<p>a 1400? Yeah, right. In the world of CC maybe, but there are plenty of valedictorians who were in the 1200s and very proud. As they should be.</p>
<p>I have a 3.5 UW and a 2200 combined SAT score.</p>
<p>You have to understand that many kids in high school just dont try. For example my first two years in hs I was much more focused on other things. While it hurts me maybe in admissions, I think going through those times helped me become a more well rounded person.</p>
<p>I agree w/sr6622.</p>
<h1>1 in my class scored 1610 combined on the new SAT. Pretty funny and slightly annoying.</h1>
<p>My ex-boyfriend passed Algebra II with a 69.6 (rounded up, lucky kid) and he scored over 700 in math. </p>
<p>I scored 2010 and I have no idea what my GPA is. Class rank is 8.</p>
<p>The answer is Vehement, hands down.</p>
<p>Mr 2.9 weighted with his 2380 SAT. (1600 M+V)...</p>
<p>tahi, last year in Alg II/ Trig, i got a 69.4 and the teacher said if i got a b on the next test she would give me a C -, so i actually studied and got the C -... I got a C the second semester... i got a 720 on math. im pretty good at math its just last year i spent the whole math year playing gameboy right in front of the teacher haha.. hmm</p>
<p>In 9th grade, I had a 4.5 GPA w (~4 uw), and at my new private school I have a near-perfect GPA with advanced courses. I just took a practice SAT and got a 1980. :(</p>
<p>i knew someone with a 1.6 gpa but 1600 sat---->smart guy just didnt try. valedictorian had 4.0/4.7 with 1120 sat.</p>
<p>Grades are a horrible way to compare aka GPA. SO many factors are different between applicants. EASINESS of SCHOOL is one of them. Easiness of classes is another. Add on Cheating and many other factors and GPA just plain sucks. SAT/ACT is a great way for standard comparison in my opinion. Shows how stupid some of your valedictorians in stupid schools really are and how smart some people in competetive schools are.</p>
<p>I don't quite agree. Even in the same school, people with a high GPAs score much lower on the SAT than someone with a mediocre GPA.</p>
<p>4.0 unweighted GPA vs 1700 SAT......</p>
<p>Exactly mathwiz. Of course higher UW GPA applicants have a good shot at scoring lower. Its about that class toughness. Our school doesnt really award a tough schedule vs an easy one.</p>
<p>har har. i know someone with a 1320 and a 1.86 unweighted.</p>
<p>i agreee..</p>
<p>about my message: the kid that got that score was bribed by his parents to take the test and to actually try on it. my school isnt competitive where average sat:1150.</p>
<p>just out of curiosity, where did he go to college</p>
<p>yikes!!!!!!!!</p>
<p>I failed english twice and got an 800 on the CR part. And it took me 5 1/2 years of school to finish + 2 years summer school (never was there/never tried)</p>
<p>Eh... I have a 3.9 UW (w/ advanced classes) and a 2010 and a 214 PSAT (I say that because I think my PSAT was much better than my SAT, which I might retake). To you guys, this would seem a little off. lol oh god... Strange world on CC.</p>
<p>But to be honest, I'd rather have the high GPA and a lower SAT. These people with ridiculously high SATs and 1.-something GPAs are just frickin lazy. To waste that much intelligence is the <em>real</em> stupidity.</p>