<p>I got 2290 composite:
690 - math
800 - critical reading
800 - writing</p>
<p>I really, really want to have a good shot at an Ivy League, but I'm not sure if the 690 will be a deal-breaker. I heard that colleges look at the specific scores, and not the composite; so if anyone has experience with the admissions process, I'd appreciate some insight. </p>
<ul>
<li>thanks</li>
</ul>
<p>Colleges do indeed look at the section scores and not the top-line total score, and 690, especially in CR, will be problematic at Ivies and their peers.</p>
<p>I rarely say this, but yes, if you want to be competitive at top colleges and universities, you should take another crack at SAT or ACT.</p>
<p>On the plus side, if you’re starting with 690/800/800, it doesn’t seem as if a higher CR score is just a pipe dream. So at least there’s that…</p>
<p>Good luck.</p>
<p>I got the 690 in math though. Does that make any difference? :p</p>
<p>but yeah, I’m sort of leaning toward retaking it</p>
<p>Oh, oops, I guess I am the one who needs help in Critical Reading! How embarrassing.</p>
<p>But, no, it doesn’t change my answer.</p>
<p>Let me put it this way. Many schools look at CR+M and having 1500+ on that would be a big advantage.</p>
<p>I would definitely recommend taking the ACT as well. It’s a lot more straightforward than the SAT and tests knowledge more than reasoning.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why do you say that? (I’m not trying to pick a fight. I’m asking sincerely.) Specifically, why does the sum of CR+M matter?</p>
<p>I know some colleges and universities disregard the writing score. But that doesn’t mean the sum of CR and M is what matters.</p>
<p>I think the individual scores are what matters. Colleges and universities report the individual section scores–not CR+M or CR+M+W–in their Common Data Sets. The Common Data Sets are where people at USNWR and elsewhere get their information for all those infernal rankings, and they’re where aggregators such as College Confidential’s Supermatch and College Board’s Bright Futures get the information about standardized test scores that they publish. So enrolling students with high scores on individual sections is what reflects well on a university or college. High CR+M totals, I think, are just a by-product of selecting students with high CR scores and high Math scores. But because nobody outside the college or university tracks information that way–how could they, when the information about CR+M scores isn’t made public?–I don’t know of any college that actually uses CR+M as a standard in making admissions decisions, nor do I know of any reason why they would.</p>
<p>Do you know something I don’t know?</p>
<p>Yes, they look at individual subscores. But when one has 1500+ in M+CR, there is little combinations of individual scores. What is the difference when you say “some school dropping the writing score” vs “CR+M”? That is what left after dropping writing.</p>
<p>I agree with that. But it doesn’t mean that 1500+ CR+M is the thing you need to be shooting for. It just happens because of the high section scores you need to be shooting for.</p>
<p>It’s akin to saying, “If you want a good standard if living, you want to make sure you pay a lot of income tax.” No, if you want a good standard if living, you want to make sure you have a lot of income. As a by-product of what you want to accomplish, you’ll pay a lot of income tax. But paying the taxes per se doesn’t get you what you’re seeking.</p>
<p>Sent from my DROIDX using CC</p>
<p>The 1500+ is a direct outcome of good section scores of both. Your example is not really good. Basically, if you are slightly weaker in one section (e.g. 700), it can be helped/compensated by having a very high score on the other section (e.g. 800). That is all it meant. That is also common use in comparing ACT and SAT scores too. 1500+ in CR+M would be around 34+ in ACT.</p>
<p>That is exactly the point I am disputing: a high score in one section does not completely offset a lower score on the other. At least, don’t depend in that. If your 1500 is 800 CR, 700 M, MIT won’t be as interested in you as in a student who’s scored 750/750 or 700/800 the other way around. The sum itself just doesn’t matter for much of anything.</p>
<p>Sent from my DROIDX using CC</p>
<p>You are talking about a specific school. That is not for generalization. There is no doubt an engineering program would emphasize on the Math score. If the sum of score mean nothing, then what is the point of talking about SAT combined score at all. The same for ACT composite score. LOL.</p>
<p>You could take the SAT subject test for Mathematics Level 1 or Level 2. That</p>
<p>Well, I am saying that although people do talk about CR+M, there isn’t much point in doing so.</p>
<p>And ACT is different, because when colleges report their students’ ACT scores (in CDS, and from there on web sites, USNWR, etc.), they report composite scores and not section scores. At least that’s what I recall. It’s harder for me to double-check now that I’m on my phone and not a computer.</p>
<p>But we are getting way off-topic. Retaking SAT would be a good idea for the OP.</p>
<p>Sent from my DROIDX using CC</p>
<p>For whatever it’s worth, my oldest attended a well-known private school and his college counselor there advised kids who were interested in applying to ivies & peers to try for at least a combined 1500 CR & M. That seemed to be a threshold for scores that would no longer be an issue with an admission counselor. There is probably some merit in having scores that aren’t lopsided but I think that matters more depending upon the declared possible major (it’s obviously better to have higher scores in the section that applies most to the intended major).</p>
<p>One question: in the USNWR ranking schools’ SAT scores are offered by combined CR + W (i.e. for UPenn the range is 1350-1530)…how is this range derived? Are the schools just adding up their bottom 25% cr & m scores and adding up their top 75% cr & m scores (not actual combined scores submitted by individual students)?</p>