Yes I’ve found several threads on this topic, but they’re all from like 10+ years ago.
Since colleges are focusing more and more on the “holistic review”, I’d like to bring up this question again to get some up-to-date perspectives.
So, which is better or worse?
low sat high gpa OR high sat low gpa??
BTW I don’t have a super low gpa, but like a 3.7 UW (which i consider low), with a steller sat of 1590 and a few perfect scores on subject tests, since i couldn’t change my grades, but i could only inprove my sat by taking it again
At any top school there will be a holistic review. Was the 3.7 at a school with tough grading so still in the top 10% of the class? What was the course rigor? Upward trajectory? Etc…
That said, there was an article recently from Trinity that said GPA is a better predictor of academic success. As you noted, tests can be retaken, tutors hired, etc… but GPA shows overall effort all four years.
Anecdotally, my D’s friends who had a mismatch didn’t fare as well with admission. That said, they are now doing great where they landed.
The top schools are reaches for everyone. at this point all you can do is wait and celebrate where you have already been accepted.
More to the point, it’s straight up daft to think that 10 more SAT points is going to be the reason you do- or don’t- get into any college, including the hyper selective ones. 1590/1600 potayto/potahto. Not to mention if you already have acceptances you are already too late to be re-taking it.
I think top 20 schools can hold out for both. You can check the Common Data Set of each school to see how many students with your GPA were accepted, but I don’t think it really matters at this point. It is what it is. If you have affordable acceptances that’s great. It’s not going to do you any good to stress over things you can’t change.
@momofsenior1 Yes good rigor and upward trend. but I feel like the toppest colleges are not going to pardon you just because you have strong sat’s and good rigor. I feel like strong gpa and sat are merely the baseline for those colleges
@collegemom3717 and no you might’ve misunderstood, I’m not trying to retake the SAT. Just wondering if my highish SAT is gonna make up for my lowish GPA.
@austinmshauri Well I’m not satisfied with my current acceptances yet, but thank you for the reply.
More I’m trying to understand is if my strongish sat’s will compensate for my not so strong grades -)
My kid has a 4.0 UW and plenty of rigor, and great class rank, leadership, etc., however her SAT is only 96%ile. It is holding her back. Generally kids with a couple of B’s but SAT’s of 1480+ are doing better than her admissions and scholarship-wise. I don’t think a 1590 will make up for a 3.7 UW, which I would think is more than a couple of B’s.
I’ve also found that you won’t even be considered for any top scholarships unless you have an ACT of 34. Just our experience. I am sure there are exceptions, but we didn’t find them.
My answer is that neither is ‘better or worse’, and that context is everything. However, GPA is considered the strongest indicator of collegiate success, and for good reason. Performance, commitment, and adaptability with (varying levels of) content/skills mastery, over time are indicative of the type of grit needed to succeed in academia.
High standardized test scores (SAT & ACT in the US) can show a type of commitment to excellence and specific content (or, in some cases, test) mastery. However, it’s compartmentalized, skewed towards higher SECs and some cultural practices, that it’s not comparatively predictive of the type of performance traits that have been indicative of long-term success. They’re not IQ tests, and for truly holistic purposes, standardized test scores have limited value in rooting out the types of “talent and potential” that an academic institution may be seeking.
My perspective on how “top colleges” view and contextualize “stats” changed a lot after visiting some of those schools and talking with admissions, and provosts/department heads.
It doesn’t matter. You likely make the first cut and now they’ll look at other things. So now it rests on how unique your profile is or whether or fits and institutional need.
How can you not be happy that you got into top50 universities/LACs?
Most importantly: have you talked about costs with your parents?
A 3.7 UW at a challenging private school, with a lot of rigor and an upward trend, where you are top 10-15% (even if school does not rank, you can estimate) is different than a 3.7 UW at a less competitive school with grade inflation where you are say not in the top 20% (you mentioned you have rigor and upward trend). The former should not hold you back given your test scores, assuming you have great ECs, essays, and rec letters. Our kid’s school says that standardized test scores count less than parents assume but more than colleges will admit. It’s all part of the package and you cannot separate the two. True that course rigor and grades are the most important factors, but low standardized tests might lead colleges to question how challenging the high school is.
I know of unhooked kids at a highly competitive private school who each have several Bs who got in last month to top 20 schools ED. It depends on other factors such as geography, your likely major, essays, rec letters, who else is applying from your school, and demonstrated interest. Will a 3.7 hold you back at H, Y, P, S, and M? Most likely yes, but not necessarily for other schools say in the 15-25 range.
All else being equal (which it never is), my experience is that classroom performance, in terms of grades, is the most important factor.
Everything above goes into deciding what your “grades” are, so comparing a specific GPA with a specific SAT score isn’t meaningful. A 3.8 can range from OK to very good depending on course rigor, high school grading, approach, etc.
But if my D had been give the opportunity to improve one of them (3.75, 1400), I would have selected GPA
I would think that, on the whole, a higher GPA is better than higher test scores. The first measures performance over years, the other over a few hours. Tippy tops and T20 schools are in a league of their own, though. Without a hook or significant achievement, excellent GPA and test scores are a baseline, not a tip.
OP, while your GPA is a smidge low, you’re close enough to be considered a serious candidate.
They’re building a class, not just racking and stacking. Once you meet their baselines that prove you can do college work, what’s twenty or thirty points on a high school test score (that will mean nothing to anyone a year from now) if X candidate plays the sport in which they are most in need of recruits (or is a champion debator and may join the college team, which has been looking weak the past couple of years and needs a few strong participants), and what’s a 3.8 vs. 4.0 GPA if the 3.8 is a viruoso in a desperately needed instrument for the marching band or orchestra?
“Also I’m talking regarding elite colleges like top 20 ranked on USNews. Not ones ranked 30 and after. since many of those have already accepted me”
I think you have your answer here - many schools in the 30-50 range have high GPA averages so it would appear that the 1590 and other parts of your app compensated for the gpa. I know it’s college confidential but if you can give more info on the colleges you got into or other parts of your app, that would be helpful.
Colleges care about usnews rankings. one of the ranking criteria is enrolled students’ sat scores, while gpa isn’t a component in calculating ranks. That goes to show that it’s very hard to compare whether gpa or sat is more important.
"Colleges care about usnews rankings. one of the ranking criteria is enrolled students’ sat scores, while gpa isn’t a component in calculating ranks. That goes to show that it’s very hard to compare whether gpa or sat is more important. "
While technically true, USNWR has reduced how much test scores count in their methodology, indicating they find it less important than other factors. They simply can’t include GPA as it is not universal among high schools. Some give GPA on a 4.0 scale, some on a 5.0 scale, some on a percentage. Weighting for AP/Honors/IB also can be vastly different between high schools. There are also all different levels of grade inflation. So the omission of GPA from USNWR rankings should not be interpreted to mean they think test scores are more important.
AOs will tell you which they consider more important. Colleges will even note it on their CDS. The point is that the tippy tops expect admitted students to excel in both areas, and indeed, most of their applicants do.
I wouldn’t assume USNWR’s small weight on test scores dictates the relative weight of test scores and GPA in admissions. Some highly selective colleges that are clearly concerned about USNWR choose to be test optional, such as Chicago. Some have theorized that Chicago’s concern over USNWR rankings is one of the key reasons why they chose to be test optional. Various other highly selective colleges appear to be less influenced by USNWR and openly criticize them.
Regarding the OP’s question, it depends on both where you are applying and context. GPA is particularly sensitive to context. For example, a 3.7 while taking rigorous classes at HS known for harsh grading with only B grades in freshman/sophomore year classes not especially relevant to major… is not the same as a 3.7 while taking no honors/AP/IB classes in public HS with extreme grade inflation with straight B’s in junior/senior year classes relevant to major. I’d suggest looking at Naviance or similar for your HS, which may provide a better context.
The particular college and program within the college is also important. Among test required colleges, some highly selective colleges appear to favor having top scores more than others. In general colleges that have SAT/ACT scores above what you’d expect based on selectivity and hooks tend to favor high scoring applicants more than you’d expect. For example, a list of 75th percentile scores is below by college. WUSTL and Vanderbilt seems to have higher scores than one would expect based on selectivity, and scattegrams, suggesting a decent chance of admission for students with high SAT/relatively low GPA.
I would agree that WashU and Vandy (as well as Rice to a certain extent) do look at SAT scores and accept a certain number of relatively low GPA/high test score types. My WashU kid falls in that category (3.67 UW/2300 old SAT plus 7 5’s on AP tests-got a 5 on the BC test/800 Math 2 even though he barely got a B- both semesters).
If he had a do-over, he probably would have prioritized GPA.
-)