There are some pretty huge liars here or 90% are you guys are super geniouses...

<p>SATs are THE test for college admissions, and what college you go to is what businesses look at. Sure, if you are lazy, you'll have problems in college. But alot of kids that take the SATs are smart and work hard too</p>

<p>don't generalize, and most of the stuff you said just doesn't make sense or isn't true.</p>

<p>but i do agree that certain people are just good testers but not good students - i probably fall in this category since my school work isn't too great but I did pretty good on SAT tests</p>

<p>I know nobody's going to agree with me when I say this, but it's definitely one of those "wish-I-had-known-then-what-I-know-now" moments, and I wish somebody had told me this when I was in high school, :</p>

<p>In general, businesses don't look at what college you went to.</p>

<p>They want to see that you went, and that you distinguished yourself wherever you ended up. In general, hiring managers fall into three groups: the first doesn't know anything about colleges at all and just thinks it's great you finished; the second may actually dislike college experience because it tends to make people think they know more than they actually do; the third knows a decent amount about colleges, which means he knows that the admissions process is inherently irrational and means nothing in the working world.</p>

<p>You may think I'm being ridiculous. I would have thought so too, once upon a time. Let me prove my point with some anecdotal evidence, though . . . </p>

<p>My second summer in college I had an internship at the Merrill Lynch headquarters in Jacksonville. My first day as an intern was also the first day for two new analysts. One had graduated from UF (my alma mater) and the other from an Ivy--I wanna say Yale, but I don't know. I watched them sit in adjacent cubicles and receive exactly the same training from exactly the same person, then set about learning exactly the same software. Four years at institutions that are supposed to be night-and-day had landed them both in the same position, literally within stapling distance of each other (except, perhaps, that one was in serious debt and the other wasn't). I mentioned this to the contact I had originally interviewed with, who has since become a good friend, because I thought it was interesting. He actually said that he and several other hiring managers preferred not to hire Ivy league types because they tended to look down on their co-workers. So that's at least one instance (and one office environment) where going to a less prestigious school might work in someone's favor.</p>

<p>Here's further proof that experience and acumen beat pedigree: distance education and night classes are very popular options for working professionals, who often are required by their companies to have a particular degree before they can get promoted or receive raises. The schools that provide these alternatives are, generally speaking, anything but prestigious. But working adults with mortgages and mouths to feed keep registering with them, because they know that their employers know that a masters from one program is the same as a masters from any other program. These people wouldn't put in the time and money to get useless degrees--the fact that they DO put in the time and money shows the degree isn't useless just because it came from an online campus nobody ever heard of.</p>

<p>Finally, a very stupid but readily accessible example--did anybody watch the episodes of "the apprentice" where trump put all the "book smart" people against the "street smart" people? Two things are instructive about that classification. First, the "book smart" players were people who had graduated from ANY college with ANY degree, which shows you what the working world thinks of college. Second, the "book smart" players almost always lost, because they didn't actually know anything that would be useful to a business.</p>

<p>Of course, there are exceptions. Certain law firms, especially, are likely to recruit only from select schools. But when it comes to the vast majority of employers, a college degree today is little more than a high school degree was a long time ago: an indication that you could be serious and dedicated enough to do something challenging but not particularly relevant to the problem of earning a living and contributing to an organization.</p>

<p>Now, I'm not saying there aren't plenty of good reasons to have a dream school and to work hard to get admitted. There are. But they have little to do with your career. If you want a good job after college, the important thing is to distinguish yourself from the pack, no matter where you go. Imagine you're an employer, and your hiring decisions might affect the livelihoods of thousands, not to mention your own--are you more impressed by the word "harvard" or by the fact that someone worked several summer jobs in a variety of industries and is able to get along with people?</p>

<p>Anyway, I know nobody's gonna take this to heart, but like I said--I wish somebody had told me. It would have saved me a lot of time and frustration.</p>

<p>thethoughtprocess said:
"don't generalize, and most of the stuff you said just doesn't make sense or isn't true."</p>

<p>Hey master equivocator, you just contradicted yourself. You said not to generalize yet you generalized what everyone has said in saying that most of the stuff is illogical and false. Your reasoning faculties are the ones askew, awry, and far amiss.</p>

<p>I think a good portion of people that say they didn't study in fact did. A lot of smart people are rather pretentious and see studying as a weakness. I have a friend just like that-- says he never studies but somehow always has the homework done like 3 days in advance and knows the textbooks inside and out. I wouldn't worry too much about people saying stuff like '1600 without studying'. Not to say that some people don't get 1600's that way, but I really doubt the numbers around here. Especially when this is a forum that, to a good extent, is based around homework and study tips.</p>

<p>sirwatson, i don't even understand most of what you said, but i wasn't talking to anyone else besides the post directly above me. and to that post, i meant by "don't generalize" - don't say that everyone who does good on the SAT's is a slacker. </p>

<p>whats akswew and awry mean? i guess its fitting that you use SAT words on this thread :) </p>

<p>sandwraith, I think everyone knows people like that.</p>

<p>What is sad is that I have much better verbal skills than all of my friends, I possess a large lexicon, and yet my best score on the verbal was only a 600! Well, maybe that is because I have only read like 10 books in my lifetime.</p>

<p>Lexicon? as in, Lexis Nexis? 600 is not bad for 10 books in a lifetime lol.</p>

<p>you are the type of person an employer would not employ. You think that by using your supposedly smart logic you can dominate, yet you are still wrong.</p>

<p>most of the people on this forum probably study more than the average person(MUCH MORE). In fact, the people that don't study probably don't worry about the things that we worry about and probably don't even know this website exists. they don't bother about crying over near perfect scores or minor mistakes. they know they can do well enough without killing themselves, and that is just as good.</p>

<p>No wonter xittamarg says that studying vocab isn't necessary for the SAT.... he uses the word "acumen" casually in his post -_-</p>

<p>that's an SAT word if i've ever seen one :)</p>

<p>very insightful, though...thanks</p>

<p>"Would your resentment towards the Cambridge area be becuase of your reject from both universities?"</p>

<p>Totoboyo, I'm surprised you pathetically tried to calumniate my statement that the SATs are over-rated. First of all, I am a junior and have therefore not applied to any colleges, including schools in Cambridge, MA. This would make it impossible for me to receive rejection letters from a college or university in the Cambridge area. Secondly, I was invited to attend a seminar at MIT because of my high PSAT score, which included an 80 on math. Finally, don't castigate me for having faults. Everyone makes mistakes; your parents would know.</p>

<p>haha that was kinda funny... although it's probably not good for either party to argue on an internet-forum (unless it were actually something...important?)</p>

<p>entertaining at the very least, I suppose....</p>

<p>Verbal obfuscation will do me well in regards to my future employer--a law firm.</p>

<p>no, because juries won't understand you, unless you are some other kind of lawyer</p>

<p>and just a hint to some people - don't even semi-brag about your test scores or anything, espeically PSATs - multiple people here will own you lol, people here are generally awesome test takers</p>

<p>heh i like how people try to explain a phenomena which they themselves have no idea about.
hey orignal poster, its human nature to say " i didnt work but i still aced the test etc etc" lol i dont know why.</p>

<p>No this board is not full of supeer geniuses nor is it full of "america's best" ( lol that was awesome ). It's full of hardworking people who want to pretend they have an awesome outside life too. Even if they do to some extent they want other people to think they are "cool" too and thats why they tend to overexaggerate stuff. </p>

<p>Now before anyone who jumps on me for this just look at the general pattern of posts in almost all these forums, barring some really straight forward posters who you may see dont say much abt themselves except for concrete facts everyone tries to exaggerate a little ( including me ) some little, some a lot. </p>

<p>Its easy( relatively ) to get a 800 in either math or verbal but to do so in both the same time is impossible without atleast some leevl of prepration</p>

<p>some peopl have absolutely ridiculous SAT, GPA, and SATII, and Ec's. Yea, i doubt everyone's stats are true but some people here are the future leaders of America.</p>

<p>Just a thought: The original poster said something to the effect of 800s on SAT's without studying.</p>

<p><em>works this comment around</em> Well if you think about it, exclude SAT II's and you only have SAT I left.</p>

<p>On the old SAT, the score was out of 1600, so an 800 without studying wouldn't be too difficult. And now that it is out of 2400, an 800 without studying is even easier to reach or surpass.</p>

<p><em>grins</em> <em>ends dumb comment</em></p>

<p>You really can't study for your 1600. But just a question: How did CC become so elite? It's just a website, which is for everyone. But it seems like the smartest people in the country and world are here.</p>

<p>Like I said earlier, its not that just "the smartest people in the country and world are here" - its that they're the ones that tend to post their stats more. Look at the post vs. view counts on some threads and you'll see what I mean - there's tons of lurkers out there reading what we are saying. Also, most of "the smartest people in the country and world" end up here cause they are the ones looking online for college related information and end up accidently finding CC and becoming addicted</p>

<p>While we're bouncing around test scores and intelligence...</p>

<p>My two sisters have dyslexia, and yet both have very high IQ's. One has an IQ 140+, but at 11 years old, she struggles through basic early readers. Neither can do anything related to math--they come up with the most original ways to flub up even single-digit subtraction. They both took the CAT tests, and the elder did well on the reading, but the younger (with the 140+) just about flunked each test. And yet, she's smarter than supposedly 99% of the population!</p>