Relationship between SAT and GPA

<p>I'm really bothered by something.
I'm an A-B student and I took the PSATs as a sophmore, no studying or anything, and got an 1100 (Math and Verbal combined w/o Writing).
Another friend of mine, who doesn't get as high scores as I do in schoolwork, took the PSATs at sophmore year without studying and surprisingly got a 1400 Math and Verbal combined.
I'm not jealous of her or anything, but I'm surprised at my low score and on the contrary, her high score.
So what I'm asking is what is the relationship between the SAT scores and our GPA/schoolwork?</p>

<p>(It's fair to note that we went to two different schools, both private Christian schools)</p>

<p>if you want to hear an extreme example; i have a friend who could care less about school, ditches atleast a coulple days a week and never does homework at all.. he is a brilliant kid though. he has a 1.9 GPA and has a 1540 SAT score.</p>

<p>I have no info on discrepancies for PSAT scores and those really don't tell that much for what will actually happen on the SAT. According to the College Board, the administrator of the SAT, about 1/3 of the students who take it have "discrepant" SAT scores in relation to GPA meaning the Board considers their SAT and GPA to be out-of whack -- the SAT is low in comparison to high GPA or the GPA is low in comparison to a high SAT. However, I do not know how big a difference there needs to be for there to be a "discrepant" SAT.</p>

<p>Oh, so then your saying that the SATs and GPAs really aren't related at all..? Or at the least, irrevelant. So would that mean that she's smarter than me? Or that I'm not as smart as my GPA (and ego) would suggest?</p>

<p>Have a friend who got a 1600 last year and had a 2.4 GPA! Smart guy, just didn't try in his classes.</p>

<p>This is pretty basic. GPA's are attained primarily through hard work. Standardized tests are a measure of pure intelligence/test-taking ability. Many students will get A's in english while actually having sub-par vocabularies, not being able to read critically, and essentially not having a good understand of the english language. This doesn't mean you're not smart...but it does mean your friend is smart. Do some SAT prep...I'm sure you'll be fine. To directly answer your question, of course there's a correlation between GPA and SAT score...but it's not a gaurantee of anything. Many kids with good grades we'll do poorly on the sats. Many with low gpas will do extremely well. In general, at schools of at least a decent amount of difficulty, high gpa=high sats and low gpa=low sats.</p>

<p>From above:</p>

<p>"Oh, so then your saying that the SATs and GPAs really aren't related at all..? Or at the least, irrevelant. So would that mean that she's smarter than me? Or that I'm not as smart as my GPA (and ego) would suggest?"</p>

<p>I was not saying that at all and simply giving you figures. Since 2/3 of test-takers have non-discrepant scores then likely most who score high also have high GPA's. As to who is smarter, I am not sure what you think the SAT is designed to test. The College Board long ago did away with any claim that the SAT was an "intelligence test." Its purpose is to provide one uniform predictor, when considered along with the applicant's GPA, of the potential that one will make it in college (at least through year one). Moreover, it does not even claim that variations in scores mean that someone with a higher score is more likely to do a lot better in college -- again, it is only trying to predict whether you "will make it" meaning at least do C work. Other studies have found that having a 300 point difference in SAT (1400 versus 1100) means little to nothing as to college GPA -- basically, college graduates with 1100's ended up having the same median and average college GPAs as the 1400's. In other words, your belief that the SAT measures whether someone is actually more intelligent than another is misplaced.</p>

<p>Because no one knows for sure what the grading standard is in any particular school, colleges have to pay some attention to other lines of evidence when deciding who is ready for competitive college work. The college admission tests such as the SAT I and the ACT are also imperfect, just as grades are, but they do have the advantage of being COMPARABLE across a huge population of test-takers. </p>

<p>In general, anyone who is an avid reader, given enough years of avid reading, will eventually score high on the SAT I. (By that I mean the person will score high on the verbal section AND the math section.) Some kids get into high school having done remarkably little independent, challenging reading, especially in this day of video games and instant messaging. Young people who READ, READ, READ, and READ pretty nearly never fare poorly on the SAT I verbal section. Young people who actually do all the math problems it takes to master math through geometry and THINK about the math as they do generally do fine on the SAT I math section. Such young people are, other things being equal*, more ready for challenging college work than young people who score significantly lower on the SAT I (or ACT). </p>

<p>BUT, BUT, BUT, the commonly observed phenomenon of kids scoring high on the SAT I but getting poor high school grades is very inexpedient for those kids. I knew a lot of kids like that when I was in high school in the 1970s--those kids were brilliant, as evidenced by one-on-one conversation, some of their written work, their IQ scores, and their college entrance test scores, but they were bored silly by their high school assignments. Now that I have lived overseas and have traveled all over the United States and have seen how meager the academic standards are in most United States schools, and how socially disaffected some bright young people are, I can sympathize with such young people in the United States, but I can't advise imitating their example. To a college admission officer, high test scores plus low grades equals LAZY. The kid who isn't doing his high school homework had better be doing something REALLY HARD (finding a cure for cancer would be hard enough) to show that he is not simply shirking opportunities to find learning challenges in his environment. Often the most expedient thing to do for a bright (here defined as scoring high on tests) kid to do if the first school is too boring is to find another school, or get out of school entirely and into homeschooling (perhaps with early enrollment at a community college or distance learning to find challenging courses). ]</p>

<p>*Other things usually aren't equal. A child from a poor family who works to support his family and gets moderately high but not super-high grades, and above-average but not spectacularly high test scores, will probably look more appealing as a candidate for college than a rich kid whose free time is taken up by recreation. A first-generation immigrant, naturally, is hardly expected to have as high a verbal score as a native speaker of English who grew up in America. There are many extracurricular actitivities that can demonstrate character and commitment to personal challenge and growth that show up neither on test scores nor on school grades. But the expedient thing to do for applying to college is to have good grades (I think you know what to do to get those), good test scores (reading more will help you get those), AND a record of challenging extracurricular activities (which can vary as widely as the interests of young people; do what is interesting to YOU). </p>

<p>One data point I know of is a boy who grew up MOSTLY in the United States but also lived for three years in a non-English speaking country. He aced the SAT I math section at age eleven, but still has some room to grow on the verbal section. He has straight As so far, but takes many ungraded classes and is mostly homeschooled. There is a HUGE variety of other examples of kids with every which combination of test scores or grades. </p>

<p>Good luck in your studies.</p>

<p>Thanks, I understand now. Heh, guess I gotta ways to go to get better SAT grades. =D Should be interesting.</p>