soccer4921

see above.

NY_Democrat

I know a decent amount of applicants get a perfect 2400/2400 for three top SAT II's combined...mines 2380 (800 in World History, US History, 780 in Chemistry...770 in Math II but it doesn't count since it's not in top 3, and same w/ 630 in Bio)

soccer4921

Okay, I got a combined 2260 ( 780 U.S., 750 Bio M, 730 Math II). I know a 2260 is solid for an SAT I score, but for SAT IIs, is it expected to have 2300 plus?

soccer4921

Okay so should i take Lit or something to bump mine up?

Echelon32

Know that Lit is widely considered the hardest SAT 2, but if youre beast at CR, then I guess it wouldn't matter.

Hollylove

stupid question - if its widely considered the hardest, does that mean colleges are more impressed if you did well on it?

Equilibrium

Holly, yes

IMO, if you're in the 83th percentile for every test, you should be fine.

soccer4921

hmm.. debating whether to take it or not. i would but i would have to tke it in december...decisions decisions

Anon_Person_1

2270...however, it's much better with only two: 1550!

Poseur

I'm relieved to see that Lit is considered so hard -- I got a 780 on it, whereas it took me two tries to get a 750 on Math IIC (one of the easiest.) And I'm good at math! Sigh. Oh well, I'm just going for 750+ on everything, I guess. :] (I'm also going for getting my French score to 650+... hahaha I suck.)

PBailey

Percentiles are more important than the 800 scale as some tests have averages of over 700 (ex. Chinese)

AKittka

i don't think percentiles are more important. compared to how many times the SAT is taken no one takes the subject tests except mostly competent students. if percentiles were more important i think CB would just throw out the scaled scores altogether. believe it or not subject tests are difficult. if all the kids who took the SAT I took IIs the average for each test would go significantly down. i think colleges are more concerned with the score even if the test is significantly curved. just my opinion though.

Begoner

I'd say that a score in the neighborhood of 2250 would be considered "competitive" by a conservative definition of the term; however, this is downwardly flexible. If you get over a 700 on each exam you take, that's not bad at all. Also (in my opinion), taking an SAT II in a language you don't natively speak is risky, because you're going to be judged against people who are native speakers.

bco09

i concur with akittka that percentiles are not more important. Though i have no factual evidence to back this claim up, i do have my logic.

Notice that the percentiles for 800's on various tests are not all the same http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_dow...ntileRanks.pdf

Let us assume that percentiles were in fact more important. In that case, 800 Ecological Biology would bear more weight than an 800 in Molecular Biology or one in Chemistry. Likewise, an 800 in Chemistry would bear more weight than an 800 in Physics. Does a student who scores an 800 in biology have a better shot at admission (lets assume they are majoring in something other than physics/biology) than a student with an 800 in physics? Absolutely not. In fact, most colleges say that they don't care WHICH science subject test you take, as long as you take one.

Perhaps an even better indicator of why percentiles don't mean as much as your scaled score is the fact that a 730 in math level 1 is 91st percentile while an 800 in math level 2 is only 90th percentile. Now you may argue that you can achieve either score by missing 5-6 problems, but tell me how you can conclude that the student who misses 6 "easy" math problems is as proficient as the student who misses 6 more difficult math problems.

The college board scales scores for a reason. keep that in mind

Ephemeral2

hahha to the person above.. taking lit to boost your scores. haha.