<p>I got liek, a 1580. That's SOOO LOW!!! Jeeez! Should I reatke my SAT again 4 the 5th time, or should I just take the ACT to compensate for my LO SAT score?"</p>
<p>I got a 1010, and I don't even think THAT's low. Low is 950-. 960-->1150 is avg. ANYTHING above is above avg. There is absolutely NO NEED to retake a 1450+.</p>
<p>Post your opinions here.</p>
<p>woo hoo I like all these threads celebrating normal people. I like how cc seems to be more welcoming to ordinary people and not just the elite</p>
<p>Heh. That's one of my pet peeves too. I hate it when people say "Oh no, I really flunked the test", and when they get it back they have a B. When I say I flunked a test, I really mean it.</p>
<p>I'm a bit of a perfectionist, but people here are much worse than me. It can be scary sometimes here...</p>
<p>I know! we need a little support group. I was so excited to get a 185 on my psat (did much better than the vast majority of my peers) and then I come here to find I have the lowest score of any junior. I am a perfectionist, but I'm not perfect like everyone seems to be. I actually flunk tests sometimes, I'm not a math prodigy and I've never been the smartest in any of my classes</p>
<p>Although I'm pretty normal I understand where people are coming from when they say they "flunked" with a B. Their standard is an A and anything lower isn't good. Most would disagree stating the C=average but if everyone accepted being 'average' you wouldn't have these stellar students. They set their own standard and when they fail their standard they sometimes forget to remember that they are already on the top. Obviously everyone would love to be the best, but there can only be so many people in that category and most of those people set really high standards to get there. K, I don't sound like I'm making any sense so I'm going to stop with my spiel :)</p>
<p>My favorite is when I got a 35 on my ACT, and we got them back, and people asked me what I got and of course I tell them because keeping it a secret is dumb, and then the next day the rumour was already spreading that I was retaking it because it "wasn't good enough" Mmhmm I'm sure. (p.s. of course I didn't retake it, how ridiculous)</p>
<p>It depends on what your goals are. For all but a small handful of highly selective schools, a 1450 is just fine. In fact it's super. But if you want to be a serious applicant to HYPSM, a 1450 is okay - you might get in, but other things being equal, your chances are not as good as someone with a 1580 - hence the retakes among those kids who REALLY want to get into one of those schools. For HYPS you need to get to about 1550 for further improvement to be of no additional benefit.</p>
<p>I disagree. Plenty of avg. applicants to these elite schools get 1450 and are accepted. People are just stupid and think numbers are so important yale is going to take a 1550 over my 1540</p>
<p>Celebrian, the difference between a 1450 and a 1550 is a hundred points. Far more than the ten in your example.</p>
<p>I, personally, didn't do as well as a I could have on the SAT. I know it. It is irrelevant whether that score is above or below the national average, or even exactly what it was. I chose not to retake the SAT, mainly because I was sick of it. My score was decent for the colleges I was looking at. Had I wanted to go to HYSPMC, I would have needed a better score.</p>
<p>On the flunked with a B issue... like sunnydaysee said, it has to do with your standards. If I can get an A on a test, and I don't, whether through a lack of studying or another mistake, then I have failed my standards. On the other hand, if I get a B after long, hard work and honest effort, then I have reached my standards. It all has to do with what you are willing to put into a test.</p>
<p>if u want to get in harvard/MIT/Caltech/Yale type of schools, 1500 is gonna be something u strive for. the other schools like cornell, berkeley, northwestern, chicago, 1400 is definitely enough. i think SAT is not as important as some people made it out to be, but for the best schools, if u are not an URM, then u have no shot of getting in without a good SAT score. i got into a bunch of schools in the high teens and lower 20s with a 1350. 1010 is an outrageously low score, its below average.</p>
<p>and also, to get into a decent college in the top 200 ranks, u would need around a 1150. 950 is not gonna get u into many schools.</p>
<p>I bet you some of these people even lie about their 1600's</p>
<p>I'm sure they do. It seems more people proclaim to have 1600s than actually occur.</p>
<p>bumP. Everybody on CC needs to see this thread...</p>
<p>this shall serve as a bump as well</p>
<p>"I got a 1010, and I don't even think THAT's low. Low is 950-. 960-->1150 is avg. ANYTHING above is above avg. There is absolutely NO NEED to retake a 1450+.</p>
<p>"</p>
<p>Rbase07: I agree with you that many students here waste time fretting about retaking scores that already are sky high. </p>
<p>However, let's talk about your score. WHile your score is in the average range, you are going to a private Quaker school and you want to be a journalist. Your private Quaker schooling should be giving you an education that would allow you to get at least a 1200 -- if you take the time to study for the test.</p>
<p>Journalists also need to have excellent verbal skills. This is true for any aspect of journalism -- broadcast, magazine, on-line, newspaper, documentary film....</p>
<p>The SAT is a good reflection of students' verbal skills. Your average level SAT does not bode wll for your having a career in journalism. It's a field, incidentally, in which many businesses require job applicants to take tests measuring their writing, grammatical and spelling abilities as well as their knowledge of current events. People who only score as well as the average college grad aren't likely to score well enough to get hired.</p>
<p>Anyway, instead of spending so much time worrying about the overly score obsessive people here, I think you could greatly help your own prospects by taking some lessons from them.</p>
<p>I agree with all but the last point. You don't need to be obsessive, just know where your abilities are, where you need to work. Don't take lessons from the obsessed. Are you happy with your score? If not, you can work to raise it, but that doesn't mean giving up a fraction of your life to study day and night</p>
<p>Why is this in College Search & Selection again?</p>
<p>Northstarmom: just because one gets a low score on the SAT doesn't necessarily mean that the individual didn't study. I SERIOUSLY busted my _$$ to get that 1010 I did. One of the reasons I don't think I did as well as I could of is because I can't afford a tutor for testprep unlike some other people I know. While I do attend a private quaker school, I am on scholarship, and even with that, my parents live from paycheck to paycheck.
So, while I do appreciate the feedback, I think that maybe it would be in your better interest to not make so many assumptions about things you are not necessarily positive on.
.:. LOW SAT SCORE =/= DIDN'T STUDY FOR TEST
&
ATTENDING A PRIVATE SCHOOL =/= BEING ABLE TO AFFORD A PRIVATE SCHOOL EDUCATION</p>