<p>i would not take it again. adcoms HAVE a record of your SATs scores and how many times you took, and everything, and I would be very proud of a 1590/1600. why waste another ~$50? and 4hrs of valuable time? no way.</p>
<p>I just put that in for sh**s and giggles..but the real problem is...you guys are criticizing this guy who tried doing his best...so what if he got perfect on his SAT's....you're practically saying he's a perfectionist and this and that...just over a freakin test.</p>
<p>come on...today's world...$50 and 4 hrs of valuable time doing what...chomping away at Cheese Nips, rubbin 1 out to the jenny mccarthy play boy...please</p>
<p>i know this is controversial but i'll stick with the adcoms.</p>
<p>My average right now in high school is 98.9...people call me a perfectionist....wow thats too bad they didn't see my SAT scores.....</p>
<p>1540 (new SATs)</p>
<p>and I'll stick with the Jenny McCarthy magazines kevster lol</p>
<p>Haha, i agree with goldshadow</p>
<p>"Anybody who "forever regretted not retaking for those 10 points" would have serious problems. Honestly. What's he gonna do? Brag to his grandkids about it or something?"</p>
<p>hahaaha so true, the sad thing is that i know several kids like that.</p>
<p>if you define your life by your SAT score then that might hint at a major character flaw. HYPS want kids whose lives are defined by their passions, not by their SAT scores.</p>
<p>alright lol you guys love that quote...and its the truth...however..if that's what the guy wants to think...let him think that...where does Stanford have a say in the thoughts and internal desires of this kid.</p>
<p>very true diamondT</p>
<p>You never know if one of his rec teachers mentioned that he cared more about the grades then a love of learning which would definitely be a turn off to Stanford. </p>
<p>But seriously, taking it again was overkill.</p>
<p>kevster1001...do you have the text or a link to the text you referred to in the original post...we could have a more productive debate with the actual article than with your paraphrase</p>
<p>very true treewanna be</p>
<p>ok let me find it, well it's not in english so ill translate it as accurate as possible</p>
<p>what language is it then</p>
<p>it basically says this:</p>
<p>"From all Stanford applicants, there was this particular student. He received all As and was an elite student. In his first SAT he received a 1590; a 1600 in his second try. But Stanford rejected him. It was because of the SAT. Despite raising his grades for a 1600, that didn't guaranteed him admission to his top school. The reason was because the university saw a bad image based on what he did. The fact that he got a 1590 in his first try, which was almost perfect, and took the exam again showed the admission officers that the applicant was only concerned about grades, and that it did not show a deep passion for learning."</p>
<p>this is just the most important chunk of it.</p>
<p>there's gotta be other reasons...</p>
<p>i'm guessing if other parts of his app showed a "passion for deep learning" they would have overlooked his retaking a 1590...in my case of retaking a 1590 for a 2400 (for NM $ purposes) my counselor wrote (literally) "(my name here) is passionate about learning" and my physics teacher wrote i showed a "deep scientific curiosity"...i guess i will have to be the test case for this scenario...check the stanford rd decision thread in april</p>
<p>i think getting a 1590 already shows a deep passion for learning...then when going for the 1600 that shows a deep passion to excell..</p>
<p>not always.</p>
<p>i totally love those adcoms now :)</p>