<p>Someone recently told me that colleges like to see high SAT more than high GPA because colleges would rather take someone who is naturally smart rather than someone who tries very hard all year round. Is this true? Lets say you have a 2300 SAT but a 3.5 GPA, could you get into, lets say, Yale, over a student who has a 3.9 but a 2100 GPA?</p>
<p>Actually, this is untrue. They would prefer an applicant with both a high GPA and high SAT score.</p>
<p>The admissions counselor I spoke with told me the opposite, though. She said that adcoms prefer students with lower SAT scores and high GPAs because at least that shows you're a hard worker, while someone with a high SAT score and low GPA is just a lazy, brilliant kid. They'd rather have the former than the latter. Ideally, you should have both a high SAT and GPA.</p>
<p>This was also explained in The Truth About Getting In, by K. Cohen. You might want to read that.</p>
<p>In my opinion after researching the Ivies extensively, there are much better chance for a student with consistent high GPA in a rigorous curriculumn and low SAT than a student with a low GPA in a not so rigorous curriculumn with 2400 SAT.
So hypthetically</p>
<p>Student A: GPA 4 (UW) in a rigorous curriculum with 2200 SAT
Student B: GPA 3.5 (UW) in a not so rigorous curriculum with 2400 SAT
from the same school similar ECs, RECs, and Essay.</p>
<p>Student A have 2/3 chances to get into HYPMS then student B.</p>
<p>collegefreak12,</p>
<p>Colleges don't want to take kids who are just "smart"... They want to take kids who work hard and are succesful... Also, your intelligence DOES play a large role in your gpa (like performance on tests), so don't assume that hard work is all that factors into GPA... I'd rather take a kid who tries hard even if he messes up his SATs.</p>
<p>Well you see... A 2200 SAT is really closs to a 2400 SAT so there is not so much difference there. However, I think what the OP is trying to ask is same rigorous curriculum,2400 vs 2100 SAT,however the 2400 has a significantly lower GPA (lets say barely top 10%) while the 2100 SAT ranks at the top of his/her class.</p>
<p>If the curriculumn is same then a 2400 SAT will certainly be preferable as the grade difference can be teacher dependent as most teacher likes one student more than others and so the grades can be misleading. The Standardized test difference of 300 says a different picture. </p>
<p>So any college will prefer a 3.5 (UW) / 2400 (SAT) with same load than 3.9 (UW) with 2100 (SAT)</p>
<p>Actually, what is weighed heaviest is a student's transcript. A 3.5UW is too low for Ivies, anyways, so ParentOfIvyHope, I really doubt the student with the 3.5UW would get chosen over the one with a 3.9UW, even if the latter student has a lower SAT.</p>
<p>I cannot be certain but until or unless there is a course load difference, a difference of GPA (3.9 or 3.5) won't overcome the difference (2100 or 2400).</p>
<p>A 300 point difference at SAT is much more prominent than a .4 GPA difference.</p>
<p>Because suppose the coruse load of both is such that they get a .6 addition for weighted GPA.</p>
<p>Then would you say a 4.1 W GPA with 2400 is less preferable than a 4.5 W 2100 SAT.</p>
<p>Since it is 3.5 you think it is low but if it unweighted in a rigorous curriculumn then it would be sufficient supported by a 2400 SAT</p>
<p>You would be much better off having a high GPA and a high SAT score. For something like Yale, you'll need both a high GPA and a high SAT score.</p>
<p>I had a 4.4W/3.85UW and 2300 and got waitlisted there last year.</p>
<p>Kyt: How was your course load in the 4 years:</p>
<p>9:
10:
11:
12:</p>
<p>ParentofIvyHope, a 3.5UW is suspiciously low, even for the top schools. And yes, a .6 difference is huge. At my school, a tenth or two-tenths of GPA can cause someone to drop a dozen places in rank, which colleges are really concerned with.</p>
<p>I would say that the only time SAT scores would count more would be if one student had a 3.9uw and a 2050 SAT compared to someone with a 3.6/7uw 2300 and they were taking about the same course load. The latter with the higher SAT score would probably have a slightly higher chance, especially if his grades have been on an upward trend.</p>
<p>I have abyssmal test scores (630-580-580 for SAT 1 / 25 for ACT) but a high GPA (3.98 UW, 4.22 W) and just got admitted into Dartmouth, Penn, UChicago, Nortwestern, Rice, Syracuse and Carnegie Mellon. </p>
<p>I knew going into college admissions that I would have bad test scores, so I made sure to COMPENSATE in every other area. I had solid grades, an extremely impressive set of extracurricular activities, original experiences to write about and worked my ass off to create a wonderful personal statement (the final draft was a combination between my 8th and 13th drafts.) Also I devoted a lot of thought into every essay I wrote for college apps and strategically picked recommenders.</p>
<p>SAT scores aren't everything, but I admit that I have a pretty unconventional life, so I have more to write about and discuss during an interview than your average student does. I'm still surprised that I got into Ivies with 500's though.</p>
<p>I'm proud of you, Alston. :)</p>
<p>keep in mind that college view unweighted GPA's in relation to the school and that is why class rank is important. A student with a 3.6 at Andover or Exeter is still in the running for an Ivy, but a student at "small town high school" with a 3.6 (and a class rank of 20%) is probably not.</p>
<p>I think we are loosing perspective on this thread.</p>
<p>An A- is 3.7 and an A is 4.0 unweighted. You want to say a difference between A- and A student will actually surpass a 300 point difference in SAT1 with the same course load then you all are mistaken.</p>
<p>Can some one start posting their stats?</p>
<p>My SAT score wasn't all that amazing (2170), and neither was my GPA (3.8 UW--but I took the absolute hardest classes I could, including two AP maths my senior year). But I still got into a nice Ivy.</p>
<p>Oh yeah, I had really nice extra-curriculars that I was really passionate about.</p>
<p>The thing is some of the toughest universities have many people with amazing grades and amazing SAT scores who have taken a rigorous course load.</p>
<p>Hypothetically, a school might take a 3.7UW/2300 student over a 4.0UW/2000 student. But why take either of them when the school can take a 4.0UW/2300 student?</p>
<p>The SAT is not the MOST important thing, but I have found that it will make a difference, especially at the top schools. Looking around my geographic area, even among similar applicants, the person with SAT scores above 2300 were considerably more likely to get into the top schools. They're not a requirement though - I got into Stanford with a 2240.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Looking around my geographic area, even among similar applicants, the person with SAT scores above 2300 were considerably more likely to get into the top schools.
[/quote]
but people with high SATs scores are more likely to have good applications than those with low SAT scores</p>