<p>How bad is it to take it more than 3 times? Like will it honestly kill chances to get into a higher up university (like Hopkins)? What makes it so bad?</p>
<p>Oh, and does anyone know which upper schools (off the top of your head) average tests?</p>
<p>I don't know. I'm interested to see the answers to this question too. It would seem like if you were dedicated enough to improve your scores, colleges would be pleased.</p>
<p>if you take it more than 3 times they'll average your scores</p>
<p>how does averaging of scores work? And which schools do it?</p>
<p>i dont think it would work against you but it definitely isnt a nice thing to see... if you got over 1350 i think you should just be happy and work on other parts of the application.</p>
<p>see.... I disagree.....</p>
<p>All the reps say to take it as many times as you want.....</p>
<p>the more the better......</p>
<p>they'll be looking at that highscore.......depending on each university that could be supersscored or sitting</p>
<p>This is a common thread subject on CC, and opinion is divided on lots of fronts. I'm not sure that there's any consensus, but if there is, it's on two matters. There are two situations when it makes sense to take the SAT again: if you really feel your previous score(s) doesn't represent something close to your best work; or if you're seeking a merit scholarship with a fixed score as a floor for consideration.</p>
<p>I'd say that most people don't think that it's exactly "bad" to take the test many times--the "don't-bother-to-take-it-again" camp simply thinks that it's not a very good use of a HS students' time (and their parent's money) to prep and take the SAT many times to try to improve your score by 100 points or so. I think that one of the best arguments for this view is that standardized tests have margins of error and adcoms realize this.</p>
<p><em>Officially</em> most schools consider your highest score on each section of the SAT. This is sometimes called superscoring, and it sounds great, because they don't average all of your scores. (Remember that they benefit from this, because they get to report all those high scores to USNews and other sources--so of course admissions officers will tell you to take the test again.) </p>
<p>Still superscoring doesn't mean that adcoms suddenly develp amnesia about margins of error. So, if you take the test many times, and (say) the last time, you score at the top of the range that's included in the margin of error for your previous sittings, you may get a higher number entered in their official database, but this may not help you much. </p>
<p>For example, if you score 650 on the CR section in a single sitting, the information they have boils down to: this student is likely someplace near the middle of the 610-690 range. If you sit for the test five times and score, 610, 610, 620, 620, 690. They probably enter 690 in their official database, but they still realize: this student is probably in the 610-690 range, and may have a "real" score toward the lower end of that range. That's one argument for not retaking if you just think that you'll raise your score marginally.</p>
<p>OP: see my reply to your post in the Hopkins forum</p>
<p>I agree with most of what MarathonMan said.. just a few things to add: [ul]
[<em>] SAT scores are just one of the many factors that go into admissions and their weight in admissions probably isn't very significant. Grades in HS are probably a lot more important (To
quote</a> an admissions officer at Hopkins, "SAT I Reasoning Exam is four hours on a saturday morning whereas high school course work is four years worth of work"). So unless you think you can do significantly better or need a higher score for a scholarship, I don't see a point to retaking over and over again. Most people's scores end up hitting a plateau at some point. And in reality, I doubt there is any significant difference between a 720 and a 780. Another quote, this time from</a> MIT: "One of her favorite quotes is "we're looking for excellence, not perfection." And 750 is excellent. [We] use scores solely to measure our confidence in an applicant's ability to thrive academically at MIT. A "7" at the beginning of any score makes us plenty confident assuming the rest of the app is solid. Even scores with a "6" at the beginning can be fine in many cases. "
[</em>]As for admissions, I thing at many schools, the admissions officers probably don't even look through all your information separately. I believe it was someone from MIT who had posted a couple years ago about how all your important information (scores, grades, awards etc) is condensed down to one page that goes into your admissions file. [/ul]</p>