<p>The difference between a 790 and an 800 can be substantial. One can get an 800 with no questions wrong. One can get a 790 with 7 or 8 questions wrong. If you're a serious math student and a qualified applicant to Yale, I think no score but an 800 on the SAT II Math will look good. This doesn't apply to all SAT II subject tests, but the SAT II Math IIC has a very generous curve. The downside to a 790 is that with an 800, admissions cannot be sure how many questions, if any, you get wrong, but with a 790 they know there is a significant number of incorrect answers on your score sheet. I know I'm going to get flamed for this response, but as someone who applied and was accepted to Yale and other Ivies this year, and saw others in my class accepted/rejected, I say from experience that an 800 looks much better and is somewhat "expected" .. so I don't think it looks insane to retake a 790. </p>
<p>BESIDES, admissions officers only see your highest scores. Clerks at the office pull your highest scores from your transcript of scores and write them for your admissions officers to see. It is very likely that your admissions officer will not see or will not consider the 790 if you get an 800. I do not think it can work against you. At worst you will be thought of as something of a perfectionist, but honestly, many Yalies are perfectionists.</p>
<p>^Why would you get flamed for telling it as it is? That's exactly what I was thinking. 790 means you got 7-8 wrong on the Math IIC because of the generous curve.</p>
<p>In my opinion, though, the curve is set in such a way to make an appropriate gauge. Harder tests have a more lenient curve, and easier tests have a harsher curve with a smaller allowable margin of error. As a result, a 790 is still pretty darn good with respect to the test. It's not like a difference of a few questions will make or break you. If you retook and got a 770 or a 760, what would that say? My point is that scores are quite volatile in most cases. If you get a 770 for instance, it's reasonable to assume you're also capable of an 800. The same may not be as easily argued for someone who gets a 720, for instance. A 790 is clearly indicative that you know your stuff pretty well. An 800 versus a 790 isn't going to sway them in some profound direction -- if anything, they'll wonder why you bothered retaking a score that was already clearly strong. Also, they usually DO have access to all the scores (I've seen this empirically). The superscore is presented in addition for convenience's sake, but the trends in scores are most definitely present. </p>
<p>Retaking a 790 for an 800 is like winning a gunwar and shooting your opponent's body to kill them off after you've already won the battle via beating him to an incapacitated pulp. Yeah, we know you could finish him off -- but we already know now that you're capable of winning in the first place. You already won! Is taking the extra one or two irrelevant steps really worth the potential downside risk?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Don't listen to them - if you have an 800 in you, then go for it. How many times to colleges have to go on record as saying they do not look askance at multiple sitting for these tests? These folks telling you to call it a day do not have your best interests at heart.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>SAT II tests are not too expensive don't require a lot of time to take. If you feel like taking it again and have a free Saturday morning, why not?</p>
<p>Because it looks unusual and basically gives off an aura of "toolism." Elite colleges aren't after perfect scores. They're after strong students with high scores. Retaking a 790 just sets up a red flag that sends the wrong message, even if it's being retaken just for the hell of it/personal challenge (the adcoms aren't gonna know that). It makes it look like you're one of those "Holy crap a 790 isn't good enough, everything must be perfect!"-students, which isn't very attractive. It looks anal-retentive. There are much better ways to spend your time. Strengthen some other part of your application.</p>
<p>I'd strongly argue that it can only hurt you. There's virtually no gain -- just a possibility for an adverse effect. It's like taking the Chinese SAT II when you're a native Chinese speaker. Getting an 800 is nothing special/yields no real gain to the application ("congrats, you can process your own native language"), but getting anything less than that expected score would raise a few eyebrows.</p>
<p>First of all, if he/she doesn't feel like after the test like he/she got the 800, he/she can always cancel the test. Second of all, a 790 is roughtly 5 or 6 questions wrong, and as said before, an 800 can be 0 questions wrong. There is a big difference, and most ivies would not see you as crazy for wanting to show the best scores possible. If you think you can do it, go for it. If you're scared that the admins will think your crazy, they prob. won't.</p>
<p>I still think it's a little much to think a 790 is somehow so different from an 800 merely because it "could be 5 questions better". Even if this were true, they wouldn't know how strong a given 800 is in the first place. An 800 is an 800. If you can 790 something, any rational mind can safely assume you're capable of the 800. The difference between a "high 800" vs a "low 800" vs a 790 is negligible, really -- and when you're getting to the point of even needing to differentiate them, it's a new level of absurdity. Retaking it is really not a good idea.</p>
<p>Can't you think of anything better to do with your time than to retake a 790...that could be the question on the admission reps mind. You are okay...repeat that to yourself a few times...:)</p>
<p>"to the person who said "quote of the year" ... Honestly, I can't tell if you are mocking me or agreeing..."</p>
<p>Mocking you. </p>
<p>Your sentence contradicted itself: If anything, you've proven the lack of correlation between high school math ability and common sense to perceive the colossal pointlessness of retaking a seven-ninety.</p>
<p>My point in that statement was that it was NOT about the 10 points. I obviously realize I got a good score. My question was purely about how that would appear to colleges, but more people have spent their time ridiculing me than answering my original question.</p>