on the SAT. The curves are really messed up in our favor.</p>
<p>runest_flect, that's my problem, too! I didn't realize SAT II were so important until recently, a little before I took them. I think my SAT scores are good for the colleges that I'm applying to, but I don't know how well I did on my SAT II's... (scores still pending)</p>
<p>But then again, it is true that people often say "Well, I know someone who got into Harvard, and they got ______ on their SAT's." We don't often hear "I know someone who got into Harvard and they got ______ and ______ and ______ on their SAT II's"</p>
<p>Typically, if someone can do well on the SAT Is, it's implied that that person has the ability to learn well, thus leading to good SAT II scores. It's that simple.</p>
<p>Not necessarily. SAT Subject Tests test knowledge while the SAT I tests skill. If you didn't have good review of the testing material (which happens in shadier high schools), then your SAT II's are obviously not going to be spectacular. </p>
<p>For example, The College Board recommends that one has at least one year of chemistry before taking the SAT Chemistry test. I would not have done well had I not taken AP Chemistry simply because my first year of chemistry did not offer enough preparation (we did not even know what polyatomic ions were!).</p>
<p>It's not that simple. The SAT I is a good general knowledge test for those who test well. If you don't test well, you are at a disadvantage even if you are very intelligent. So I would say that high SATs are a good indicator of high math/verbal skills, but low SATs aren't necessarily good indicators of anything. </p>
<p>The SAT IIs are MUCH harder. You can be someone who "learns well" and still do badly on the SAT IIs if you haven't had good teaching or good courses. You can take AP bio and get an A, but if the class or the teacher was sub-par, you will still bomb the SAT II bio test.</p>
<p>And my advice to all: Take ACT and if you do well, use it in place of SAT and SAT IIs.</p>
<p>SAT1 scores depend on how few you miss. Many people have perfect scores. At the high end, similar scores show similar skill.</p>
<p>SAT 2 scores depend on how many you get right. Since the test covers many areas of the subject matter, you can excel in some and not in others. I don't think anybody is supposed to get them all right. That's why people can miss so many questions and still get a let's say 750. Even at the high end, similar scores don't show similar knowledge. They show similar mastery of the subject.</p>
<p>i think sat 1 are far more important. sat 2 are very subjective since they cover so much material, pretty randomly as ive seen on the bio sats. plus for people who didnt take ap science or watever, they are mosy likely not going to do well on the subject test because honors just doesnt cover the material efficiently, which i also unforunently found out. i honoslty think that sat subject tests matter really only if youve taken them after the Ap class, showing that yes you had the knowledge with you and still were able to do good or bad. with honors, its kind of stretching it. does that make sense?</p>
<p>okay, i know that the sat II's are more specialized but what exactly do they do for you when you go to college? when do you have to take these subject tests and in general which ones are required by most colleges?</p>
<p>i plan to go into pre-med so which subject tests do i most likely have to take?</p>