<p>What criteria should one keep in mind when deciding which test is right for them?</p>
<p>Mathematical ability and experience.
Desired college to apply to.</p>
<p>I'm a Junior in Precalculus with a B. My SATI Math score is about 700. I consider myself bad at math. I'm mostly interested in NYU. I can prepare for the IIC and ace it if necessary, but I'd be just as content taking the IC. What should I do?</p>
<p>There are lots of threads on this,but it sounds to me from all the information provided that the IIC would be a better choice. You are in pre-calc now,and the curve on the IIC is much better.</p>
<p>TAKE IIC. </p>
<p>Seriously, so many other people and I foolishly thought, "Oh, we'll take IC and do better on it!" Wrong wrong wrong. The curve is haaarsh.</p>
<p>That said, if you think you could score an 800 on both, I actually think the 800 IC would look just as good or better, especially if you take AP calc exams and ace them. I was reading something by one Harvard admissions officer who said that 800 IIC scores aren't even that impressive anymore, because they see so many of them. They really ought to even out those curves; the "Level 2" name does enough to make it stand out as more impressive, and someone getting 8 wrong and still scoring an 800 doesn't give a good indication of one's readiness to do advanced college math.</p>
<p>IIC is better choice for ANYBODY EXCEPT ONES GOING FOR COLLEGES REQUIRING IC</p>
<p>They both are just about the same. And I heard IIC has a better curve
(I took em both and got same score)</p>
<p>come on guys stop embarasing me like that, saying IIC is the easiest. I'm an honors math student, did well in all my math classes, including BC calc this year, got 800 on SAT1 math, and 630 on IIC, believe it or not. So hell no it's not easy, otherwise i would have gotten a much higher score.</p>