<p>I think so and I hope so.... SAT scores are the only ways where colleges can directly compare students (hence standardized) while teachers all have different perceptions of students.</p>
<p>Schools don't just want to see that you're smart - they want to see that you're smart and that you're a unique, creative, dedicated hard worker who will really enrich the campus community. Your recs are a very important part of your application because they're the only part where people testify directly about your character, and that's hugely important to schools that are trying to build community. At multiple LAC info sessions I heard stories about students with outstanding numbers who were rejected because their recs cast doubt on their characters.</p>
<p>That said, it depends to some extent where you're applying. At a larger school, the admissions process is more numbers-driven. So YMMV.</p>
<p>^ehh, I know lots of jerks and bad people who get into harvard, so you don't actually have to be a genuine person to get into a good school</p>
<p>Well, "jerks and bad people" is subjective. Harvard sees countless applicants with 4.0 GPAs and 2300+ SATs, and they still only admit c. 10% - those 10% must have something other than pure numbers that made them stand out as people.</p>
<p>Those 10%......to have something often....parents, older siblings that went there first..</p>
<p>bobmallet: if you do some research around here and in very good college app advice books, you'll see that many of the top schools have what's called the "holistic" approach. They want more than just pure numbers like what Quaere indicated.</p>
<p>If you scroll around, this "less than meritocratic" approach is regularly debated here on CC. A new thread arguing about athlete/legacy/development/ethnic/economic recruitment and admissions starts about once every two days. YAWWWNNNNN</p>
<p>I doubt recs are regarded higher than SATs. They could be a huge lie for all admissions officers know.</p>
<p>well teachers all have different perceptions/criteria for students, so you can't really compare students with each other with recs</p>
<p>In the A for Admission book Michelle Hernandez wrote they weight the teacher's recommendation and the SAT. If a teacher wrote he is the best of all his students(something like that) and they look at the SAT II subject test score to be 560(for example) then they know that it's not quite the best of the best, whaterver that means.</p>
<p>we had heads of admissions come to our school from northwestern, middlebury, tulane, and harvard.
the tulane guy (definately less selective than the other three) said 40% of his decision is test scores, 40% is gpa/classes taken, 20% is EC's/recs/essay.
i would say test scores and gpa are way overemphasized for smaller schools like tulane. i would guess the breakdown for those bigger/ivy schools would be closer to 25/25/50</p>
<p>It seems counterintuitive that small schools would emphasize scores higher than big schools. Eh>?</p>
<p>It's hard to know. I think in this forum, the people with high SAT will think SAT is most important, the people with high GPA will think GPA is most important and the people with amazing ECs think ECs are most important. So you will get a different opinion which varies depend on each person perspective.
It's great if you have high SAT, high GPA and great ECs and not so great if you have low SAT, low GPA, and light ECs, everything else in between ranges from great to not so great and that's what makes it hard for adcom to decide.
One think about the ECs, even if you are really and genuinely passionate about your ECs but there could be too many people with your ECs(for example music), and school could toss your application aside as well. I think a few years back that is what happened to one kid. So not only it has to be genuine but unique as well.</p>
<p>Obviously SATs are more important than recs. That isn't a question. The true question is which is more important, test scores or GPA?</p>
<p>"The true question is which is more important, test scores or GPA?"</p>
<p>Are you serious? That isn't the true question at all. GPA is significantly more important than test scores.</p>
<p>They count for different things. SAT scores are "more important" but they won't save you if your teacher says you are a cheater, grade grubber, and all-around horrible person.</p>
<p>Similarly, an incredible rec can't offset a 560 at top schools.</p>
<p>Collegekid, it depends on which college. (Look at Duke and Caltech for instance) And when I say test scores I don't mean only SAT. I include SAT ii's and AP exam scores.</p>
<p>SAT scores are generally more important than rec. letters most of the time. If the governor of your state writes you a rec., that would be a hook and an exception to this situation. But usually rec. letters aren't really important because most teachers write approximately the same compliments about their students. The SATs show the differences.</p>
<p>If the governor of your state writes you a rec., that would be a hook and an exception to this situation.>></p>
<p>Actually, this may not be true. If you just get an impersonal recommendation from the governor and it's clear he doesn't know you from adam, it won't help one iota. Letters like that are almost never a hook.</p>
<p>Recommendations are important, but they mainly are used to confirm and strengthen the other parts of your application. In other words, a student with so-so grades and so-so test scores won't get in just because they have glowing recommendations. But, a student with solid test scores and solid grades will get a boost having recommendations that add to the picture of a solid student. However, unless a recommendation is truly horrible (as in a teacher saying, don't take this kid! or, even worse, "call me so we can talk privately") they usually aren't going to pull you in by themselves. But then again, the same is true for SAT scores. Perfect 800's won't pull C- students into Harvard either.</p>