<p>I'll add to cb5's post that high schools use different grading scales. Some use 90-100 = A, 80-89 = B, etc., while others use 93-100 = A, 86-92 = B, etc. Combine that with widely varying levels of course difficulty, and you can see that it's hard to rely heavily on GPA to evaluate students.</p>
<p>Its so true. I bumped into a parent who was bragging that their daughter had
a 4.8 gpa, when if she was at another school five minuites from that school she would have an unweighted gpa of 93, and a weighted gpa of 98.</p>
<p>I believe that some colleges' admission requirements depend on the race of the applicant. I am international (Greek) GPA 4.00(weighed), top 10 percentile, 2350 SAT, member of the national Greek swimming team and Columbia rejected me.</p>
<p>
[quote]
This explains why somebody I know got a 4 on the APUSH test, but a 790 on the SAT USH Subject test.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And it explains why I got a 4 on APUSH yet only a 660 on the SATII (that and the fact that I didn't study...)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Would colleges rather see a 3.6 and a 2250, than a 4.0 with a 2100.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think the latter of the two is more important. There's a big difference between a 3.6 and a 4.0 (That would be substantially more B's.) In terms of the SAT score: 700, 700, 700 is pretty good. 700, 750, 800 proves that you know how to take tests, but not necessarily study hard for school. Though it may be 150 points away, the 4.0 student seems more hardworking and will probably have a greater rate of success in college (somebody already posted the link to FairTest.)</p>
<p>
<p>Theoretically, there could be no difference at all between a 4.0 student and a 3.0 student if you consider the conditions in my post (quoted below), with all other things (courses, difficulty, etc.) being equal, and both students earning an average of 91% in their classes at the 2 different schools.</p>
<p> [quote=JiffsMom] ...high schools use different grading scales. Some use 90-100 = A, 80-89 = B, etc., while others use 93-100 = A, 86-92 = B, etc.
</p>
<p>
[quote]
There's a big difference between a 3.6 and a 4.0
[/quote]
</p>
<p>As several participants have pointed out, the biggest difference may merely be different grading standards at two different schools. Colleges have to look beyond grade averages to what students have actually learned before college.</p>
<p>
Well, no, that isn't exactly what SAT measures. It does measure those things to a certain extent, but it also measures a kind of undefined pattern-recognition ability. This is why two people with the same grades in the same school can get quite different scores.
There are many ways to get good grades in school, and some students may not deserve the grade as much as others. And THAT is why two people with the same grades in the same school can get quite different scores.</p>
<p>There is only one way to get a particular score on a standardized test, hence the adjective, "standardized." It's a much fairer method of comparing students.</p>
<p>
In other words, the SAT does measure aptitude, but it isn't exactly scholastic aptitude. This explains why somebody I know got a 4 on the APUSH test, but a 790 on the SAT USH Subject test.
I'm not sure you understand how each of these tests are scored. A 4/790 combination doesn't seem unusual at all.</p>
<p>I think I understand them pretty well. The AP exam has free response questions, and the SAT Subject Test has only multiple-choice questions. While they measure essentially the same material, they don't require or measure the same test-taking skills.
The difficulty, I think, is in truly "standardizing" tests. If you have free-response questions or essays, you can't genuinely standardize the scoring of the tests. On the other hand, if you use only multiple choice questions, you can't avoid awarding better scores to people who are just better at taking multiple choice tests, but who don't necessarily have any better command of the material being tested. I suspect there is really no way around this problem, which is why colleges have to look at both grades and scores.</p>
<p>Free response questions in World History are graded on a strict rubric that has more to do with spitting out info than having significant analysis. Is US History the same, or similar? The SAT Subject Tests also tend to have easier multiple choice questions, and the curve is much more lenient. </p>
<p>And as for "better at taking multiple choice tests," what specifically do you mean? If you mean better at analyzing and understanding nuances and tricks to the questions, that itself is a test of analytical thinking. And timing and tricks can both be learned to an extent that the advantage of being naturally good at that is nearly neutralized. </p>
<p>Of course the SAT isn't perfectly "standard," but think of GPA. The English curriculum at one school could be 60% projects, at another 60% multiple choice tests, at another 60% essays. You could have a teacher who gave out 3 A's or 13--who loved you or disagreed with every opinion you had. And all under the same name, "Honors Sophomore English Composition"--which might be weighted at one school or unweighted at another.... </p>
<p>It becomes almost impossible to ascertain what GPA measures. All the issues with better test taking skills that the SAT has, as well as new issues with different rigor, teacher preferences, and vastly different coursework comes in. The SAT is 100 times more standardized and accurate, despite any problems it may have, than GPA is.</p>