SAT 1 superscoring question

<p>So apparently most colleges care more about superscored scores, especially the ones that exist in our minds, like Stanford, Harvard, etc.</p>

<p>I got 2230 on my SAT - 750CR, 790Math, 690Writing</p>

<p>1) Do my scores seem reasonable? I got 4 wrong in CR, 1 wrong in Math, a 9 on essay and 4 MCwrong. According to PR cracking the SAT I, I shouldve gotten around 780, 790-800, and 770!</p>

<p>2) I'm considering taking it to boost up my writing.. I normally get 12s on essays and 800 overall, but I'm worried about lowering my CR -- It could fall to around high 600s. But if i end up with 800 in writing, it would be worth it right, even if i got say.. 2200 on my retake? since my superscore is 2340?</p>

<p>I know my message is kind of uninteresting and long, and there are a lot of them because they pertain to individual people, but I would really appreciate any opinions/ideas at all.</p>

<p>u posted in wrong section</p>

<p>Your scores seem to be reasonable compared to mine. I got 1 more question wrong on CR and got a 740, the same exact situation with Math (except I’m really annoyed because the 1 answer I got wrong was a mis-grid), but with writing I only got 2 wrong, 9 essay, and got a 740. Re-taking for the writing section would make sense, I guess, even though most schools don’t care about it too much.</p>

<p>oh, thanks, Sirensong. That makes me feel a little better about my CR and math scores =)
When did you happen to take it? I took it on January 24th.</p>

<p>orange peel, what section should I have posted this in?</p>

<p>bump please</p>

<p>I guess it must have been a particularly easy test, therefore a particularly harsh curve. Either way your scores are awesome! </p>

<p>I don’t think it could hurt to retake, if you want one more shot at improving the writing, but I wouldn’t advise retaking it after that.</p>

<p>what the hell, i got 3 wrong and 8 essay on writing with a 690, lol</p>

<p>Thread moved from the SAT Subject Tests Preparation into this forum.</p>

<p>oohh, I must’ve overlooked that. Thanks for the correction, gcf101.</p>