I come from a disadvantaged background, since I’m in a single-parent, low-income family. Also, I’m a URM. I was able to take subject tests through a fee waiver, and won’t get my scores back for another couple weeks. However, I think I probably got mid-600s on my subject tests, Literature and Math II, even though I scored decently well on my SATs, with a 2290 total (800 CR, 720 M, 770 W:11). I scored 740+ on practice tests for Literature, but I found the actual exam a lot harder, so I don’t think I’ll get any higher than a 700.
What I’m asking is this: if my subject tests end up being in the 600s, should I just send my SATs and not send the subject tests for the regular round? I plan on retaking in December, but I’m trying to look at my worst-case-scenario options. I guess my question boils down to what looks worse - no subject tests or bad subject test scores?
If the school requires subject tests and you do not send them you will be an automatic reject. If SAT II’s are optional that is different. What schools are you applying to? If top 20 not sending them may hurt.
Top 20 schools.
I know that usually “recommended” means “should” as far as top schools’ requirements go, but I figured being financially disadvantaged might give me some leeway.
How will they see right through OP? If they don’t send the scores they will assume they didn’t take them because of financial hardship. However, if OP doesn’t specifically lie and say they didn’t take the tests due to financial hardship then there is nothing wrong with what they are doing. The scores are optional at a lot of schools now and OP is simply choosing to exercise their right not to send them.