<p>I have been reading a lot about students with low gpa's and high test scores and low test scores and high gpa's getting into U Of M, and I was wondering which one has a bigger impact on your chances of getting in.</p>
<p>Clearly neither. Nahh, I think about it this way. Your grades show what you’ve done your entire high school career. A standardized test shows what you did basically on one day. You take the test a MONTH later, and your score could go up, even if you didn’t LEARN anything new. Do your best in both, and see what happens. Good luck!</p>
<p>Very good point. What do you think colleges favor?</p>
<p>GPA. I went to a Carnegie Mellon information session and they said GPA is much more important in admissions for all colleges.</p>
<p>I definitely say GPA. A girl I know got into Carolina with AMAZING grades, but barely in the 1000’s on the SAT. Some people just don’t test well.</p>
<p>Most college info sessions I’ve been to said that the TRANSCRIPT is the most important, not the GPA. For example, a 4.0 UW may look amazing at first, but once you find out that the person with that GPA took only regular level courses after looking at his transcript, the 4.0 becomes meaningless. In an opposite case, a 3.3 may look bad at first, but once you find out that the person with that GPA took 15 APs in a very competitive school, it seems pretty good. </p>
<p>This is all guesswork though. Who knows, maybe admissions will pick the kid who got a 4.0 in all easy level classes over the kid who actually challenged himself.</p>
<p>@iStabBunnies: I really don’t get the “bad test taker” excuse. How will people get good grades in school if they’re bad at test taking? There are tests in school too.</p>
<p>Bad at STANDARDIZED tests, thank you. Clearly, she had good grades, or she wouldn’t have gotten into Carolina.</p>
<p>Sorry to hijack the thread, but how can one be bad specifically at standardized tests? The format (multiple-choice) is no different from most tests in school.</p>
<p>@jake1313: Exactly why I think the “bad test taker” excuse is totally BS for people who have high GPAs and bad test scores. If someone’s bad at standardized testing, then how can he/she still do well on tests in school if standardized tests and school tests are very similar? I think the best explanation for the high GPA/low test score combo is that the kid doesn’t know how to apply the stuff he learned outside of schoolwork. For example, back in freshman year I knew this kid who had a perfect GPA. However, on a practice SAT, he couldn’t complete a problem along the lines of “x§y = x+2y. What is 1§2?”</p>
<p>Some people freeze up. Because its the SAT. Some people can’t write an essay in 25 minutes. You have to think of other factors aside from the fact that “Oh, its multiple choice. Anybody can do that.” Everybody isn’t the same. If they were, we would ALL have 2230’s and 3.9’s.</p>
<p>The SAT really measures how good a student is at taking the SAT. Excelling on standardized tests requires a very specific skill-set that some people naturally possess and some have to work to gain; they are based less on knowledge than on high-retention speed-reading and test-taking skills. However, it is also truly standardized: a 2200 in rural Wisconsin is the same as a 2200 in Manhattan. Yes, your SAT score doesn’t necessarily reflect your ability, but it isn’t all that bad as a rough predictor.</p>
<p>Transcripts, however, vary widely from school to school. Yes, seeing a student’s course load tells you something about them, but even AP courses (and especially non-APs) are incredibly non-standardized - the curriculum of an AP LA course can vary hugely between two schools, and at some schools APs aren’t even the hardest classes (for example, the Honors Physics class at my high school is considered a step above the AP Chemistry course in difficulty). Yes, a 4.0 is almost always more impressive than a 3.8, and the transcript is usually the most important part of the application, but it’s also not a consistant indicator of ability.</p>
<p>You. Genuis.</p>
<p>@iStabBunnies: Wouldn’t they freeze up during tests in school too if they freeze up during the SATs? </p>
<p>@llllll: That’s why I think SAT IIs should be considered by all schools in determining the proficiency a student has with a certain subject. It’s also a good indicator of grade deflation/inflation. For example, anyone who gets a B or an A in an AP class such as Chem ALWAYS gets above a 750 on the SAT II. On the other hand, I have a friend in a different school who got an A+ in an AP class and scored less than a 650 on the SAT II.</p>
<p>@Bunnies: Who genius? Me genius?</p>
<p>@Pies: I disagree; the SAT IIs have several of the same weaknesses as the SAT Is, the most prominent of which is the inability of a one-hour multiple-choice test to measure a student’s understanding of a subject.</p>
<p>Edit: Well, not entirely disagree. They should certainly be considered, but they are not necessarily more accurate than a student’s grade in the course or score on the AP test.</p>
<p>Yes you genius! Finally, my thoughts expressed eloquently. I am not worthy.</p>
<p>Thank you! I’m glad we’re in agreement.</p>
<p>okay… let me clear this out. HIGH GPA IN MY OPINION. means NOTHING. there is a huge discrimination in schools… two of the dumbest girls in my competitive school has amazing GPAs. they have like 1400 in SAT. I have 2.9 gpa and I have 1700 in sat and it was my first time without studying at all and im INTERNATIONAL.
if u have a high gpa and low sat, honestly ure not… eh… u know ;D</p>
<p>SAT should be more important since school can be confusing. I was so sick so I couldn’t go to school for 15 days and failed my tests that time. thats why i have a 2.9. but hey, universities can’t see that.</p>
<p>GPA usually plays a much bigger role in admissions.</p>
<p>“Some people just don’t test well” is a silly thing to say. Unless you have an anxiety disorder or a learning/processing/physical disability, you cannot be worse at taking tests than anyone else. Yes, there are ways to beat the SAT that have nothing to do with ‘scholastic ability,’ to coin a phrase. If you can’t master them, that doesn’t mean you’re a ‘bad test-taker’; it means you’re bad at mastering new skills and applying them to practical situations.</p>
<p>I kind of think SAT is more important. A LOT of people have good GPA’s, but how many have 2300+ SAT scores? I’m sure that an extremely selective school would be more likely to accept a 3.6/2300 than a 1700/4.0.</p>
<p>I’ve heard many IVY counselors say that in many cases test swords can outweigh GPA so make sure to do well on both! Take the most rigorous course load at your school and try very hard to get A’s in those classes. And make sure to do well on the standardized tests too</p>