<p>Do they have some sort of checklist that they go through when they are reading transcripts? ex) number of core classes, APs and Honors classes, etc</p>
<p>No, the process is fluid, subjective, and wholly holistic. And it is all, of course, evaluated with the applicant’s high-school circumstances in mind.</p>
<p>SAT I tests your ability to do well; SAT II tests what you have done well on.</p>
<p>(At least that’s what they’re supposed to test.)</p>
<p>So if an admissions officer gets a food poisoning at a restaurant in applicant’s city the day before he/she evaluates student’s transcript, will it have negative effect on applicant’s chance?
Did I just make this off-topic?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think admissions officers don’t actually travel. Instead, they stay at one location to read all the applications. So, your hypothetical situation (fortunately) would never occur.</p>
<p>Google this and click the first link: secrets of college admissions food poisoning</p>
<p>Wow. I stand corrected. Though, why would a college admission officer travel around?</p>
<p>SAT I is more important lol…</p>
<p>Most people do very well on SAT IIs if they just study it a little or have took the AP course.</p>
<p>SAT I measures innate ability/ talent.
SAT II is more specific.</p>
<p>I know people who got 2250+ (SAT I) and 690-750s (SAT II) and got into really good schools (like Cornell). </p>
<p>However, if you were to put a number on importance… I would say SAT I is 65% while SAT II is 35%.</p>
<p>Thats my two cents =P</p>
<p>hannibal, who are you talking to?</p>
<p>Probably XferStudent. I couldn’t understand what he/she said either.</p>
<p>Buuuuummmp</p>