is test optional really only for low income or diversity applicants?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read on here about kids with 4.0uw GPAs and a 29 on the ACT or 1300 on the SAT. I mean, come on. If your kid can’t even crack 30 or 1400, no way their 4.0 is actually reflective of a school or education that is rigorous.

This is the dumbest take on this forum but don’t worry, you’re not alone. Every school is different and kids’ GPAs are judged against their peers.

Yes, consistently working hard and doing well over the course of a semester matters more than a three hour snapshot

Dp, but the point is that there are a good amount of schools where it is not difficult to get a 4.0, especially in the Covid era.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Test Optional en mass isn't going away.

There will be an option to submit a standardized test - OR not submit.

Vanderbilt - Top 20 college - extending TO another 2 years and accepting 39% of TO applicants is noteworthy and will be a harbinger of things to come in admissions.

And...a lot of white kids will get accepted via TO just based on numbers alone: it's not just a URM / first gen dynamic.

News flash, white kids can be first gen.

[Anonymous]

TO is for losers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Test Optional en mass isn't going away.

There will be an option to submit a standardized test - OR not submit.

Vanderbilt - Top 20 college - extending TO another 2 years and accepting 39% of TO applicants is noteworthy and will be a harbinger of things to come in admissions.

And...a lot of white kids will get accepted via TO just based on numbers alone: it's not just a URM / first gen dynamic.

News flash, white kids can be first gen.

Tell that to the DCUM comments making first gen a euphemism for black and brown people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Test Optional en mass isn't going away.

There will be an option to submit a standardized test - OR not submit.

Vanderbilt - Top 20 college - extending TO another 2 years and accepting 39% of TO applicants is noteworthy and will be a harbinger of things to come in admissions.

And...a lot of white kids will get accepted via TO just based on numbers alone: it's not just a URM / first gen dynamic.

News flash, white kids can be first gen.

Tell that to the DCUM comments making first gen a euphemism for black and brown people.

Haven’t see that, provide a link.

[Anonymous]

TO is going to have to be for all.
Remember that all of the California state systems (largest state by pop.) is now test-blind. All of the west coast plus AZ is currently some form of test-optional if not test-blind. As a result many former testing locations along the west coast are ceasing to exist, making it more & more difficult to take a test even if the student wants to, a situation that will eventually result in no testing availability. So then what's the implications for (let's use eg. school's that DCUM would love) say Stanford and USC? If they went back to testing required as some here would prefer, would they then be excluding non-diversity applicants from their own state who can't take a test? That would never happen. And don't for one second think that these west coast developments are happening in a vacuum. The largest population of current undergrads at MIT (test-required) come from ........... you guessed it California https://registrar.mit.edu/statistics-reports/geographic-distribution. That will have to change or MIT will have to change, I think I know which option I'd bet money on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Test Optional en mass isn't going away.

There will be an option to submit a standardized test - OR not submit.

Vanderbilt - Top 20 college - extending TO another 2 years and accepting 39% of TO applicants is noteworthy and will be a harbinger of things to come in admissions.

And...a lot of white kids will get accepted via TO just based on numbers alone: it's not just a URM / first gen dynamic.

News flash, white kids can be first gen.

Tell that to the DCUM comments making first gen a euphemism for black and brown people.

Haven’t see that, provide a link.

Any/all links on this topic. Look it up - yourself if so interested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Test Optional en mass isn't going away.

There will be an option to submit a standardized test - OR not submit.

Vanderbilt - Top 20 college - extending TO another 2 years and accepting 39% of TO applicants is noteworthy and will be a harbinger of things to come in admissions.

And...a lot of white kids will get accepted via TO just based on numbers alone: it's not just a URM / first gen dynamic.

News flash, white kids can be first gen.

Tell that to the DCUM comments making first gen a euphemism for black and brown people.

Haven’t see that, provide a link.

Any/all links on this topic. Look it up - yourself if so interested.

I asked for a link because I haven’t seen it and think you are making it up. Guess you proved that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:TO is going to have to be for all.
Remember that all of the California state systems (largest state by pop.) is now test-blind. All of the west coast plus AZ is currently some form of test-optional if not test-blind. As a result many former testing locations along the west coast are ceasing to exist, making it more & more difficult to take a test even if the student wants to, a situation that will eventually result in no testing availability. So then what's the implications for (let's use eg. school's that DCUM would love) say Stanford and USC? If they went back to testing required as some here would prefer, would they then be excluding non-diversity applicants from their own state who can't take a test? That would never happen. And don't for one second think that these west coast developments are happening in a vacuum. The largest population of current undergrads at MIT (test-required) come from ........... you guessed it California https://registrar.mit.edu/statistics-reports/geographic-distribution. That will have to change or MIT will have to change, I think I know which option I'd bet money on.

Testing locations are ceasing to exist? That makes no sense, testing locations are schools which are going no where. The college board will make sure there are adequate testing locations, have no fear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My white upper middle class daughter applied TO and was accepted everywhere. We knew it was a gamble but her scores were not representative of her ability and we didn’t want to give schools a reason to say no to her. She has ADHD and is a poor test taker. Her best scores she could manage on the ACT test dates were 4-5 points lower than the scores she was getting on her practice tests. They were lower than the mid range for all her schools even though her GPA was fine. She was aiming for safeties and matches, not top 50 or anything like that.

My kid is also smart and a poor test taker. While they are slow at math, they do just fine with extra time. However, we haven’t gone through the expensive testing to get more time on tests.

If you are white, rich, attend fancy public or private…if your kid has no learning differences, then you are very fortunate. Colleges want more than a sea of these types of people, which they make evident by offering TO.

I’m glad more students feel welcome to apply even if their test score doesn’t reflect their abilities. Too much emphasis is put on the 3-4 hours over which one test takes place. In poorer areas, the testing is a nightmare with late starts and interruptions. We are going to a different and richer county for the next test in the hopes they will have proctors who know what they are doing—or at least don’t take phone calls during the test.

Test scores do tend to reflect abilities, colleges just don't like the results and parents don't like the fact that poor test taker actually means weak in that subject

Really? So I kid that doesn't score high on the SAT but, for example, manages 4 or 5 on the AP exams is weak in a subject? Because several of DDs friends fall into that category.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:TO is for losers

As is your comment.

[Anonymous]

And...a lot of white kids will get accepted via TO just based on numbers alone: it's not just a URM / first gen dynamic.

A lot of white kids are already being accepted TO, as well as all other ethnic groups. Students should have the option, as they do now, to submit a score if they think it helps their application, or not. These schools already know which students will be successful and who they want to make up their class to provide the best experience.

[Anonymous]

If your kid is applying to the tippy top schools, and they are white UMC, they’d better think twice before going TO. Test optional is designed for institutions to diversify their classes now that we are past the peak of Covid (it was a different story for class of 2021, many of whom genuinely couldn’t test). Yes, some white kids will get accepted who are TO, because no institution wants to invite a lawsuit. But don’t kid yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And...a lot of white kids will get accepted via TO just based on numbers alone: it's not just a URM / first gen dynamic.

A lot of white kids are already being accepted TO, as well as all other ethnic groups. Students should have the option, as they do now, to submit a score if they think it helps their application, or not. These schools already know which students will be successful and who they want to make up their class to provide the best experience.

This sounds like brain dead propaganda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And...a lot of white kids will get accepted via TO just based on numbers alone: it's not just a URM / first gen dynamic.

A lot of white kids are already being accepted TO, as well as all other ethnic groups. Students should have the option, as they do now, to submit a score if they think it helps their application, or not. These schools already know which students will be successful and who they want to make up their class to provide the best experience.

This sounds like brain dead propaganda.

Why? do you suspect the PP is from a test prep company?