<p>How important are the SAT II subject test scores compared to the reasoning test at top schools? Some say they are equally important while others claim they are less of importance. Also, would below average SAT I score be compensated by high SAT II scores?</p>
<p>I would also like to know what other people have to say on this issue. Sadly, I can only give you my own biased oppinion. </p>
<p>SATII’s are, in the very least, as important as the SATI. However, I would like to stress that I think they are, in many cases, more important than the latter for the simple reason that they are more relative to what YOU learned in a preticular class over the year(s).</p>
<p>I don’t see how they can be even close to the importance of the SAT seeing as many prestigious schools don’t even require that you submit them…</p>
<p>What is your definition of prestigious then? Harvard, Yale, Princeton, MIT, Caltech, Duke, Georgetown, etc. all require at least 2.</p>
<p>Harvard said somewhere that they would consider dropping the SAT and requiring students to take 4-5 subject tests instead.</p>
<p>I believe one of their admission officers said that SAT II subject tests are a better predictor of aptitude than the SAT I.</p>
<p>However, this was only Harvard. Almost all top schools require two SAT subject tests. They’re at least as important as the SAT I in my opinion. Do well on both.</p>
<p>UC almost dropped SAT I in favor of all SAT II’s, that’s why they changed it. I think that the SAT II is a better judge of what you have learned.</p>
<p>“What is your definition of prestigious then? Harvard, Yale, Princeton, MIT, Caltech, Duke, Georgetown, etc. all require at least 2.”</p>
<p>A lot of schools that “require” them will take the ACT in lieu of subject tests such as: Penn, Brown, Duke, etc.</p>
<p>Other great schools don’t require them at all: Stanford, Georgetown, University of Chicago, etc.</p>
<p>I guess if your definition of prestigious is limited to HYPM then you either have an enormous ego, enormous SAT 2 scores, or all of the above.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Interestingly, they lowered their Subject Test requirement, though.</p>
<p>So the general consensus is that SAT IIs are at the least equally important as SAT Reasoning test?</p>
<p>^ No, the SAT Reasoning Test is usually more important.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Didn’t they do that because the Writing Subject Test was removed? I remember reading that somewhere on this site, but I’m probably wrong.</p>
<p>Whether or not one test is more important than another really isn’t that important; doing well on all your tests is probably what you should strive for.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I heard that about Princeton, but not about Harvard. The Writing Subject Test was removed years ago, but Harvard’s new policy won’t go into effect until the next admissions cycle.</p>
<p>Hmm, true, Harvard did get rid of their 3 subject test requirement. Most of their applicants seem to have taken 3 anyway though.</p>
<p>About Stanford - I was under the impression that, though subject tests aren’t required, they’re recommended.</p>
<p>I agree with doing your best on both the SAT I and II’s.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Your impression is correct.</p>
<p>silverturtle, could you please go more in depth about why you think the SATI is more important?</p>
<p>Admissions officers have said that one’s being academically qualified is the primary factor in application evaluation. They foremost use the SAT Reasoning Test and one’s transcript to determine this. Subject Tests are used to measure specific skills.</p>
<p>does it matter the certain skill? Like for example, if one was planning to major in mathematics but took a world history SAT II… would that be irrelevant and weird?</p>
<p>In general, top schools do not use one’s intended major as an evaluative context for scores.</p>
<p>Silverturtle, do you perhaps know how much time admissions officers spend on reading transcripts? Do they just skim over it, possibly checking number of APs and honors? I basically want to know the thought process of an admissions officer at the top college when he/she is examining applicant’s transcript.</p>
<p>Admissions officers have uniformly indicated that they spend a lot of time carefully reading applicants’ transcripts.</p>