<p>The fact is, neither GPA nor SAT scores are completely accurate in terms of measuring intelligence. But the SAT is much more accurate. There are plenty of people who just try really hard, do every assignment, and can memorize information for tests and quizzes. I really don’t see at all how GPA can measure someone’s intelligence. Yes, standardized tests usually require practice an preparation, but it is very rare that an unintelligent person will get a good score. It measures reading comprehension, reasoning, and logical analysis. Grades (at most schools, not all) reflect what a trained monkey can do with enough effort.</p>
<p>I’m a senior who has taken the SAT twice. I received a 1660 the first time with minimal studying and a 1790 the second time with a lot of studying. While I do think that the SAT can measure intelligence, it’s very flawed for certain students (note: not all students, since obviously some score very high). It doesn’t account for those of us who just can’t “think” quickly (like me). </p>
<p>In school, I’m always the last one to finish tests, but I do well, so that’s why my GPA is pretty high. I would consider myself reasonably intelligent, but clearly my quick-thinking skills are lacking. 
My lowest score is consistently on the math section, not because I don’t know how to do it, but since I need to really think about the question and different ways to approach the problem. </p>
<p>The SAT doesn’t allow for this, since they have a very strict time limit. I took a practice test without a time limit and scored about a 2100, but on the actual test, I scored 300 points lower.</p>
<p>In response to Shadowmist I feel that the ability to think quickly is a trait of “intelligent” people.</p>
<p>I think it’s more about knowing the test vs. being smart.</p>
<p>My PSAT last year was a 165 (62 CR, 43 M, 57 W), and my score on the October test was a 2040 (2120 if I’d gotten a 12 on the essay) w/ 720 CR; 630 M; 690 W, 8E.</p>
<p>My prep was taking practice tests w/o really going over the answers; I was basically getting myself really familiar with the test’s format. My math prep was taking Algebra II and going thru PWNtheSAT in 2 weeks. CR & W … well. English class.</p>
<p>To be honest, I hate these kind of tests for that reason. It’s not a practical way to find out the potential or intelligence of a student.</p>
<p>When I took my first practice test I got 1760 (or something like that), and at the time I didn’t know much about the SAT. So I thought it was a really bad score and was startled to find out that it’s above average. Really, what? I didn’t study and I had forgotten almost everything I learned in grades 10 and 11. That’s just representing my luck, not my knowledge. </p>
<p>And anyway, I think it’s wrong to say that these tests measure intelligence because they are directly related to education.</p>
<p>At my school, the ones with insanely high grades are split up into 2 categories: the tryhards (most of them) and the gifted ones. At my school most kids take the SAT the first time without studying. The tryhards (and trust me, you don’t know tryhard until you come to my school. they WORK) generally score around 1800-2000, and the gifted ones are generally around 2250 on their first try. There are also 1 or 2 gifted kids who don’t try whatsoever, GPAs are in the gutter and score around 2250 as well. Eventually, after dumping thousands of dollars into the hands of tutorers (while I firmly believe they’d go up without doing that anyway), most of the tryhards make it to 2200 or just slightly below. Topically, it appears, the SAT might measure your intelligence or your aptitude or whatever if you don’t study, but it doesn’t measure your readiness for college in my opinion because I’m pretty sure the tryhards in high school will still be tryhards in college and get fantastic GPAs and probably land good jobs. The gifted ones probably will as well, just with less effort.</p>
<p>I guess the point of my argument is that only your original SAT score probably indicates your “intelligence” (a term I hate and every time it’s used I feel like it’s really condescending) more than your final, superscored one. However, I feel like the SAT reflects very little about readiness for college work. AP scores, in my opinion, do a better job at that, as you only have one shot and there is a score distinction there between the tryhards and the gifted.</p>
<p>Also, this isn’t meant to be bashing tryhards, and please don’t find that term offensive. I’m just using it out of laziness’s sake because saying “students who put in a lot of effort” is a little too long</p>
<p>Yes, your SAT score is not a PERFECT indication of intelligence, because obviously with more prep, people tend to score higher. However, I do think its a pretty good indicator of intelligence (based on what I see from my school). There are people who are deemed “smart” but really are not - they try super hard to memorize all the information (and even then their grades are really not that high), but they lack analysis and critical thinking, which is what the SAT tests. You can learn all the tricks and practice all you want, but when you are under a pressured time constraint, I think, you cannot help but expose your natural intelligence. Also, I think a person of higher intelligence has a higher degree of mastery in these skills than a person of lower intelligence. People who lack the intelligence to score a 2300+ on the SAT won’t ever get there.</p>
<p>Because of the prep aspect though, its hard to say who is more intelligent when everyone in the group has scored, say about a 2100+, but I think it is quite safe to say that people with a 2100+ are more intelligent than those who score, say <1800 (especially when the latter has had prep)</p>
<p>The people I know that score high on SAT, also happens to be extremely smart. I haven’t noticed any dumbasses that score extremely high on the SAT at my school.</p>
<p>The SAT and GPA measure two completely different things. This is why colleges still ( mostly) require and consider both.</p>