<p>My son and extended family were having a big discussion over this tonight over dinner, between my family and my husbands family, we had 5 college bound seniors between us! Thankfully they ALL got into great schools, especially since its been such a rediculously hard year; needless to say we are all very relieved. There were some disappointments however and we got into a debate over whether or not a low GPA and high SAT's/ACT's or a high GPA but low test scores would help or diminish your chances at higher level colleges and a few ivies. The kids all felt that high test scores, meaning over 2050, really stand out; even if the GPA is on the lower side, the adults felt that a consistent and higher GPA is really paramount to everything and that anyone can have a bad day and not test so well.</p>
<p>So curious as to what you all think, my stepdaughter is a junior and totally panic stricken over what she has seen them go through this year, she is a solid student but was a late bloomer and only a few months ago started taking a Princeton review course for SAT's, etc............so I will be interested to see what you think is more important or stands out to an admissions office more.</p>
<p>P.S. I know the obvious answer is BOTH, but if one has to be higher than the other which would you prefer and which would stand up in a admissions office?</p>
<p>my test scores are above the 75th percentile of every school i was rejected from. it certainly doesnt help to have a 3.1 and not be in the top half of my class.</p>
<p>I agree w/ DC. My BF has 3.5--4.0 wtd, hon mention all state football, Band Pres., Eagle Scout, etc., and was even rejected at easy State Schools (couple of states) because of 1000 V+M SAT.</p>
<p>You have to have both on an even scale! High Sats, low GPA: tells admissions your a good test taker (possibly paid for Sat help) but slacked off in school. High Gpa, low Sats: makes them nervous you can't handle the pressure. Just my opinion!</p>
<p>I think GPA hurt me more. I got a 2280 SAT and 34 ACT and had a GPA of 5.19/5.00. We have a weird scale at our school, but that put me ranked 31/491.</p>
<p>I was accepted at Dartmouth, Rice, and UChicago; waitlisted at Amherst, Duke, and UPenn; rejected at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Columbia, Brown, Georgetown, and Williams.</p>
<p>i think both LOL
i mean, if only i tried harder in school and studied harder for those tests...
but o well, i cant keep regretting. what's done is done and we all have to move on
enjoy wherever ur going (:</p>
<p>GPA by far is more important than test scores. My GPA screwed me over...my SATs were quite decent (1510/2310) but they could only do so much to "balance" my 3.65 unweighted =/</p>
<p>Colleges would much more easily forgive "bad" test scores than a "bad" GPA. Like my friend put it the other day...the test scores only reflect what happens one day over the span of four hours (you could've been very sick with the flu, anything could happen on test day) while your GPA reflects four years of continuous work.</p>
<p>The transcript reigns over all as the #1 most important thing colleges look at.</p>
<p>Of course, best case scenario would be a 4.0 unweighted and a 2300+ ;) but we all know that's not exactly an everyday reality...</p>
<p>i'm going to break away from the crowd and say low scores. i had a 4.3 GPA, bt a 1850 SAT and 28 ACT. I firmly believe that those scores led to my rejections.</p>
<p>Well, another thing to take in consideration is the type of schools we were rejected from. I was top 10% (literally, 90 percentile) ranking and 99 percentile SAT scores. Reject/waitlist @ all Ivy I applied to.</p>
<p>I would say "poorly written essay" was the thing that hurt me the most. There were so many applicants with extraordinary test scores that I can't even say how much my score hurt me anyways.</p>
<p>im saying GPA 100%, my friend has a 2400 and a 3.45uw(hard high school, still not great) and got rejected from uc berkeley in state. if he had a 4.0 from our school and a 2000 he would have gotten in im fairly positive</p>