<p>For college admissions, is it better to have a good GPA or good SAT scores? For instance, if someone has a 3.85 gpa unweighed and only a 1700 SAT scores, which would be more important for admission.</p>
<p>Although by no means completely reliable, the SAT score has the advantage of being a standardized measure of an applicant vis a vis his or her fellow applicants. GPAs, whether unweighted or weighted, vary enormously from one school to another, which is why some colleges reweight them as part of the admissions review in order to compare applicants on the same standard. My opinion is that SAT or ACT scores combined with class rank is a better overall indicator of academic achievement/college readiness.</p>
<p>The GPA is extremely subjective, as its entirely the schools choice if it wants to give everyone A+'s or if it wants every class to be mind-boggling hard. SAT's put you in a rank with everyone else in the nation, thus being much more important, simply because it shows your academic rank in comparison to everyone. I'm sure millions of people have A's in school but only a few thousand can get above 2200 on the SAT, so its simply slimming the applicant pool down.</p>
<p>For example; lets say someone had a 4.0 GPA and all that stuff, honors AP everything. If he suddenly gets, like say, a 1700 on his SAT. Sorry, but unless his parents have donated $10,000,000, then hes not going to Yale, Harvard, Princeton, MIT, etc.</p>
<p>Just get as high as possible on both. It's not like it's an either/or type of deal.</p>
<p>This is depressing.... I have a 1700 SAT</p>
<p>The SATs are definitely more important. At my school maybe two people have the equivalent of a 4.0 and there's no such thing as a weighted gpa yet people get into good schools all the time whereas other people on this board with their 4.5s don't. Grade inflation is rampant among most schools so the SATs allow people to be compared more fairly.</p>
<p>that was somewhat strange...I just typed all of the SAT with s on the end.. whoops!</p>
<p>Michael1...me too, add 20 points :-/</p>
<p>eh, well, im just saying Harvard, Yale, Princeton Stanford and MIT (HYPSM). Still a lot of great colleges beyond that</p>
<p>While good GPAs can be taken with a grain of salt, bad GPAs coupled with a good SAT score shows that you are smart, but not a very concientious student. Good GPA and a ranking to back it up, coupled with awards and ECs that show you are a good student can balance out a so-so SAT score. Adcomms realize that some people just do not shine in that arena.</p>
<p>It really depends. Ultimately, you want to max out on both as newest newb said. However, I think a bad GPA coupled with a high SAT score is a recipe for disaster. Vice versa is not that desirable either however it is better than the previous. Now, if an applicant has a medium GPA (for the school) with a high SAT score I think that would be viewed better than vice versa. A medium GPA would not be necessarily indicative that the kid is lazy especially when backed up with good SAT II's and AP exam scores; chances are the student is at a competitive school. Vice versa ( high SAT, medium GPA) is also good, however it displays that student's academic background may not have been competititve enough to compete at the elites. So, in conclusion, a val with a 1700 is more competitive than someone ranked top 30% with a 2400 (even though I doubt either applicant would get into really competitive schools). However, someone ranked in the top 15% with a 2400 will be better off than someone ranked as val with a 2100. (Though both will be competitive for top schools) This is just MHO.</p>
<p>Fred, why do you say a low GPA and high SAT score is a recipe for disaster?</p>
<p>A genius who won't work produces exactly as much as a moron who doesn't work: zero.</p>
<p>If you see my definitions of low GPA for a high SAT scorer (top 30%), unless the kid's going to Andover that is a recipe for disaster.</p>
<p>I would consider a low GPA < 3.0.</p>
<p>It really depends on the school. The UCs, for example, are known for taking GPA into a higher account than SATs, though those too are very important. It just depends.</p>
<p>What the CRAP were the first posters saying?!</p>
<p>GPA IS MUCH MORE IMPORTANT THAN SAT.</p>
<p>Transcript is the single most important piece of documentation for a college, not the SAT score report.</p>
<p>"The single most important credential that enables us to evaluate your academic record is the high school transcript, and it is the very first place in the folder that we turn. " - Stanford</p>
<p>SAT must be important for telling the difficulty of a school. I go to a prep school in which MAYBE two kids graduate with about 4.0's (never has anybody had higher than a 4.1) and yet out of 80 kids we probably send 18 to ivies and the rest all to top schools....</p>
<p>The schools have info about each (HS) degree granting school in the country, so they know the demographics, the average grades, the sort of course work that is offered, etc. They can get a feeling if your work is good, and if you took the hardest path. </p>
<p>This info came to me from the MIT information session in our city. The Adcom asked who thought the applicants were compared to each other, and about half the people raised their hand. Then he asked people to stand up if what he said about their schooling was true. He asked about public, private, charter, homeschooling. Then he asked about size. Then he asked about the number of AP offerings. People were bouncing up and down. At the end he asked how could MIT compare each kid to the others. </p>
<p>He also said that you could consider your application as a table. If one leg was shakey the table might still stand - so the legs were grades, scores, ecs/awards, application. He also implied that a mediocre SAT score would not blemish an otherwise student. </p>
<p>OTOH, mediocre grades (I am not sure what this means, possibly less than 3.0 or even 3.5 depending on the school) shows a student who doesnt like to actually do the work that is necessary. This might work in High School, but not in a tough college.</p>