<p>When asked about how important SATs were, the Yale admissions officer told the crowd at our school "Less important than you think, more important than we admit." Take that as you will. :)</p>
<p>Worried4#2, it sounds like your daughter's SAT scores and math/science grades are telling the same story. I don't see any red flags here. I'd probably suggest trying one retake to see if she could bring up the math and/or trying the ACT and seeing if that results in a better math score.</p>
<p>You don't really have a SAT/GPA disconnect there at all. Your daughter's GPA reflects her SATs pretty well, taking into account her school and her curriculum.</p>
<p>That said, a 190-point difference between CR and M seems a little unusual. (Apart from non-native English speakers who score well on M but poorly on CR and W.) My daughter and her best friend were talking about this once and told me that the friend's 150-point difference was the most extreme of anyone they knew. That didn't keep the friend from getting acceptances at an Ivy and similar colleges. Her grades were a little higher (and her SAT M score a little higher), but she didn't attempt Calculus BC or Physics C. And she presented as a History/Language person.</p>
<p>If it were my child, I would think that it was worth a few hours of practice and a few hours on a Saturday morning to see if the Math score couldn't be brought north of 650. That might be achievable, it's not going to make her look like a slacker (she's not going to look like a slacker as an unbalanced student with one C/year in a challenging curriculum anyway), and it would be just a tad more "respectable". She would be at least part of the pack, not an outlier.</p>
<p>With a student who is unbalanced, and who shows focus and achievement in one area, I don't think a C in the most challenging course in her weak area is an insuperable barrier at all, even at a really selective college (although a B would be better).</p>
<p>JHS & Mathmom - thanks for your (as usual) rational and wise responses. When S re-took SAT for same reason, he had spent very little, if any, time preparing and ended up dropping from 670 to 630 (although moved up to 800 from 780 CR!!). </p>
<p>Plus - I left this out in my previous post - D seems to have a fairly severe case of math anxiety, and that usually manifests as anger and abusiveness towards authority (I mean me!). </p>
<p>Seems futile to me, but I am now reconsidering.</p>
<p>Topic addresses a concern of mine also.</p>
<p>D has outstanding SAT scores: March 2270; May 2300; 1570/1600; superscore 2370/2400.</p>
<p>Weighted GPA 4.11. Unweighted GPA is less stellar. Made Bs about half the time in H classes (ex.: never made an A in H math; H English - 3 As and 3 Bs, etc.) Class Rank: Top 20% - ouch.</p>
<p>She is not a slacker; her classes are hard. Private school - about 200 in class. Two friends who are in the top 10% have taken less H classes; friend 1 has taken 7; friend 2 has taken 4; my daughter has taken 9. Don't know if she would do it differently, but would definitely consider it had she known ahead of time that it could make enough of a difference to move class rank just below the 10% mark.</p>
<p>Other than unweighted GPA/class rank, everything is good: outstanding test scores, school awards/leadership/ECs, including work experience. Oh - NMSF.</p>
<p>Not interested in HPY, but definitely Rice, Notre Dame and possibly Wash U,. I don't know if admittance will be affected as much as high-end scholarships (wanted).</p>
<p>OP back. The purpose of my post was the narrow question of whether there could actually be a downside to improving SAT's in my daughter's situation--i.e., would a college think more of a B+ student with "B+ level" SAT's (whatever that would be) than it would of a B+ student with "A level" Sat's. Thanks to those who addressed that issue. And to those who took this in a broader direction, I'm glad I raised a subject that interested you. And then there was the incredibly rude "Maybe her scores were a fluke." What can I possibly say to that?</p>
<p>For those who are so curious: Daughter has a 3.4 or 3.5 unweighted (final grades for this year not in yet), something a bit over 4.0 weighted, though that seems to be a useless number anyway. She has taken highest level courses (AP, Honors where no AP available) in language, history, English, and a mix of honors and non-honors in science and math. She sings in the select chamber choir, and competed into regional choir, but not all-state. Her EC is primarily theater, two shows a year, which demand incredible time commitment. Her community service is good--abiding commitments to a couple of organizations over three years. Just got into NHS and Tri-M, the music honor society. She has ADHD and nonverbal learning disability, and I'm very proud that she has done so well despite these impediments. She is not a driven student, but not lazy either. Strength at standardized tests is a trait that runs through our whole family--I guess it's just as reasonable that some people particularly excel at standardized tests as it is that others do particularly poorly. Re-taking the SAT I would really not involve much time commitment, maybe a few hours of test prep in selected areas, so it's not a matter of sacrificing course work time. As I said, her GPA will probably stay about where it is. </p>
<p>Carry on...</p>
<p>MommaJ - I guess (and it is just a guess) that a higher SAT score would help rather than hurt. Your daughter's GPA is solid and a slightly higher SAT score could indicate potential ability rather than wasted ability. Your concern may be negated by the counselor or teacher recommendation anyway. I would think this particular worry would be more valid if the student had an "A level" SAT and a "C level" GPA and you knew that the teacher recs would also reflect a "slacker student". Also your d's H classes and ECs indicate that she is no slacker; personally (MHO again) I would go for the higher SAT score.</p>
<p>Another question: for a kid with
SAT I: 800 CR/760 M/790 W (1560/2350) - took it once, no superscore
SAT IIs: 800 US History 800 Literature 700 Math IC 750 World History</p>
<p>but a lower-than-would-be-expected GPA due to math/science struggles in freshman/sophomore year (in the 4 classes I recieved one C+ and one B freshman year and one B and one B+ Sophomore year) and thus an overall GPA that is not so high (3.7/8), but A's by junior year in AP Calculus be looked upon as simply a late bloomer math/science wise?</p>
<p>The GPA was 3.55 grade 9, 3.85 grade 10, and probably a 4.0 this year in grade 11, all unweighted.</p>
<p>All of our stories are anecdotal and as always individual results will vary. My nephew though was similar to your D. He has a diagnosed LD, sky high grades and scores in CR and Writing. His GPA suffered through 3 years of math and science and his test scores revealed that sure enough the kid is not a math whiz. My SIL had similar concerns to yours but his ap revealed what he is. An excellent humanities student who is weak in science and math. No surprises and at least the kid is consistent. It has all ended well for him. Bottom line a strong ap is a strong ap and your D sounds like she will have one. Her GPA is still solid and I agree that her test scores are more likely to say "girl with serious potential" than "slacker"</p>
<p>I am on my second child with the high SAT, lower GPA profile. Both with ADD, inattentive type. Both had 504 plans which they rarely/never used. No SAT accommodations. Disclosed ADD on applications. First child: athletic scholarship, no admissions process to speak of. Second Child: Just under a 4.0 weighted GPA after a VERY slow start frosh and soph year. 9 AP's. 5's and a 4 on AP's. NMF. Admitted in 3 top 30 schools with a full tuition scholarship at one. Admitted to all other schools he applied to. Had a GPA below the average for admitted students at most every school. Got into more schools than most of his IB, straight A friends and relatives. UCLA and Berkeley, renowned for heavily wtg. the GPA in admissions, accepted him and offered money, albeit only pennies from Berkeley. YES, raise your test scores! After I have seen my kid's admissions process, I have to believe high scores can make a difference and that not every admissions officer thinks a kid with a differential is a slacker. Regardless of what speculation we read on this and other sites, no one knows what the tipping point is. Have your kid get their best test scores, do their best with grades, and write an essay that makes the admissions people believe they would be a positive addition to the incoming class. I disclose this info so those of you with similar kids will know that these "slackers" with less than a 5.0 GPA do get admitted to good schools. Not Ivy league, but really good schools. Good luck to all.</p>
<p>A 3.5 can be a good GPA at a school with deflated grades, especially with tons of APs. Taking SAT again will show that your daughter is ready to make an extra effort, something an underachiever would not usually do. Make sure her subject test scores are high. This will indicate that she knows material at a good level (expected after APs).</p>
<p>Ok....so how about the opposite, of sorts? SAT's 1960 but GPA in a private school 3.9 including AP's....minimal weighting of 1.1 (other schools in the area weight at 1.4)........she'll retake them, plus take the SAT II's.....</p>
<p>Retake the SAT. </p>
<p>Friend's daughter is in precalculus with an 89.1 average.<br>
My d is in H algebra II with an 82 average at a different school. </p>
<p>Friend's daughter made in the 400s on the math section of the SAT.
My daughter (NMSF) made a 770 on the math section of the SAT in March and a 750 on the math section in May. </p>
<p>Neither SAT score is a fluke. Different schools: curriculum and expectations. College admissions can not rely on course level and grade alone as it can be misleading.</p>
<p>Pinkpinapple, I don't think any admissions officer will see you as a slacker, but rather as someone who had a little trouble adjusting to high school. A few colleges don't even look at freshman year grades. I think you'll have good results.</p>
<p>khs, in some cases a high GPA coupled with low scores would indicate a poor school or a poor environment. I suspect more likely you have a poor test taker in this case. (You might ask her GC if her scores are lower than the average of other students with her scores.) Your best bet is probably to try to raise the grades (try xiggi's recommendations here on CC), try the ACT, and/or apply to some colleges that don't look at standardized test scores. There are quite a few of them.</p>
<p>SAT 1960...low score...poor test taker? Ack.</p>
<p>There are a lot of gpa/SAT disconnects. All three of mine had higher test scores than grades would indicate. My fourth child does not test well, but has better grades that the older ones.</p>
<p>Exactly! There is NO FORMULA. Do your best in the most rigorous schedule you can withstand without losing your social life and ability to participate in activities you enjoy. Be an interesting person. Apply to schools. Hope for the best. If anyone on here thinks a 1960 is a "bad" SAT, they need to know that many top schools admit kids with that type of score.</p>
<p>To the OP: Curious...Have you discussed your D's situation with her GC or another close advisor at her HS? Also, I think you should look at your school's profile before you decide that she has a big/impactful disconnect. There are lots of kids with ADHD and related issues--these are generally mitigating circumstances. I do not think your D's case is so unusual that it would be viewed as a tremendous negative. I don't think anyone will think she is an underachiever.</p>
<p>Also, lots of kids have clear strengths and it doesn't harm them in the admissions process. Though my D had high SATs and a high GPA, etc., there was a noticeable disparity between her CR/W and M scores; she was never tops in math-science and worked hard for low A's in those subjects but breezed through her humanities/social sciences winning many academic awards in those areas. We didn't worry about her lower math score--she only took the SAT once and she only took the minimum required 2 SAT II's. She focused on her strengths. This did not hurt her in what they call the "holistic" approach--she was accepted early at one of the very-top LACs. Her BFF, a supremely talented writer, had very poor math scores (and nearly failed math) and stellar CR/W scores--a 250+ point disparity. She, too, was admitted early to a great LAC. Our kids have much more to offer than test scores.</p>
<p>Don't despair.</p>
<p>Your D seemingly has good verbal/writing skills which will help her with her applications. Writing the essays is one of the biggest challenges. At small LACs, the essays truly count and could be a deciding factor in whether an admissions counselor fights for your admission at committee. A lot of what goes on is purely subjective and if they instinctively "like" you it can't hurt.</p>
<p>IMO, it seems as though fit is a biggger issue for your D. Maybe you should speak with people at the colleges your D is looking at (if you haven't already) with regard to accommodations for ADHD, etc. and ask how these types of students perform and what support there is for them. There are many LACs where a quirky kid can find a niche.</p>
<p>GPA and scores will come into play for merit money, but you don't specify if this is a consideration. If it is then another go round couldn't hurt--if scores don't improve you don't have to report them. Supposedly, math is the easiest score to raise even if you are math-challenged--check the SAT forum for strategic advice.</p>
<p>Good luck to you and your D.</p>
<p>Just a couple of thoughts. First, I would absolutely have S retake the SAT, but not report the scores to any colleges OR to the h.s. (that way, if he bombs, it won't appear on his transcript). Second, after three kids, the youngest heading off to college this fall, while both GPA and SAT scores are extremely important, the SAT is the only truly objective evaluation method available. GPA's vary wildly from school to school, and even though AO's rescale, there is no way to consider that some schools and teachers are easier than others. Plus, as someone who worked in college financial aid many moons ago, SAT's were often used as a cutoff for the order in which aid applications were reviewed.</p>
<p>"SAT is the only truly objective evaluation method available."</p>
<p>Standardized tests measure what they test--the ability to take standardized tests, which is correlated to the characteristics of successful people, but by no means one to one. They do not test organizational ability, thoroughness and tenacity, which within broad limits is vastly more important than test taking ability in almost every facet of life.</p>
<p>cloverleafgirl...my understanding (perhaps I'm wrong) is that every SAT you take (9th grade & after) is sent to schools automatically by the collegeboard---you can't pick & choose.</p>
<p>Maybe someone knows something different...</p>