<p>I was doing some research on this site and realized that many top colleges look down upon you for retaking a 2300+ SAT. Why is this? What if you scored exactly a 2300, then would it still reflect badly? I already took it two times; if I take it again it would be my 3rd time; should I retake? </p>
<p>You run the risk of looking like an OCD perfectionist, which some regard as a negative trait. OTOH, if you’re applying for crazy-competitive scholarships like they have at Duke, and that’s something you really want, then it might be worth retaking the test.</p>
<p>While I don’t have stats to prove it, you’re probably no more likely to get into, say, an ivy league school with a score of 2350 than you are with a score of 2300. But hey, I’d wonder how people “prove” that schools look down upon a “chronic tester” anyway. It’s all conjecture and speculation. </p>
<p>@RunningForLife, I really urge you NOT to retake this. I’ve snooped around a few blogs by admissions officers from HYPSM.</p>
<p>It’s apparent that scores aren’t given as much weight as you think they are. Admissions officers look to see that you are in the 2200+ range and then never think about your score again. </p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/massachusetts-institute-technology/1625217-mit-class-of-2018-ra-results-thread.html#latest”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/massachusetts-institute-technology/1625217-mit-class-of-2018-ra-results-thread.html#latest</a></p>
<p>Look at that thread. Most people who got into MIT got a 2000 - 2350. Once you’re in that range (preferably 2200+) you need to stop worrying and start looking into the other aspects. </p>
<p>In fact, if you look through that thread closely, you’ll see that 6-7 kids got perfect scores. 2400s. Most of those kids were rejected 
. </p>
<p>My son took the SAT once; he was very close to a perfect score, but had better things to do than retake.</p>
<p>You do not want to be viewed as unable to deal with imperfection, not having a sense of “good enough/sufficient for the task at hand” (which is a common and serious problem for engineers when they later get jobs), or a “score whore,” which is on the same level as grade grubber.</p>
<p>As a silver-lining, humorous view of this, my son said that adcoms are always mentioning how they rejected many 2400s – his less-than-perfect score saved him from becoming an example for adcoms to brag about rejecting :)) </p>
<p>Thanks for the responses guys!! 
@WasatchWriter: Why would retaking a 2300 be seen as “perfectionism”? Isn’t a 2300 pretty far from perfect?(100 pts seems pretty significant…maybe I’m missing something?)
@IxnayBob: But there aren’t that many perfect scorers to begin with…(maybe like 300 per entering class total), and wouldn’t having a perfect still pose an advantage to a 2300-2340 ish?(Logically, wouldn’t more 2300s get rejected than 2400s?)</p>
<p>Once your score gets above 2150 or so, the test’s ability to evaluate what you’ve learned and/or to predict future success declines very rapidly. Admissions people start looking at other qualities.</p>
<p>Consider an analogy. Let’s say two Olympic quality swimmers are trying to get hired as a swimming coach. One was the winner in the last Olympics. The other competed in the same event. The difference in their times was 1/10 of a second. You can’t really believe that the faster swimmer automatically will make the best coach. Both of their times are awesome. The people hiring the coach have to look at other qualities, such as personality.</p>
<p>Likewise, admissions committees know that there’s just not much difference between a student who scores 2300 and one who scores 2400. Those 100 points really don’t tell you anything important that you don’t already know. </p>
<p>Please, ignore the people who say 2200+ is all the same. It’s not. People are basing these opinions off of decision threads, which often contain an unusual number of outliers as underqualified post to brag and overqualified post to sulk.</p>
<p>@RunningForLife, I’m not sure if a 2400 on the first and only test would pose an advantage, but perhaps it would. I am convinced that a 2400 on the second taking of the test (after a 2300 first time) would not pose an advantage. Even worse, of course, is a 2200 on the second taking of the test (after a 2300 first time).</p>
<p>But, fwiw, if you want to take it, go for it. We’ll just agree to disagree. Please let us know how it works out.</p>
<p>ETA: btw, I’m curious. You asked the question, but don’t seem to believe the majority of responses. Why did you ask?</p>
<p>@IxnayBob: I asked the question to get other’s feedback. Why else would I ask?
Sigh guess I’m stuck with my 2310 then… :(</p>