<p>I took the November SAT, and got my scores a few days ago. I was really satisfied with my score, 2310, until I started reading around this forum about how colleges don’t count the writing score. I got 800 on writing, so if you add up only my CR and math scores, you get 1510.</p>
<p>Now, I am completely unfamiliar with the 1600 scale, but one of my friends got a 2160 on the SAT but a 1500 with only math and CR combined. So wouldn’t our scores look basically the same if colleges don’t look at writing?</p>
<p>So here are my questions:</p>
<li>What is a “good score” on the 1600 scale? (again, I am totally lost on this scale)</li>
<li>Do colleges really ignore the writing section of the SAT?</li>
<li>Should I retake the SAT?</li>
</ol>
<p>So, while a score like a 1400 is great, only 5 percent of the nation achieves that score. Your score is great by any standards.</p>
<p>Colleges view the W section several different ways. Some simply consider the SAT score out of 2400. Others consider the W section but don't put as much weight on it as the CR and M. Others consider the W section as they would an SAT II (although it does not count towards the required number of SAT IIs). Still others say they do not consider the W section yet. (Out of this last group, I am sure most still see the W scores, while others may have it taken off records before it is given to the admissions committee.) </p>
<p>I'm in the same boat you are- 800 W. I got a 2190, so my 1600 score for most people would be about 1500, but mine is 1390.</p>
<p>um... the 1600 scale is the same as 2400 if you just muultiply your score out of 2400 by 2/3, so I don't see why you would be totally lost on the scale
most colleges consider the writing section, a small handful don't but many colleges will consider it but give a little more weight to other two sections
colleges that don't care about writing as much: Emory, Chicago, NYU, Rice?, MIT, CalTech
a 1510 is proportional to roughly 2260, so 2260 and 2310 are not THAT diffeent</p>
<p>John, that's actually not how the two different scales work... you just add CR and M together, which is not the same thing as multiplying by 2/3. Multiplying by 2/3 can give you an answer almost 100 points off, as your example shows. And especially out of 1600, that is a big difference. The score you would get out of 1600 by multipying my 2400 score by 2/3 is three percentiles higher than what my 1600 score actually is. </p>
<p>It doesn't matter what your 2400 score roughly correlates to, what matters is the actual 1600 score.</p>
<p>You worry too much. 1510/1600 would be like the same thing as 2200/2400 (to my guess). No need to take it again unless you're super-driven-ambitious-motivated to take your scores to a higher level. Don't worry about it. You're a smart man.</p>
<p>I think I will have to do some more thinking as to whether I will retake or not (my parents want me to, but I'm unsure, and it's ultimately my decision anyway).</p>
<p>John: Multiplying by 2/3 gives a general idea, but not really an equivalent, as in my friend's example. They are two different scales.
Carpe Aeternum: Yeah, 800 in writing is a tough situation. Hopefully most colleges still add in the writing section? It ups my percentile quite a bit.
Cyborg: Yes, but it's not so much the 1510 I'm worried about as the disparity between the 2310 and the 1510 :</p>