Dartmouth finally publishes their SAT data in the Common Data Set after dropping TO; white enrollment surges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My legacy DC, top 10% at rigorous private, national level ECs, 36 ACT with all sections being 36, very authentic and personal essays, was flat out rejected in ED. We donate annually too. Not anymore.

What was SAT score?

Didn’t take the SAT. Only ACT.

Does she get extra time? I think some schools know that the ACT is very friendly to students with extra time, and from top privates, tends to be the choice of students with extra time. Others take SAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fall 2020 freshmen data sets, ivies:
(Best correlation to today as it was after the 2016 recentering)

25—50(est)--75

Harvard 1460-1520–1580
UPenn. 1460- 1515-1570
Yale. 1470- 1515-1560
Princeton. 1460- 1510–1560
Brown. 1440- 1495- 1550
Dartmouth 1430–1490—1550
Cornell. 1410–1475–1530

Columbia’s does not appear to be available. They had a long history of not publishing it.

Dartmouth ‘s new data set is stronger not weaker; Dartmouth likely remains bottom three in the Ivy League

our high school college counselor very helpfully told my kids that unhooked kids with no major national awards need to be right in btw that 50% and 75% number as a rule. which was helpful when they were doing SAT prep. And my kids were coming from known feeders. Get that SAT up in the 1530/1540 range

How about unhooked kids with good grades and 1570+? What are the chance this kid could get into at least one T15 if applying to all of them assuming ECs are decent and teachers' recs are amazing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:in our AI future, engineering in the next CS.

Is CS enrollment really going down?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I went to top engineering school - agree that students in fraternities have access to older member’s problem sets and exams and papers kept on file. Friend’s som going to Cornell for engineering - he met with friends who are upperclassmen there and they told him to join a frat and this was one reason why - access to old exams etc.

There are no hard copies of exams "on file". Maybe there are other ways to get exam info?
- mother of Cornell student in a frat

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fall 2020 freshmen data sets, ivies:
(Best correlation to today as it was after the 2016 recentering)

25—50(est)--75

Harvard 1460-1520–1580
UPenn. 1460- 1515-1570
Yale. 1470- 1515-1560
Princeton. 1460- 1510–1560
Brown. 1440- 1495- 1550
Dartmouth 1430–1490—1550
Cornell. 1410–1475–1530

Columbia’s does not appear to be available. They had a long history of not publishing it.

Dartmouth ‘s new data set is stronger not weaker; Dartmouth likely remains bottom three in the Ivy League

our high school college counselor very helpfully told my kids that unhooked kids with no major national awards need to be right in btw that 50% and 75% number as a rule. which was helpful when they were doing SAT prep. And my kids were coming from known feeders. Get that SAT up in the 1530/1540 range

How about unhooked kids with good grades and 1570+? What are the chance this kid could get into at least one T15 if applying to all of them assuming ECs are decent and teachers' recs are amazing?

Very high chance. Statistically better than a 60% chance of admission to one T15.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a Dartmouth freshman. Disclaimer: they're our oldest child so I don't have experience with another current day college and I didn't attend an Ivy or similar school myself.

Admission trends there are hard to pin down. Since our kid enrolled we've heard from half dozen legacy families in our larger circle of friends/coworkers/etc whose kids were rejected for the classes of 2029 and 2030. The perhaps most noteworthy is a friend's child whose parents both attended (and met there), are reasonably active alums, sibling attends, had great grades/scores/etc and yet was ultimately rejected. Got into Hopkins, Duke and Princeton (!) unhooked and attends one of these. This stands out as the most wild of the legacy rejections I personally now know but I could share almost a half dozen more that are almost as noteworthy.

The student body is a real mixed group. You have the children of actual billionaires (at maybe the highest concentration anywhere) and many of multi millionaires. They tend to have graduated at or near the very top of prep or boarding school classes. Bright and well trained. Many of this group are Dartmouth legacies.

Then you have the upper middle or professional class kids who are very smart and typical of what one thinks of as high achieving, Ivy level kids. Decent number of Asians in this group. My own child is in here.

Then you have a lot of kids who frankly aren't very remarkable. Most bring rural/geographic diversity and economic diversity. Many struggle. Since we're talking SAT scores, this group often had SAT scores in the 1400s, even 1300s (my kids knows or knew because apparently at some point in early freshman year this comes out in chatter). Dartmouth currently seems to love admitting this demographic (there are many of them) and views admitting them as being a large part of their current mission. I don't know if this is similar at other Ivies or other top 20s as I don't have another kid in college.

Which brings up the question of what the point of an Ivy is. Is it to educate the best and brightest, regardless of prior opportunity? Or is it to give a top opportunity to kids who will benefit most from it? Dartmouth appears to believe very strongly in the second. However, it's meant that kids like mine (a pretty typical DMV high-achiever) are skating through college and not really being challenged. To be frank, my child has a 4.0 and hasn't worked very hard. They will tell you that their high school cohort was by-in-large brighter than many classmates at college. In this regard it's been disappointing. I'm not sure what the rest of the years will hold. I'd be interested in hearing what other Dartmouth parents think.

NP This is happening at other Ivies too. I posted last week that an Ivy professor friend of ours talked about so many kids being unprepared. I didn't feel like being controversial at the time so didn't add the important missing insight our friend shared: it was mostly FGLI who came in shockingly unprepared. Not all of them, but many. Many can't write and will take years to get them up to university-level writing. Friend said a lot of the athletes are actually great students because so many come from good prep schools and have parents who are college educated. They also say it's self-selecting – the athletes who come from struggling schools, who only want to play ball self select to go to colleges in southern states, whereas the ones who are more prepared academically choose to come to Ivies or at least UT Austin even if they too could have been recruited by Ole Miss because they want to have career options beyond the NFL. Friend said this is happening across Ivies, professor friends from other Ivies are complaining about the same things and university leaderships know.

BUT...

Friend also said the reason is more complex than 26-year-old admissions officers trying to be woke. They know AI is coming, and soon the window could close forever to lift up those in the bottom with no access to any tool or means of upward mobility. This is why there is so much focus on applicants in rural areas now. They are the ones most at risk because if they can't get a full ride from an Ivy (all expenses paid, flights to go home for Christmas or even money for groceries in the summer), these kids can't even go to the nearest state schools in their own states. Some can't even go to community college (many may start but they can't stay) because they can't afford the transportation, a $5K tuition or annual expense. They need to join the work force if they don't attend a very wealthy Ivy that would feed them.

My family is UMC/UC. Our DCs are top 5-10% at feeder privates outside DMV with SAT at top 0.5% and great ECs. They don't have tutors and work their asses off. Am I disappointed that they likely won't get into HYP? Maybe a little. But when I heard what my friend said, it makes sense and I know why ivies are doing this. So rural FGLI who score 1400 will go to HYP and my kids hopefully will go to Rice or Tufts. I am more than ok with that.

Accurate assessment here. This isn't wrong.
And your kids will be fine - and likely 10x better in terms of lifetime earnings as the FGLI kid going to HYP. AOs know that. It's why your kids need "more" for HYP admissions - natl awards, something unique/compelling/unusual/highly desirable. But with those stats they'll do well enough and the outcome won't be materially different.

- parent with top stat DCs at feeder private outside DMV now at two different private T20 and thriving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fall 2020 freshmen data sets, ivies:
(Best correlation to today as it was after the 2016 recentering)

25—50(est)--75

Harvard 1460-1520–1580
UPenn. 1460- 1515-1570
Yale. 1470- 1515-1560
Princeton. 1460- 1510–1560
Brown. 1440- 1495- 1550
Dartmouth 1430–1490—1550
Cornell. 1410–1475–1530

Columbia’s does not appear to be available. They had a long history of not publishing it.

Dartmouth ‘s new data set is stronger not weaker; Dartmouth likely remains bottom three in the Ivy League

our high school college counselor very helpfully told my kids that unhooked kids with no major national awards need to be right in btw that 50% and 75% number as a rule. which was helpful when they were doing SAT prep. And my kids were coming from known feeders. Get that SAT up in the 1530/1540 range

How about unhooked kids with good grades and 1570+? What are the chance this kid could get into at least one T15 if applying to all of them assuming ECs are decent and teachers' recs are amazing?

The person you are answering doesn't realize that the counselor was giving them a polite "blow off". They were probably annoying the counselor constantly so they said, effectively, "call me when your kid hits the number". Our counselor pulled up naviance, went through the other applications that were succesful at each school, and gave us odds for admission to each school based on the quality of the EC, my kids scores and GPA. Ultimately, the takeaway was "they like interesting kids with strong letters of recommendation, and anywhere within the SAT range is acceptable because SAT was never the deciding factor". You all can whine about legacies, and athletes, and rural kids, and poor kids. But, your kid isn't interesting if there are 10s of thousands of similar applications around. Furthermore, the ivies are liberal arts schools. So the eschewing of humanities, and the total focus on engineering or other STEM fields isn't interesting to these schools. My child was very succesful with his admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fall 2020 freshmen data sets, ivies:
(Best correlation to today as it was after the 2016 recentering)

25—50(est)--75

Harvard 1460-1520–1580
UPenn. 1460- 1515-1570
Yale. 1470- 1515-1560
Princeton. 1460- 1510–1560
Brown. 1440- 1495- 1550
Dartmouth 1430–1490—1550
Cornell. 1410–1475–1530

Columbia’s does not appear to be available. They had a long history of not publishing it.

Dartmouth ‘s new data set is stronger not weaker; Dartmouth likely remains bottom three in the Ivy League

our high school college counselor very helpfully told my kids that unhooked kids with no major national awards need to be right in btw that 50% and 75% number as a rule. which was helpful when they were doing SAT prep. And my kids were coming from known feeders. Get that SAT up in the 1530/1540 range

How about unhooked kids with good grades and 1570+? What are the chance this kid could get into at least one T15 if applying to all of them assuming ECs are decent and teachers' recs are amazing?

Very high chance. Statistically better than a 60% chance of admission to one T15.

Where is 60% chance coming from? LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a Dartmouth freshman. Disclaimer: they're our oldest child so I don't have experience with another current day college and I didn't attend an Ivy or similar school myself.

Admission trends there are hard to pin down. Since our kid enrolled we've heard from half dozen legacy families in our larger circle of friends/coworkers/etc whose kids were rejected for the classes of 2029 and 2030. The perhaps most noteworthy is a friend's child whose parents both attended (and met there), are reasonably active alums, sibling attends, had great grades/scores/etc and yet was ultimately rejected. Got into Hopkins, Duke and Princeton (!) unhooked and attends one of these. This stands out as the most wild of the legacy rejections I personally now know but I could share almost a half dozen more that are almost as noteworthy.

The student body is a real mixed group. You have the children of actual billionaires (at maybe the highest concentration anywhere) and many of multi millionaires. They tend to have graduated at or near the very top of prep or boarding school classes. Bright and well trained. Many of this group are Dartmouth legacies.

Then you have the upper middle or professional class kids who are very smart and typical of what one thinks of as high achieving, Ivy level kids. Decent number of Asians in this group. My own child is in here.

Then you have a lot of kids who frankly aren't very remarkable. Most bring rural/geographic diversity and economic diversity. Many struggle. Since we're talking SAT scores, this group often had SAT scores in the 1400s, even 1300s (my kids knows or knew because apparently at some point in early freshman year this comes out in chatter). Dartmouth currently seems to love admitting this demographic (there are many of them) and views admitting them as being a large part of their current mission. I don't know if this is similar at other Ivies or other top 20s as I don't have another kid in college.

Which brings up the question of what the point of an Ivy is. Is it to educate the best and brightest, regardless of prior opportunity? Or is it to give a top opportunity to kids who will benefit most from it? Dartmouth appears to believe very strongly in the second. However, it's meant that kids like mine (a pretty typical DMV high-achiever) are skating through college and not really being challenged. To be frank, my child has a 4.0 and hasn't worked very hard. They will tell you that their high school cohort was by-in-large brighter than many classmates at college. In this regard it's been disappointing. I'm not sure what the rest of the years will hold. I'd be interested in hearing what other Dartmouth parents think.

NP This is happening at other Ivies too. I posted last week that an Ivy professor friend of ours talked about so many kids being unprepared. I didn't feel like being controversial at the time so didn't add the important missing insight our friend shared: it was mostly FGLI who came in shockingly unprepared. Not all of them, but many. Many can't write and will take years to get them up to university-level writing. Friend said a lot of the athletes are actually great students because so many come from good prep schools and have parents who are college educated. They also say it's self-selecting – the athletes who come from struggling schools, who only want to play ball self select to go to colleges in southern states, whereas the ones who are more prepared academically choose to come to Ivies or at least UT Austin even if they too could have been recruited by Ole Miss because they want to have career options beyond the NFL. Friend said this is happening across Ivies, professor friends from other Ivies are complaining about the same things and university leaderships know.

BUT...

Friend also said the reason is more complex than 26-year-old admissions officers trying to be woke. They know AI is coming, and soon the window could close forever to lift up those in the bottom with no access to any tool or means of upward mobility. This is why there is so much focus on applicants in rural areas now. They are the ones most at risk because if they can't get a full ride from an Ivy (all expenses paid, flights to go home for Christmas or even money for groceries in the summer), these kids can't even go to the nearest state schools in their own states. Some can't even go to community college (many may start but they can't stay) because they can't afford the transportation, a $5K tuition or annual expense. They need to join the work force if they don't attend a very wealthy Ivy that would feed them.

My family is UMC/UC. Our DCs are top 5-10% at feeder privates outside DMV with SAT at top 0.5% and great ECs. They don't have tutors and work their asses off. Am I disappointed that they likely won't get into HYP? Maybe a little. But when I heard what my friend said, it makes sense and I know why ivies are doing this. So rural FGLI who score 1400 will go to HYP and my kids hopefully will go to Rice or Tufts. I am more than ok with that.

Accurate assessment here. This isn't wrong.
And your kids will be fine - and likely 10x better in terms of lifetime earnings as the FGLI kid going to HYP. AOs know that. It's why your kids need "more" for HYP admissions - natl awards, something unique/compelling/unusual/highly desirable. But with those stats they'll do well enough and the outcome won't be materially different.

- parent with top stat DCs at feeder private outside DMV now at two different private T20 and thriving.

PP Thanks. and agree 100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dartmouth hasn't published their SAT data in the Common Data Set for 4 years. They finally abandoned test optional. Well, they finally published it. The results are startling.

69% submitted SAT score
33% submitted ACT score

25%-50%-75%
1440-1520-1550

White 484 600 +116 +24.0%
Asian 150 145 −5 −3.3%
Black 70 53 −17 −24.3%
Hispanic 130 117 −13 −10.0%
AmIn/Alas 13 9 −4 −30.8%
Two + 98 105 +7 +7.1%
International (Nonresident) 170 154 −16 −9.4%

https://www.dartmouth.edu/oir/pdfs/cds_2025-26.pdf

Misuse of percentages. Should have used percentage points. Tsk tsk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fall 2020 freshmen data sets, ivies:
(Best correlation to today as it was after the 2016 recentering)

25—50(est)--75

Harvard 1460-1520–1580
UPenn. 1460- 1515-1570
Yale. 1470- 1515-1560
Princeton. 1460- 1510–1560
Brown. 1440- 1495- 1550
Dartmouth 1430–1490—1550
Cornell. 1410–1475–1530

Columbia’s does not appear to be available. They had a long history of not publishing it.

Dartmouth ‘s new data set is stronger not weaker; Dartmouth likely remains bottom three in the Ivy League

our high school college counselor very helpfully told my kids that unhooked kids with no major national awards need to be right in btw that 50% and 75% number as a rule. which was helpful when they were doing SAT prep. And my kids were coming from known feeders. Get that SAT up in the 1530/1540 range

How about unhooked kids with good grades and 1570+? What are the chance this kid could get into at least one T15 if applying to all of them assuming ECs are decent and teachers' recs are amazing?

Very high chance. Statistically better than a 60% chance of admission to one T15.

Where is 60% chance coming from? LOL

4% each!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dartmouth has always leaned conservative, white frat type. Partly due to location.

I think this is correct. I also think less Asians apply to Dartmouth - but not that much less that the percentage would go down. There is still bias (conscious or not) for white applicants (and against Asian applicants). Dartmouth probably doesn't want the Asian population to grow exponentially as it did on other campuses. There are definitely markers on the application that point to the applicant's race and background.

Dartmouth doesn't have engineering, which limits its appeal for many students, including many Asians. You generally don't see many Asians interested in SLACs in the middle of nowhere, which is essentially what Dartmouth is.

False.

Saying Dartmouth does not have engineering is like saying Brown does not have engineering. The two schools are similar in that respect, yet Brown is now close to 40% Asian.

Dartmouth should still be attractive to many Asian applicants, especially premed students, and also students interested in economics, government, and the humanities. Georgetown does not have engineering at all, and it is close to 30% Asian.

As a PP pointed out, some SLACs have a higher percentage of Asian students than Dartmouth. Carleton and Wellesley are good examples.

So I do not buy the “no engineering” explanation. The numbers look much more like the result of active discrimination, and the surge in white enrollment only reinforces that impression.

Dartmouth has an AB in “engineering science” that us possible in 4 yrs. For the BE, which is the only ABET accredited degree, it takes a 5th year at Dartmouth.
Engineering at Brown may be weak but at least a 4 yr BS in engineering is possible at Brown.

The 5th yr to get a real engineering degree is a major turnoff and yes it disproportionally affects asian applicants

All DC's friends are getting their engineering BS in 4. Oh, and they are also involved in fraternities, and by the way, the greek average GPA is higher than the schoolwide GPA

That greek GPA point is true at most selective schools (look at Cornell, Penn, Northwestern, Vanderbilt)

Is that b/c they have file cabinets full of old tests & distribute them to fellow fraternity members to prepare?

And essays and homework.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the other end of the spectrum, Hopkins saw 50% of their class of 2029 made up of Asian Americans. What gives?

At a guess, high-scoring white kids tend to pick Dartmouth over Hopkins, while high-scoring Asian kids tend to pick Hopkins over Dartmouth.

Also, Dartmouth really focuses on taking kids from the top 10% of their high school class. That might hurt Asian kids, because they tend to be clustered in a small number of high-performing high schools.

Hopkins is famous in taking top 10% of the class. This doesn’t make any sense!

If anything, Hopkins takes a higher percentage of the class that is Top 10% than Dartmouth.

From our boarding school, Asian students (usually Chinese nationals) consistently choose JHU year after year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dartmouth is just an extension of Exeter or Hotchkiss culture. Same crowd, same bubble, same nepos connects.

Toss in a few quest bridges and rural middle class kids for some countering flavor and you've got the incoming class any given year.

Plus a few Asians to bring the stats up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fall 2020 freshmen data sets, ivies:
(Best correlation to today as it was after the 2016 recentering)

25—50(est)--75

Harvard 1460-1520–1580
UPenn. 1460- 1515-1570
Yale. 1470- 1515-1560
Princeton. 1460- 1510–1560
Brown. 1440- 1495- 1550
Dartmouth 1430–1490—1550
Cornell. 1410–1475–1530

Columbia’s does not appear to be available. They had a long history of not publishing it.

Dartmouth ‘s new data set is stronger not weaker; Dartmouth likely remains bottom three in the Ivy League

our high school college counselor very helpfully told my kids that unhooked kids with no major national awards need to be right in btw that 50% and 75% number as a rule. which was helpful when they were doing SAT prep. And my kids were coming from known feeders. Get that SAT up in the 1530/1540 range

How about unhooked kids with good grades and 1570+? What are the chance this kid could get into at least one T15 if applying to all of them assuming ECs are decent and teachers' recs are amazing?

Very high chance. Statistically better than a 60% chance of admission to one T15.

Where is 60% chance coming from? LOL

Statistics. Distribution of 1570 scorers spread across Ivy, Ivy plus and top selective colleges. Hint: the top 50 contain the vast majority of these scorers. The top 15 contain more than 1/3rd. While colleges intentionally hide their admission rates by SAT, and the college board only gives out percentiles now, the data is the data.