Which Would You Rather Have?

Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

Discus: SAT/ACT Tests and Test Preparation: June 2004 Archive: Which Would You Rather Have?
By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 09:39 pm: Edit

Valedictorian of a class of 250 at relatively rigorous public high school.
Average of 730 on three SAT IIs.

Rank of 20 out of 250 at relatively rigorous public high school.
Average of 800 on three SAT IIs.

Please just respond with '1st' or '2nd' so we can get a tally going.

By Thepiskickass (Thepiskickass) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 09:40 pm: Edit


By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 09:44 pm: Edit

Okay, that's 0-1. Keep em comin

By Athlonmj (Athlonmj) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 09:45 pm: Edit

we need a lot more information than that

By Physicskid123 (Physicskid123) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 09:45 pm: Edit

Number 2. That one more closely resembles me!

By Sprangbang (Sprangbang) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 09:51 pm: Edit

I'd say second... a rank of 20th is respectable, and a person with straight 800s's potential can't be overlooked...also, this shows that while person 1 has gotten better grades, person 2 has retained more of the knowledge, and isn't such retention the true measure of a person's achievement in a class? I suppose a public school might rather have student 1, but I would imagine that a very selective school would take 2.

sorry, I just felt that if I threw an opinion out in the open like that, I should back it up

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 09:54 pm: Edit

I'm not saying which would you pick, I'm just saying that all things being equal, when it comes to grades and subject test scores, which would you prefer? Consider them taking the same tests and classes.

0-3. Let's go!

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 10:28 pm: Edit

Come on. Just three characters.

By Averagemathgeek (Averagemathgeek) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 10:32 pm: Edit


By Cherrybarry (Cherrybarry) on Monday, May 31, 2004 - 11:18 pm: Edit

Person 2 won the genetic lottery. Not fair. I feel sorry for the valediction, who probably works his or her butt off.

By Twinkletoes696 (Twinkletoes696) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 12:46 am: Edit

I will take the first kid! Having a average of 730 is nothing to sneeze at either!

By Rbc13 (Rbc13) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 12:54 am: Edit

The first one because 3 tests aren't everything! There is a huge amount of difference between the work put into by the person ranked 20 and 1 more than likely.

By Feuler (Feuler) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 01:01 am: Edit


Grades measure your ability to do meaningless busy-work, suck up to your teacher, etc. True, these may be useful in life, but they can be learned once you're getting paid for it.

SAT II measures a composite of luck, test-taking ability, intelligence, and knowledge. The latter two are useful throughout life.

Also, depending on the school, the diff. between 1 and 20 isn't much. At my school, the difference between 1 and 30 is a B in driver's ed (a .25 credit).

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 02:35 pm: Edit

2-6 if I take cherrybarry's comment as a vote for 2.

By Entropicgirl (Entropicgirl) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 03:51 pm: Edit

2nd...I'd rather be "smart" than "diligent." (OK, both kids are smart, blah blah, generalizations are bad, blah blah, but that's my rationale).

By Chamonix (Chamonix) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 04:29 pm: Edit

The Former

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 04:57 pm: Edit


By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 04:59 pm: Edit

Well said, entropicgirl!

By Shaka (Shaka) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 05:05 pm: Edit

2nd definitely...1st seems like a tight assed bookworm with less understanding of the materials he/she had learned...but rather handed in all his/her hw on time...

By Crypto86 (Crypto86) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 07:08 pm: Edit


By Mehere (Mehere) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 07:41 pm: Edit

tho it depends on how the rest of the applicants from ur school do. if the person with rank 10 has 800s acorss the board.. then.. maybe the first place is a fluke

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 09:08 pm: Edit


By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 09:38 pm: Edit

That is easy.

The high schools are of the same difficulty but all SAT-II are NOT equally difficult. Just look at California and Korean and Chinese SAT-II tests!

So, valedictorian wins hands down! Sorry, peeps!

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 09:51 pm: Edit

I'm saying if they each took the same tests, say Math IIC, Writing, and Chemistry. The point of the tally is to see which wins: (near)perfect grades or perfect ability to get 800s on subject tests that require acquired knowledge (this ability is a combo of things; let's not debate this; see Feuler's comments).

I'll put you down for #1.


By 1212 (1212) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 11:06 pm: Edit

machines are not partial in grading
while teacher are jaundiced, therefore the test results (if they consists of the same exact tests and the same version in the same testing conditions) blocks all extaneous factors such as racism, favoritism, nepotism, anything similarism and (most of the time) grading errors, etc

By 1212 (1212) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 11:14 pm: Edit

"The high schools are of the same difficulty"

if both took the same exact courses, educated by the same teachers for 4 years, while being identical or simese twins, then that statement MAY be true
but again, as i previously exlained, situations for the SAT would also have to be pretty similar

Have you ever tried this: if you have an older brother or sister that had the same teacher for the same course, try to find a worksheet, essay, project, any assignment (that is unlikely to be affected by recent discoveries) they had from that class. Exactly Copy your siblings work, verbatim, matching the handwriting, and hand that in 90+% of the time, the same teacher will grade it differently
(i suggest that you do not try this, unless your sibling is much older)

By Thermodude (Thermodude) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 11:22 pm: Edit

Hmmmm...my personal opinion would be #2. Think about it....rank #1 and rank #20 many times are seperated by GPA differences of less than .2 (at my school, which doesn't weigh...#1 is a 4.0 and #20 is a 3.95...yah...one C can bring a person down like 30 spots). Sometimes this difference is simply due to the fact that teacher styles of the instructors better matched #1. However, the difference between an 800 and 730 in SAT II's is actually quite something (At least according to the UC system). On Biology, a subject I was ok at, but never took the AP for it, i scored a 740. For Physics, a subject I love passionately and took both AP Physics B and C, I scored a 790.

By Jess13 (Jess13) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 11:28 pm: Edit

#1. If they're talking the same level courses here, there's a big difference between #1 and #20. Obviously, that's going to change from school to school, but if you think that being at the top is an easy feat, and that's it's all about grade grubbing and sucking up, then you're sadly mistaken. And grades are far more important than a couple of test scores.

By Mysticaura (Mysticaura) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 11:37 pm: Edit

1 valedictorian are admitted at a much higher percentages at colleges if you look at the statistics despite minor differences in test scores

By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 11:39 pm: Edit


Did you not read the OP message and the way he described the schools.

Valedictorian of a class of 250 at relatively rigorous public high school.
Rank of 20 out of 250 at relatively rigorous public high school.

The situations for the SAT2 might be similar but the OP does not say that the students take the same tests. How you could compare a SAT-II that most foreign third graders should ace with an SAT-II in Biology? Except for the rigged SAT tests, the difference between an 800 and a 730 is not that great. For instance for Biology-E, in 2003, 1600 students scored between 750 and 00 while about 3,100 scored between 700 and 750. That represents the top 5% and the top 15% in the country.

By Zantedeschia (Zantedeschia) on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 11:48 pm: Edit

I think Qwert cleared that up...saying that hypothetically that they took the same tests...

I'm glad my school neither ranks nor calculates GPA...we're competitive as is...I think the average SAT is like a 1500 or something...

Anyway, I'd go for #2 because there is often a tiny differnce betwen 1 and 20 in the rankings..and cuz, #2 sounds more like me =)

By Sarasote (Sarasote) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 01:34 am: Edit

number 1
rank and gpa is looked at much higher than sat 2s

especially at many public schools, 1 and 20 is a big difference. at my school the difference between number 1 and number 20 could be 8-12 Bs

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 07:20 am: Edit

7-13. It's evening out.

By Stupid_Guy (Stupid_Guy) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 09:42 am: Edit

2nd, I like to stick up for people, like me, who are so underappreciated.

SAT IIs test knowledge of the subject.
Grades test how well you can follow instructions.

By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 10:29 am: Edit

Consider them taking the same tests and classes.

It is still number one, hands down!

By Tri_N (Tri_N) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 12:28 pm: Edit


By Frenchfries (Frenchfries) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 03:45 pm: Edit

Definitely #1. Being valedictorian means that that one student got better grades than everyone else in the entire class, and even if he or she did so by doing "busy work," that doesn't make it any less of an achievement. No matter what, it takes a ton of effort to be valedictorian, but as far as standardized tests go, it's entirely possible that person #2 got three 800's by doing minimal/no prep work. This is an accomplishment too, and such a smart person would definitely be successful in life, but if someone is that smart, I also would tend to think that he or she could do better than being ranked 20/250 (I know, maybe the GPAs towards the top are really close, but still). Plus, the difference between 730 and 800 is not that big at all, especially since both are above average.

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 03:47 pm: Edit


By Emmittsmith (Emmittsmith) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 06:01 pm: Edit

I would rather be dilligent and intelligent than lazy and brilliant. Not to say that any of the categories are lacking in either respect; a substantial amount of dilligence and intelligence are needed to achieve a 730 average on SAT IIs and 20/250 as a class rank). However, with this mind set, I go with #1.

By Feuler (Feuler) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 06:35 pm: Edit

Valedictorian does not mean they got better grades than everyone in their class, only that no one in their class got better grades than them, i.e. there could be ties. Most of the competitive schools in my area have at least 10 Valedictorians every year, out of 400-450 kids (though that says more about grade inflation than anything else). I've heard unconfirmed reports that our school has about 30 this year (interestingly, 30 is about how many National Merit Finalists we have every year; I suspect the intersection of those sets is sizable).

By Needhelp06 (Needhelp06) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 06:49 pm: Edit

Qwert271 which relatively rigorous public high school is this? Just curiosity talking.

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Wednesday, June 02, 2004 - 09:18 pm: Edit

It's very hypothetical. None in particular, just think of some one in suburbia, quite affluent, good resources, usually sends about 3 to half a dozen to Ivy caliber schools. Probably offers about 8 AP courses. Honestly, I'm thinking of the one that I go to, but that's a secret.

And just to clear some things up: in this high school there is a marked difference in GPA between the #1 and the #20.


By Needhelp06 (Needhelp06) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 12:41 am: Edit

would you be able to tell me what state your in? I go to a school that exactly fits the description I go to and I'm trying to see if you are actually from my school. Or you could give me your AIM sn and we could talk without telling the whole board.

By Aim78 (Aim78) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 12:58 am: Edit

I like the second guy. He's smart, but he's also been challenged in his classes.

By Oasis (Oasis) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 04:23 am: Edit

Second...the position of "valedictorian" is overrated and doesn't really reflect one's academic integrity.

By Astrobobocop (Astrobobocop) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 10:02 am: Edit

#2 because i rank intelligence above diligence. A machine can do some very complex tasks, like translating sentences for spanish homework or calculating the derivative or integral of an equation. It requires true intelligence, not an algorithm, to come up with new ideas.

By Tlaktan (Tlaktan) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 10:13 am: Edit

#2. I just don't like valedictorians. They are far too conceited to be appropriate leaders. At least at my school. Valedictorian implies some form of scholastic leadership -- BS. Took the dang easiest classes, kissed ass to all the AP teachers..

Okay, I've had my $0.02

By Ecnerwalc (Ecnerwalc) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 12:13 pm: Edit


By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 02:15 pm: Edit

11-18. needhelp you can email me. click my name to see the address.

By Benzinspeicher (Benzinspeicher) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 02:17 pm: Edit

genetic intelligence has nothing to do with SAT IIs, SAT IIs measure achievement. And I'll be number 2.

By Norseviking (Norseviking) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 04:02 pm: Edit

Number 2

By Tired_Student (Tired_Student) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 10:04 pm: Edit


By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 10:23 pm: Edit

12-19. I'm hoping to be #2 after Saturday (who's with me?). Nothin' I can do about being #1 now. Maybe that's why those who like 1 better do: it requires sustained effort over years, whereas getting 3 800s can be done with a good amount of knowledge in three different areas and achieved on one lucky day (perhaps it's not luck, but in some people's cases I'm sure it is).

By Ilovefood (Ilovefood) on Thursday, June 03, 2004 - 11:25 pm: Edit

From what's been given, #2

By Lahlahlah (Lahlahlah) on Friday, June 04, 2004 - 12:13 am: Edit

who cares...

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 02:45 pm: Edit

12-20. Keep it up, we're almost there.

By Runrickyrun (Runrickyrun) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 03:13 pm: Edit

Scoring 3 800s on three SAT2s as opposed to 3 730s on three SAT2s negates everything the valedictorian has done in his effort to attain the highest GPA in the entire grade level? I don't think so.

Scoring 730s on SAT2s means that the Valedictorian is a machine? Valedictorians are usually enrolled in a ton of AP Classes, at least in the schools in my general vicinity, and keep up with all of the homework, turn it in on time etc. How does this give them as much time to study for a subject test? And if you're the "lazy" #20, who doesn't do any work, and get 800s on SAT2s... I'd consider that very lucky. You can't know everything about a subject by just being the cocky, lazy "brilliant" student.

By Runrickyrun (Runrickyrun) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 03:14 pm: Edit

By the way, I choose Student 1.

By Thermodude (Thermodude) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 03:23 pm: Edit

dangit...why won't any one give any consideration to the individuals that go to schools that DON"T WEIGHT GPA LIKE ME! At my school.....the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN #1 and #20 can be ONLY two or three B's One of my friends from a few years ago got like two B or something...he took the HARDEST classes out of anyone (more AP's and stuff)...but cause of those two B's...he was ranked like #23....ranked below people who had 4.0's but took underwater basket weaving.

By Desrtswimer (Desrtswimer) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 04:10 pm: Edit


A 730 average is just fine and dandy!

i got a ::gasp:: 600 on one of my SAT II's. Still admitted to everywhere i applied.

definately #1!!!!!

By Silverstar (Silverstar) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 04:26 pm: Edit

wow. underwater basket weaving....talk about random =p

By Monoe (Monoe) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 04:29 pm: Edit

The first one.

There is not a big difference between 730s and 800s. As much as you'd like to disbelieve it, colleges don't place that much more weight on three 800s than, say, 720, 740, 730. There is, however, between 20th and valedictorian. You may say it's only 'diligence' and 'sucking up', but there is a certain type of dedication needed to top 249 others, one that transcends grades.

And the 'composite' of those qualities Feuler mentioned are weighted heavily towards 'luck' and 'test-taking ability'. A lot more heavily than you'd like to admit. Add 'money' and 'race' to the list.

By Thermodude (Thermodude) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 04:48 pm: Edit

UUHHMM...did anyone not get my point...some schools do not weight GPA....in my school...I've taken 6 AP's (more than anyone else)...but I'll be ranked BELOW a unnamed person who I know who doesn't study as much as I do...and took 0 AP's...but still got a 4.0. Oh ya...my GPA's a 3.993 (got 1 A-)....and i'm probably gonna be ranked #14 if things do not change. I really don't think its fair that I"m ranked below people take REALLY EASY classes and tell me they really don't study (cause their classes are easy), while I study my a-- off. One thing, however, is that my SAT II"s (which are knowledge based tests) are higher than many of the people who are ranked above me and take like ZERO AP's and one honors class.

By Sulskman (Sulskman) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 05:08 pm: Edit

Two! SAT II's a greater measrure of performance. GPAs can be affected by other factors like dificulty of teacher, types of courses you take, and each school has different policy in terms of weighting for honors/AP classes.

By Needhelp06 (Needhelp06) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 05:22 pm: Edit

haha I am a number 2. So im gonna go with number 2.

By Thenarrator (Thenarrator) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 06:26 pm: Edit


By Encomium (Encomium) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 06:37 pm: Edit

1st is better I think...people 20th in my high school don't do that well compare to 1st

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 07:07 pm: Edit

17-23 if I counted correctly.

By Kingkonglives (Kingkonglives) on Sunday, June 06, 2004 - 11:51 pm: Edit


By Iwantcolumbia (Iwantcolumbia) on Monday, June 07, 2004 - 11:50 pm: Edit

#2 for sure. grades are a measure of how hard-working and dilligent one person is. standardized test scores are a measure of potential.

By Pinacolada (Pinacolada) on Tuesday, June 08, 2004 - 12:18 am: Edit

hmm..well seeing as some valedictorian with straight 800's from a super rigorous high school is going to come along and beat both of them jk though that's not an unreasonable prophecy
i'll vote for 1

By Minamora (Minamora) on Tuesday, June 08, 2004 - 12:19 am: Edit

The first.

By Feuler (Feuler) on Tuesday, June 08, 2004 - 01:05 am: Edit

Well, what Pinacolada said, or another student will come along with rank 20, avg. 730, but having done something with their life, and beat all three.

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Thursday, June 10, 2004 - 07:04 am: Edit


By Thermodude (Thermodude) on Thursday, June 10, 2004 - 05:54 pm: Edit

k...I just want to add....an 800 and a 730 constitute a sizable difference in knowledge.....here are a couple of my scores....

740 Biology - large amount of studying...I took just hrns though....love Biology...but not nearly as much as Physics

790 Physics - My favorite subject....took AP Physics B (got a 5)...self-studied for Physics C.....read lots of Physics books...studied way more than bio

BTW...the way you PREP FOR AN SAT II is by studying the subject!!!!!!!!!!!!...most of the knowledge i learned for both Physics and BIology came from my studying of it...both from school and for fun..anyways....if a person who knows NOTHING about Biology even TRIES to take the test...they'll score really bad....you need to know information to do well on SAT II"s. The more information you know (as in the case that i knew more info about physics than i did with bio)...the higher you'll score.

By Mreeves (Mreeves) on Thursday, June 10, 2004 - 07:10 pm: Edit

Hmm, I'd say #1.

Considering AWESOME SAT I scores, (i.e. 1550-1600), I think the harshness of the 730s would me mitigated. Besides, in a "relatively rigorous public high school", colleges know that it is hard to become Valedictorian.

By Dalaboy (Dalaboy) on Thursday, June 10, 2004 - 07:39 pm: Edit

1, class rank would show more than just a few saturday worth of tests. A class rank is like two years worth of materials, while each sat ii test is at almost an year.

By Wintersoul (Wintersoul) on Thursday, June 10, 2004 - 08:21 pm: Edit

#1, I've known many valedictorians who were brilliant but who either tested badly or were really bad with time. In less stressful situations, however, they were comparable with the rest of the students at the top of their class. Also, it's very easy for a person to spend some time prepping for a test and do very well, whereas many valedictorians don't have the time or don't feel that perfect test grades are important enough to spend the time prepping for a one time test when they could be studying other things.

By Macadamiamin (Macadamiamin) on Thursday, June 10, 2004 - 08:35 pm: Edit

#1. No doubt about it.

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Thursday, June 10, 2004 - 08:49 pm: Edit

24-23. Wow you #1 guys are hauling ass. Look at the tallies from before.

By Mahajan2005 (Mahajan2005) on Thursday, June 10, 2004 - 09:16 pm: Edit


He is the only person who says underwater basket weaving

also, put me down for #1...valedictorial is worth much more than a SAT II score...believe me i know about both

By Forsakn4 (Forsakn4) on Thursday, June 10, 2004 - 10:31 pm: Edit

honestly ppl is there much of a difference between in sat2s between 730 and 800-its only like two or three questions which are probable on luck
sat2s cant test all the knowledge of any subject
but school work does and in this case that there is a real difference in gpa from 20 and 1
there is no doubt #1 would be valued more by any college

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Friday, June 11, 2004 - 02:57 pm: Edit


By Ware_Ru (Ware_Ru) on Friday, June 11, 2004 - 03:51 pm: Edit

Only two or three questions? 8 for writing, 8 for literature, 11 for us history, 7 for math iic, 10 for bio, 13 for chem, 12 for physics, etc, etc, etc (these are some of the first few tests in the real sat ii book. BTW, i used the lowest 800 and the highest 730, so for example, some people who get 800 physics score more than 20 questions (out of 75) better than someone with a 730 physics). If you think that getting that many more questions right on a standardized multiple choice test isn't proof of being more knowledgeable about a subject, then I'm sure you're already enrolled in a hands-on cooking class to demonstrate your superior knowledge of Calculus and chemical equilibrium.

As for which is more important to college, I can't say, though I have a feeling that it's valedictorian (although that is ridiculous. I've never in my life met someone who truly, thoroughly knew a subject and then didn't perform on a standardized test; if you know how to do something, you know how to do it; you don't miss 20 more questions than someone who doesn't know the subject. Moreover, if you can't get questions right, how can you possibly know the subject?). Then again, when was the last time someone expected colleges to accept kids based on merit? Students are admitted based on their family tree and on their ability to "overcome life problems" and "work hard" and "do community service" and "be born black."

In retrospect, I realize that instead of learning what was important and useful in high school, I could have budgeted my time more effectively in the eyes of college admissions officers by making clay models of a human cell or 3d styrofoam models of the water molecule, and other such projects that pave every valedictorian's road to glory. Valedictorian. Better for college? Probably. Demonstrates a superior knowledge of any single subject or a general superior knowledge of all subjects? Not a chance.

By Jason817 (Jason817) on Friday, June 11, 2004 - 04:43 pm: Edit

2nd one because valedictorians have to give a speech on graduation day and I just cant give speeches.

By Elisetrop (Elisetrop) on Friday, June 11, 2004 - 05:15 pm: Edit


By Miamiman (Miamiman) on Saturday, June 12, 2004 - 04:12 pm: Edit


By Miamiman (Miamiman) on Saturday, June 12, 2004 - 04:12 pm: Edit


By Physiko (Physiko) on Saturday, June 12, 2004 - 05:42 pm: Edit

I would definately choose 2nd....anyways...Forsakn4 said that the difference between an 800 and 730 was 2 questions....this is blantantly FALSE!!!!!

The difference between an 800 and 730 for many SAT II's is more like 13 questions (out of 70-something or so).....that's about the same difference between a 95% and a 79%.....so....since WHEN DOES A 79% = 95%?????

You guys.....look at the raw scores yourself in the 22 real SAT's put out by the collegeboard....an 800 and a 730 is like the difference between a 95% and 79% (I am repeating this a second time so that people will notice it)....k....now most often....the difference in rank between #1 and 20 constitute GPA's difference of like say 4.0 UW (100%) and 3.9 UW(97%).....hhmmmmmm......interesting....compare...100% to 97%......or....95%...79%

By Zas1987 (Zas1987) on Saturday, June 12, 2004 - 06:00 pm: Edit

the first one by far. colleges look at grades/GPA first, and then standardized tests. They are not nearly as important, and people make a way huge deal out of them.

By Dostoyevsky (Dostoyevsky) on Sunday, June 13, 2004 - 10:52 am: Edit


By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Sunday, June 13, 2004 - 12:40 pm: Edit


By Encomium (Encomium) on Sunday, June 13, 2004 - 12:42 pm: Edit

Jason, at my school the number 1 kid ("valedictorian") doesn't have to give a speech. HALLELUJAH!

By Mattman (Mattman) on Sunday, June 13, 2004 - 09:02 pm: Edit

1. SAT IIs don't matter except at a handful of colleges, but the boost in rank and GPA is respected by all

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Sunday, June 13, 2004 - 09:32 pm: Edit


By Vladimir2004 (Vladimir2004) on Sunday, June 13, 2004 - 10:05 pm: Edit


first and 20th is a pretty big difference. Taking 3 tests and scoring slightly better on them is not a big deal because how smart you are is determined by years of hard work, not how well you blacken little ovals on some saturday morning, does this not make sense?

By Escaria (Escaria) on Sunday, June 13, 2004 - 11:30 pm: Edit

the 2nd

lol you guys wanna know how *my* school chooses valedictorian? it's a goddamn sham is all..
the whole grade 12 class votes on it. so it's essentially a popularity contest
.. kinda sad eh?

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Sunday, June 13, 2004 - 11:37 pm: Edit

Oh my god I can't restrain myself! Just because you can simplify tests to blackening little ovals doesn't mean it's that arbitrary or easy. The SAT 2's are the product of a whole year or more of work and acquired knowledge. It makes no difference that they analyze it on some Saturday morn. I takes a clear understanding of the subject to get an 800, let alone 3 of them. Also, repeating what someone above said, the difference between 800 and 730 on most subject tests is about 10-15 questions out of 50-75 questions. That's huge. The difference in percentile is normally about 20%. The subject tests prove how well you acquire knowledge and manipulate it. It doesn't matter what it's on, colleges want to see how well you can learn. That's what college tests are like. They don't give credit for homework or class attendance or quizzes. The final comprises usually about 60% of your grade and it's taken in a matter of hours. They want to see that you can retain what you're taught like you'll have to in college.

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Sunday, June 13, 2004 - 11:37 pm: Edit


By Thermodude (Thermodude) on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 01:12 am: Edit

AMEN!!!! Well said Qwert271...I agree completely with the above statement......everyone....realize that in many colleges...the final constitutes like 60% of the grade....and most college classes don't give assignments like making a paper cut-out of the battle of Saratoga or writing a play in biology class. (Of course, I did love these assignments and they were given in hnrs/AP classes...but i probably won't get them in college). Tests (like the SAT II)...carry a lot of weight in college...while busy work (like making posters or a clay model of Fort Ticonderoga)....doesn't count as much.

By Sssran87 (Sssran87) on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 11:15 am: Edit

I vote for 1. The SAT's are too dependant on luck. Multiple Guess does not prove anything. The tests you speak of in College are not MC. Most are open ended essays and short answers. Things that the SAT II's do not measure. Even the Writing is Holistic.

By Copper45 (Copper45) on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 12:11 pm: Edit

#1 - Take the valedictorian

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 04:26 pm: Edit


By Thermodude (Thermodude) on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 05:55 pm: Edit

Interesting....just read an article...it said the best indicator of success in college is not GPA, SAT I scores...but AP exam scores (i.e...5, 4, 3's....). A survey was done and the students who scored the most 5's on their AP exams did the best in college. Now, something else to take note....the AP exam MC section is very similar to SAT II's, if not identical for some tests (like US history). Ever wonder why the collegeboard is reforming the SAT I?.....their making it like the SAT II's (the new SAT will be similar to a combo of SAT II math iic, SAT II writing, and SAT II literature). The truth is, that SAT II's and AP exams are good indicator of success in college(because they test knowledge).

By Vtoodler (Vtoodler) on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 06:11 pm: Edit

number 1, come on people--this is valedictorian that we're talking about
Besides, grades are more important for most schools

By Newt (Newt) on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 06:34 pm: Edit

Number 1, just because I am valedictorian and I hope that counts more because I didn't get 800/800/800 :p

By Qwert271 (Qwert271) on Wednesday, June 16, 2004 - 08:02 am: Edit


By Thermodude (Thermodude) on Wednesday, June 16, 2004 - 11:32 pm: Edit

This polling appears to be interesting....Qwert...most people who vote for #1 have a rank close to #1...and seem to not have perfect 800's.....people voting for #2 seem to have ranks not so close to #1...and are close to or have perfect perfect 800's.

The funny thing is...people appear to be content with what they already have (note that the name of the thread is "which would you rather have?).

By Kyptonite (Kyptonite) on Monday, July 19, 2004 - 01:29 pm: Edit

It really depends on what kind of school you attend. I suppose that being the valedictorian at Philips Exeter or Thomas Jefferson or some other rigorous high school signifies that one has worked meaningfully and hard for four years. But in my experience at a relatively crappy high school, I have found that the valedictorians tend to be extremely competitive "grinders".



Someone who has mastered the art of sycophancy (toward teachers). A practitioner of rote memorization. The "dumb" valedictorian.

Oh yea, put me down for number 2.

Report an offensive message on this page    E-mail this page to a friend
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page