https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/04/11/harvard-reinstates-sat-act-admissions-requirement/
Harvard is joining the list of school requiring test scores for applications. |
Indeed.
Some posters on here were very confident that Yale and Brown and Dartmouth resuming testing requirements were the exceptions. Pretty clear by now that test optional admits had not very good outcomes. |
With no dog in this fight (I have regular kids who aren’t high achieving) I applaud this. |
Princeton and Stanford next? |
Good |
yep.
Whatever will the 4/4.6 1390 poor test-taking children of DCUM do? |
I still think they should require parents SAT scores. |
I mean, obviously. The test optional thing was a weird experiment and there is no evidence that it accomplished anything useful, and some evidence it was genuinely detrimental. Good riddance.
Being good at taking tests is not the most important thing in life and everyone should remind themselves of that. But it turns out that people who do test well, and are able to get very high scores on college preparedness tests, tend to also do best in college, where they will also be expected to regularly take tests. It's okay that not everyone goes to an Ivy, or becomes a lawyer or doctor or academic or MBA or whatever. It's not the only option in life. |
Given that you don't know how to use apostrophes, I don't think that would benefit your kid. |
I mean, now you're being weird. I support requiring test scores, but this is psychotic. |
Remember when a 4.0 and 1400 was an exceptional kid? |
A 1390 in a test-required atmosphere is a decent score. |
test optional was a failed experiment |
It still is a great kid. The poster who made that odd, snarky remark revealed a lot about him/herself. A higher SAT score does not mean anything about a child's character or even about their ability to do well at an Ivy. It might just mean rejection at that Ivy. |
anything over 1350 is top 10% |