<p>Which has the bigger impact? SatI or the subject tests?</p>
<p>SAT I by far</p>
<p>SAT I, definitely, as it's more a measure of your overall academic skill. But that doesn't mean SAT IIs are unimportant!</p>
<p>I'd be curious to see if anyone has solid evidence that universities systematically place more emphasis on either one of the two tests.</p>
<p>UCs place equal emphasis</p>
<p>People always say equal emphasis or I, but I've heard from some people that were really researching the whole UC admissions process thing and what not, and they said that
SAT II was worth 2x as much as SAT I (And that the UC's published a guideline somewhere that indicated this). It shocked me as well.</p>
<p>UC does place equal emphasis on both tests (Berkeley and UCLA might not though as theirs system is slightly different). The other UC's have a scoring system. Your SAT scores translate into points, which are included with other factors such as GPA, initiative, etc. So, if you received a 600 M 700 V 650 W and a 700 Lit+ plus a 750 Math IIC you would have 3,400 points. Most UC's have a cut off at approximately 7,500.</p>
<p>7500? What?</p>
<p>also, UCs only take your highest 2 SATII scores which I think is very generous.</p>
<p>JyankeesSS2 - There's a lot of subject tests that people can take.</p>
<p>A person who gets 2200 on SAT and 650's on SAT II's </p>
<p>VS </p>
<p>A person who gets 2000- on SAT and 750-800s on SAT II's </p>
<p>I personally think that SAT II are waay easier...I prepared for 5 months for the I but none for the II's...and I am still confident to get 600+ for all the three subjects I took...bearing in mind that I was relying on knowledge I learned in 9th-10th grades for 2/3 of the tests.. : P</p>
<p>^^well if they place way more emphasis on sat1s, then it sucks!! i personally would say that above a score like 1950 on sat1, there wont a be huge difference between a 1950 or a 2150...except that if u score llike above 2200, and the sat1 becomes MORE of a "leverage" for u...but thts my 2 cnts</p>
<p>i think ppl want to know THIS: can low sat1 marks be offset by amazing sat2s? and VICEVERSA??
As for my opinion, i'd say both above are similar, as far as testing goes; i'd have to look at other criteria to distinguish which one to aadmit!</p>
<p>what does every one else think?</p>
<p>can low sat1 marks be offset by amazing sat2s? and VICEVERSA??</p>
<p>^
I say the former, no. The latter, yes. For most schools, anyway. Unless it's like 15 subject tests with all 750+ or some crazy **** like that.</p>
<p>I wonder if low SAT I math scores can be offset by higher SAT subject math II scores?</p>
<p>My subject math score is 40 points higher than my reasoning math score... I suppose anything less than a 50 pt difference isn't really a huge deal, but for other people would it be better to score higher on reasoning math or subject test math?</p>
<p>It really depends on the school. Only a few schools require the IIs. At HYPSM, I think the IIs have equal or more weight than the Is because these schools need some way to distinguish such qualified applicants.</p>
<p>i think SATI has more weight def.
i know people say that SATIIs should be more important because they "even the playing field" or whatever across diff. schools...but thats not always true. alot of schools dont teach to the subject tests. for example, i took honors chemistry which at my school was basically ALL math and not alot of the conceptual stuff you need to know for the subject test. i also took honors physics and my teacher said not to take the SATII because we dont learn what is tested on the subject test.</p>
<p>just because you dont get an amazing score on a standardized subject test doesnt mean you arent a good student in that subject.</p>
<p>^^ and vice versa. I went through the same exact thing with the chemistry. Our close was based on chemical problem solving, in depth stoichiometry etc. It was a really fun class and I did super well...rewarded with a 620 on the chem sat II.</p>
<p>That test is geared more to the AP test I think</p>
<p>jdub-exactly. we did in depth stoichiometry and all that. i did really well too. it is geared towards AP. i got like 670 after cramming alot of conceptual stuff the night before haha.</p>
<p>emilyequalsfun-->i see your point,but also just bcoz u cant get a gr8 score on the 4 hr sat1 doesnt mean ur really not upto college level work. Real life example: i did 5 GCE A levels, and 2 AS levels, All As except one B(ppl who know A levels understand how crazily demanding it is!!)
My friends took only 3-4 A levels, and got higher sat1 than me.
I got 2010---so does this mean i cant do college level work??</p>
<p>if we put the ques this way: dont colleges(v selective ones) value the "demonstrated mastery of content"(sat2s) more than "ability to master content"(sat1s)?doesnt low sat1s and high sat2s show that u tried and excellled in studies, despite being not extremely smart?</p>