<p>no its unnecessary to improve your score IMO</p>
<p>
[quote]
but I can't even get a perfect score on the SAT I math. does this reflect badly on my math skills....?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Thanks a lot.. now I know that I had good math skills last year which became very bad last October... :(
You think a 780 is bad.. try a 770!!!!</p>
<p>:p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p</p>
<p>If you are taking extremely advanced math classes.. I am sure your math skills are at least above average, ;)</p>
<p>It doesn't matter... I've seen people with your scores get into HYPSM!! On the other hand, I have seen people with your scores NOT get into HYPSM!! </p>
<p>Schools such as MIT and Caltech look at a LOT more than Math SAT scores for admission. The kids that get in to these schools are usually very bright, ingenuous, and hold a strong passion for math and science! I haven't seen many people get into MIT who were simply amazing at these subjects..</p>
<p>If you do choose to retake the SATs, I wish you the best of luck in improving your score and the best of luck with getting into MIT and Caltech next year, :)</p>
<p>darkchaos - don't bother. the point is that 2300+ are all looked at the same.</p>
<p>"does this reflect badly on my math skills....?"</p>
<p>My god, it's a 780!! And I always considered myself uptight in terms of academics. I always wonder if some of these people are joking. I'm great at reading, yet I got a 680 on that section of the SAT. I considered that normal</p>
<p>@ itla_uno: I see, thanks. What worried me was that I could see that a 2310 made up of a 770, 770, and 770, would just as good as a 2400 because 770 is basically 800, but my score has a 720 in it, which is not an 800.</p>
<p>^Many colleges are still not even considering the writing section all too much.. Cornell doesn't count it at all and Duke considers the Writing SAT to be equivalent to an SAT II.</p>
<p>. . . in that he's keeping his (or her?) standards high. I am <em>not</em> going to slam you for your perfectionism, hcheng501.</p>
<p>I don't think you need to retake the test, though. Your SAT I score is effectively perfect, or close enough. MIT doesn't care that much about your ability to do algebra and geometry anyway. You <em>do</em> need to be thinking carefully about the SAT II Math and AP Math tests.</p>
<p>A poster on another thread said that she thought, these days, a true "perfect score"--a person whose test scores would make a big contribution to their overall application--was really someone who had perfect SAT Is <em>and</em> perfect SAT IIs, most likely in pretty disparate subjects. I wish that perspective would take hold and become the widely accepted view, because in my experience it's spot-on. Far, far too few students realize that the SAT Is are only half the standardized test picture. For MIT, I don't think you need to take SAT IIs in disparate subjects (and I got in to Harvard years ago with SAT IIs only in Writing, French, and English Literature), but I <em>do</em> think you need to look seriously at the SAT IIC, the SAT II Physics, etc. Maybe you already have. Forget about your SAT Is: good job! On to the next thing! </p>
<p>Congratulations!</p>
<p>take it again, especially because MIT has about 30% of the people with an 800 in math. If you go down in other subjects, as long as it's not huge, its fine.</p>
<p>
[quote]
A poster on another thread said that she thought, these days, a true "perfect score"--a person whose test scores would make a big contribution to their overall application--was really someone who had perfect SAT Is <em>and</em> perfect SAT IIs, most likely in pretty disparate subjects.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That was me, actually to correspond to old-SAT I would think that one needs perfect SAT-II to be in Math and English, or whatever corresponds to math and verbal. It's hard to think of what combination of exams would equate with an 800 old-SAT verbal; English and a 5 on an AP just doesn't probe vocabulary, analogies and the other IQ-test proxies in the same way. Of course additional 800s in disparate subjects are never a bad thing.</p>
<p>DeltaRoyale--</p>
<p>The difference between a 770 and an 800 on the Math is most likely one question, two at most. More important from the standpoint of MIT, it's one <em>basic math</em> question: clearly an oversight.</p>
<p>I have heard before that if a student has a perfect score on the SAT IIC Math, colleges will disregard a less-than-perfect score on the SAT Math. This is more likely to be true of a school like MIT, not less: MIT sets a premium on actual math proficiency rather than problem-solving skills. </p>
<p>I could be wrong, but I would bet a month's salary that if a student had an 800 on the SAT IIC exam, a 5 on the BC Calc test, and a 770 on the SAT I Math, the MIT admissions committee wouldn't even look at the SAT I score. This student would probably be in a substantially better position than a student with an 800 on the SAT Math (basically a sign that you're a pretty sharp crayon who got a good coach or a good test prep book) and a 770 on the SAT IIC. After all, getting a 770 on the SAT IIC usually means that you missed five questions or more, I believe. </p>
<p>The SAT I Math is such a different ballgame than the type of math that gets you a second look at a top-tier institution of technology!</p>
<p>take this from someone who just got into Stanford with a 2270, all scores 2250-2390 are the perceived almost identically. At that point, only getting the perfect 2400 will catch their eye any more.</p>
<p>For someone who claims to be good at math, you should realize that a 780 is as "perfect" as an 800.</p>
<p>DiamondT...I couldn't have said it bettr</p>