<p>Wondering about this</p>
<p>Although there are a few exceptions, SATs are given considerably more weight in the admissions process.</p>
<p>Most colleges vary, however the SAT's are generally more important.</p>
<p>^You guys are all wrong... (brainwashed by CC)...</p>
<p>the most important thing is that they match up...great SAT w/bad GPA=lazy student. great GPA w/bad SAT=grade inflation...consistency is key. but SAT is standardized, so i'd agree with abiste.</p>
<p>GPA is more important than SAT, but you really need both to be good.</p>
<p>sorry but it's SAT.</p>
<p>going back to what zel17 said:</p>
<p>He/She is right. bad SAT score and a high GPA will make the admissions team think your school gives out A's like nothing or have idiots as teachers. Some would hope they would get the impression that even though you suck you try hard...</p>
<p>I would've thought GPA... I always heard your transcript is the single most important factor.</p>
<p>Although, I think colleges like SATs because it sort of puts all applicants onto an equal playing field.</p>
<p>At elite universities, though, I think both are given about equal weight (and of course, are the two most important admissions factors).</p>
<p>I would think that if you go to a competitive school, one that sends students to elite colleges regularly, GPA would matter more. But what zel17 says is right--the SAT should be reflective of GPA and vice versa.</p>
<p>I don't think either is more important than the other. As was stated, consistency is the key.</p>
<p>I always thought it was GPA, in conjunction with rank/courseload...it probably varies from school to school though. </p>
<p>How bad does a high SAT/low GPA look, anyhow? Might colleges take it as a sign of grade deflation as opposed to laziness?</p>
<p>If you really want to know the relative weight for a particular school, you can find out by looking at the institution's Common Data Set. (There are several threads with links.)</p>
<p>It's hard to find a college where GPA is not rated "very important," but very common to find standardized tests rated just "important" or merely "considered."</p>
<p>IMO, GPA is more important. It measures your performance over several years instead of 4+ hours. As for "grade inflation" and GPA, that's what you have class rank and school reports for. In a grade-inflated school, everyone's grades are inflated. You could have a 4.0 GPA, but it could mean nothing if everyone of your classmates has a 4.0. </p>
<p>In general, this is how it works:</p>
<p>high SAT = Intelligent.</p>
<p>high GPA = Hard Working.</p>
<p>A combo of both is preferred, but I think that hard work is more important than intelligence. It's great to be smart, but it doesn't mean much in the job market if you're too lazy to work. </p>
<p>Nonetheless, standardized tests like the SAT are a necessity. They are the only real way we can compare students from different schools.</p>
<p>public schools = gpa</p>
<p>private schools = sat</p>
<p>prime example: i know people who got into ucla and berkeley with a 1700 sat but they all had over 4.0. howver, i've seen people with 3.4 get into harvard but had sat scores of like 1560 (on old one)</p>
<p>GPA should be more important. The academic record over 4 years says more than what happens on a test in a single morning (or 2-3). Combining GPA and rank accounts for grade inflation ("competitive" schools generally have more resources, and high-ranked students from "noncompetitive" schools demonstrates more initiative and success considering the environment).</p>
<p>That said, the most important is the rigor of the secondary school record. People who take easy classes for easy As will not perform better in college.</p>
<p>bman: that's quite a simplification. An anecdote doesn't prove anything.</p>
<p>the SAT is a stupid test... I know plenty of kids who work their asses off in school and get good grades yet don't get a good SAT, simply because they aren't good test takers</p>
<p>I also know plenty of kids who work their asses off in school and don't get good grades, for whatever reason. Both measures are flawed - the idea is that when put together with a few other things, for better or for worse, you get some idea of an applicant's profile.</p>
<p>
[quote]
simply because they aren't good test takers
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Who cares? College is tests, tests, and more tests, with a few problem sets. There's no homework to pad your grade.</p>
<p>Its not each one idividually but a mixture. Your ECs and Essays can make up for whatever you stuggle in (GPA or SATs). I personally that nowadays, GPA>ACT>SAT, only because GPA and class rank together show what type of student you are, but the SATs just show how well you can prepare for a completely worthless standardized test that shows virtually nothing.</p>
<p>The SATs are ridunkulous.</p>