<p>People who are saying that 2100-2200 is awesome, dont you think there’s a bit of a difference between a 2110 and a 2190? Additionally, were just looking at composite scores. What do you guys consider as good and bad on a section? Personally I think
200-490 is low.
500-550 is average.
560-590 is ok
600-640 is good
650-680 is great
690 is so close
700-720 is worth celebrating
730-750 is awesome
760-800 is amaaaaazing.</p>
<p>I think most kids who get high scores without prep may have preped for similar tests in the past and forgotten about it. For example they may have preped in 7th grade for Duke TIP or for the PSAT in freshman year etc. I know my son does not think he preped, but he was memorizing word lists for spelling bees as far back as Elementary school. Similarly, he may not hav preped with a C.B Blue book but he may have been practicing math from some other book and not considered it practice for the SAT. Then, at some point these skill cross over and it does not seem to the child like they prepared.</p>
<p>For individual sections, you could think of it in terms of z-scores. Also, one’s idea of a “good” score varies froms section to section. For me, I’m good at math and average at reading, so I consider a 750 on math poor, but a 750 on reading very good.</p>
<p>I know quite a few “closet studiers”</p>
<p>One kid that got a 236 on PSATs claims to have taken 1 practice test. If they’re Asian, it’s more than likely they’ve prepared.</p>
<p>One cannot define a “good” score. It amazes me that so many students are overly arrogant and pretentious when it comes to these standardized tests. Yeah, a higher score will get you application looked at, but scores are only ONE element in an application.</p>
<p>Imagine this thread, but with a new title. “what is a good sport, and what is a bad sport?” Or better yet, “What is a GOOD club, and what is a BAD one?” </p>
<p>The SAT is only one part of an application and differs depending on where one is applying. </p>
<p>Just my opinion, don’t flame the messenger…</p>
<p><1300 - lol
1301 - 1600 - below average
1601 - 1800 - average
1801 - 1900 - ok
1901 - 1990 - good
2000 - 2100 - very good
2101 - 2200 - very very good
2201 - 2300 - god like
2300+ - ***</p>
<p>nope, it’s definitely possible to get a 2300+ without putting in much effort. for students like that (myself included) i’d say a 2300 was a bad score because it doesn’t reflect the student’s true ability.</p>
<p>but anyway people in my range are the ones with stellar standardized test scores and mediocre GPAs. you’re better off just studying, lol.</p>
<p>2400: Good.</p>
<p><2400: Bad.</p>
<p>Only kidding.</p>
<p>^lukelev07 good point. There are lots of 2400’s rejected at the top schools.</p>
<p>Also, there are more things to worry about in high school besides the SAT, right??</p>
<p>Quite right rspence, since tests such as the SAT cannot distinguish between those who are in the second and the third standard deviation, they can only provide an adcom so much info. In the end people do not get the Nobel Prize for scoring 2400s on the SAT. So, I think what the research universities need are people who have a particular set of skills to go after the big prize and not just dwell on the 100 different general skills needed to score a 2400.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Yeah a 2400 isn’t worth it if you don know the color of the sky and grass outside… I know people will say “some are just naturally gifted” and while true, being well-rounded is much more important than being a basement-dwelling professional studyer… Again, my opinion…</p>
<p><1600 - bad
1600 - 1800 - decent
1810 - 2000 - good
2010 - 2150 - great
2160 - 2300 - incredible
2310 - 2400 - what is this I don’t even</p>
<p>rspence, can you provide any insight on how MIT views the Writing score on the SAT? Do they ignore it completely or give more weight to the MC over the Essay? I am wondering since it was an MIT professor that criticised the Essay in the SAT. thanks </p>
<p>.</p>
<p>@perazziman, I’m not sure actually. I don’t think MIT places much weight on SAT scores (unless they’re really low)…here’s a good article about MIT and SAT scores:</p>
<p>[url=<a href=“http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/whats_the_big_deal_about_402]What’s”>What’s the big deal about 40^2? | MIT Admissions]What’s</a> the big deal about 40^2? | MIT Admissions<a href=“it’s%20a%20little%20old%20though,%20written%20before%20the%20writing%20section%20was%20in%20place”>/url</a></p>
<p>@rspence. I appreciate it.That is some good info.</p>
<p>Personally, I think ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are rather relative, depending on the individual’s circumstances. </p>
<p>That being said, for college admissions purposes, I would say:</p>
<p>2000+ is probably best if you want to go to a selective school (maybe top 40 USNWR)
2100+ is good for Ivies and T20s</p>
<p>Give or take a few points, of course.</p>
<p>I would say 2250+ is good for ivies. 2300 if ORM</p>
<p>@hpyscm, would that be for a single sitting or superscored? I got a 2190 single sitting but 2270 superscore (I’m Chinese though so it’s nothing special).</p>
<p>I think 2100+ for T20/Ivies means you have a shot…some shot at least. Obviously, for ORMs…2200+ is probably better, statistically speaking. </p>
<p>@darthpwner, I think colleges superscore most of the time and even Yale ‘unofficially superscores’, so you’re probably good. Also, 2190 is quite good.</p>