<p>In the other thread, I gave you testimony from two adcoms, both of which stated that from their point of view, there is no difference between a 750 and an 800. Why, might I ask, would these adcoms be lying to us?</p>
<p>hey cheesie, harvard shows in its stats that each year for one 2400s guy getting accepted another 1960s guy is admitted too. so 2300+ is perfectly fine. its not worth your time and effort to retake it. at the end of the however it all comes down to what you wanna do.</p>
<p>p.s. i think what the previous poster(@ocraaa) said is all crap. and btw i dont believe anything posted by an organisation which names itself “silver turtels” :D</p>
<p>Because that is what they do… They do what they are told to do… It is a very sad low level job, usually reserved for grads who couldn’t get real work.</p>
<p>I’m not sure there’s a consensus here, but I continue to think that there’s no reason to retake unless you’re pretty darn sure your score will increase. And what’s the evidence that it will? Have you been getting significantly higher scores on practice tests, for example? </p>
<p>Oh, and “ILoveMyMom”–ask her to teach you some manners.</p>
<p>Hunt - pretty sure ‘ILoveMyMom’ was joking. . . </p>
<p>I have a 2310 but my scores are unbalanced (800 CR, 800 W, 710 Math), and I’m also a strong Humanities/weak Math + Science student, something that is reflected across my application, so should I retake? </p>
<p>My other standardized tests are: </p>
<p>34 on the ACT (English 33, Math, 34, Reading 34, Science 35)
710 Math IIC, 800 US History, 770 Literature. </p>
<p>Again, what’s the basis for thinking you will do better if you retake? That, to me, is a key question, because retaking has an opportunity cost, and it also includes the risk that you will do worse.</p>
<p>Carbon, consider retaking your 710 math Sat II. If you do better on that, it’ll compensate for your sat I score so you won’t have to retake the whole test.</p>