No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My prediction is that colleges in other countries (in Europe? Canada? Australia?) will take the places of US colleges in world rankings within the next decade or so. The colleges where performance is still the measure for getting in and they can keep academic standards high and therefore graduation prospects really good will become much more in demand. High performing kids will be applying elsewhere, not here.

Ok, Nostradamus

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good kids are getting rejected from top schools, because top schools no longer care about academic excellence as much as they care about "Diversity"
There are very few students who meet ALL of the following criteria
1) Top 1-3% of graduating class
2) 1550 in SATor 35 ACT or higher in test scores
3) National AP scholar.
4) 750 or higher in 2 Subject Tests

These are truly gifted students. All of them could easily be accommodated in the top 15 schools, many times over, but most don't get in, because top schools are obsessed with diversity.

This is a tragedy for this country in the long run, because as any economist will tell you, we are grossly misallocating some of the best resources of our academic institutions on some very questionable talent, instead of focusing them on talent that can benefit the most from them and consequently turbocharge the US economy into the next generation.

But eh. Becoming fat, dumb and careless is probably necessary for the baton to pass from the US to some other nation. That's the way history has worked

No---the difference between someone with a 1520 and a 1580 is minuscule. Both are really smart people---one may just not test as well. Does not mean they are not as smart or as valuable as an employee. In fact, plenty who have test anxiety do exceedingly well in life. Universities have recognized that the SAT/ACT is not the best indicator of excellence and adjusted accordingly.

Fun fact: my 26 ACT kid (who despite hours of tutoring could not change the score) graduated college, employed by a great company, 1 year out just got the highest raise possible for the "first year cohorts". Even those who my kid thought were "top contributors"and as good as my kid got lower raises. The company "ranks the same year cohorts" and distributes raises according to that ranking. That means my "so-so academic kiddo" based on ACT testing, is somehow excelling in the real world. We always knew that---give them the opportunity and they have the drive and desire to do well and everyone would want them on their team. They are working alongside kids who went to "better universities" and those kids likely have higher GPAs and higher SAT scores. Yet somehow it doesn't matter if you have the right drive and work ethic.

Still comparing and ranking huh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My prediction is that colleges in other countries (in Europe? Canada? Australia?) will take the places of US colleges in world rankings within the next decade or so. The colleges where performance is still the measure for getting in and they can keep academic standards high and therefore graduation prospects really good will become much more in demand. High performing kids will be applying elsewhere, not here.

You’re forgetting that those countries have very low tuition for domestic students & equalizing measures in k-12.

In humanities and liberal arts there’s a lot of fluffiness. Check US News Global Engineering rankings. US is not that dominant. MIT is only the world’s #4. Look at how many of the world’s top 25 and top 25 are non-US (and non-Western). Crazy to think about it.

I meant top 25 and top 50.

Look at US News Best Global Engineering rankings. That really scares me. I don’t care if Chinese universities rank the best in the world in history or anthropology or LBGTQ studies. Those graduates can’t design weapons to kill us. But engineering graduates do.

:mic drop:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s what happen when schools seek out diversity instead of the best and brightest. Educators only way to close the education gap is to drop the ceiling to the floor.

So admissions become a game of craps.

Racist. Diversity and “best and brightest” aren’t mutually exclusive. They did choose the best and brightest. Obviously the rejects aren’t considered to be among that group.

Facts are not racist. "Diversity" means getting the best from the diversity pool-- not the best overall pool.

I go further and say that "diversity" as it's currently used is RACIST, against Asians. I fully support doing away with affirmative action because of this. You cannot spend decades lying about wanting to welcome all races, only to dismiss achievers of Asian descent and hold them to higher standards than the rest, and materially impact their chances of attaining their full potential due to discrimination in higher education and jobs.

Asians have long supported liberal and progressive policies, but as a voting block, inasmuch as any large and disparate group can be, they do not approve of ALL the left's agenda. Be careful not to take such voting groups for granted all the damm time.

This is going a bit far. When we visited admitted student days at diverse schools - there were FAR more Asians than there were white males. No complaints here....but get real.

Why don’t you complain that there are far more Blacks than Whites and Asians in NBA?

Ummmmm....the NBA is a for profit business to entertain. If the fans will pay to watch, no one cares about the race of any player.

If basketball fans don’t care about players’ races or skin colors, why should colleges and employers care? The very fact that you care about their races proves you are a racist.

You really suck at this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s what happen when schools seek out diversity instead of the best and brightest. Educators only way to close the education gap is to drop the ceiling to the floor.

So admissions become a game of craps.

Racist. Diversity and “best and brightest” aren’t mutually exclusive. They did choose the best and brightest. Obviously the rejects aren’t considered to be among that group.

Facts are not racist. "Diversity" means getting the best from the diversity pool-- not the best overall pool.

I go further and say that "diversity" as it's currently used is RACIST, against Asians. I fully support doing away with affirmative action because of this. You cannot spend decades lying about wanting to welcome all races, only to dismiss achievers of Asian descent and hold them to higher standards than the rest, and materially impact their chances of attaining their full potential due to discrimination in higher education and jobs.

Asians have long supported liberal and progressive policies, but as a voting block, inasmuch as any large and disparate group can be, they do not approve of ALL the left's agenda. Be careful not to take such voting groups for granted all the damm time.

This is going a bit far. When we visited admitted student days at diverse schools - there were FAR more Asians than there were white males. No complaints here....but get real.

Why don’t you complain that there are far more Blacks than Whites and Asians in NBA?

Ummmmm....the NBA is a for profit business to entertain. If the fans will pay to watch, no one cares about the race of any player.

If basketball fans don’t care about players’ races or skin colors, why should colleges and employers care? The very fact that you care about their races proves you are a racist.

You really suck at this

Other than calling other people “suck,” what else are you good at? What’s the highest grade you achieved? Second grade elementary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The workplace is figuring out that school brands are kind of meaningless -and testing at all levels is on the rise. My daughter is a recruiter in finance and top employers now require a LOT of testing just to get in the door, including personality, math, logic and writing assessments. You can't prep for these tests or take them over again - and there are no accommodations. Candidates (of all races and backgrounds), including the sort of "elite" credentials many DCUMers salivate over here, often bomb or don't get by the tests. Top employers want proof that the candidate is as good as they look on paper, because degrees don't prove much of anything these days.

Interesting. I hire inside counsel and we give an assignment (small legal/analytical written piece). We want to see how people think and reason and make sure they can write coherently.

And my workplace is getting rid of cover letters and sending interview questions in advance in order to accomodate poor writers and the less able to think on their feet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My prediction is that colleges in other countries (in Europe? Canada? Australia?) will take the places of US colleges in world rankings within the next decade or so. The colleges where performance is still the measure for getting in and they can keep academic standards high and therefore graduation prospects really good will become much more in demand. High performing kids will be applying elsewhere, not here.

Soooo - colleges are not ranked based on the students that attend but on the faculty who teach there. Your argument makes no sense, especially when one of the changing factors is that US schools are taking more and more international students. A great example of this is in graduate school - where most top US STEM programs have fewer than 50% of their graduate students as US citizens.

Academics want to work at universities that have a high quality student base. It’s a lot less work and more fulfilling for the academics to teach those students. Not to mention the fact that grad students do most of the heavy lifting in academia.

The shift might not happen overnight, but the good academics will go where the good students are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The workplace is figuring out that school brands are kind of meaningless -and testing at all levels is on the rise. My daughter is a recruiter in finance and top employers now require a LOT of testing just to get in the door, including personality, math, logic and writing assessments. You can't prep for these tests or take them over again - and there are no accommodations. Candidates (of all races and backgrounds), including the sort of "elite" credentials many DCUMers salivate over here, often bomb or don't get by the tests. Top employers want proof that the candidate is as good as they look on paper, because degrees don't prove much of anything these days.

Interesting. I hire inside counsel and we give an assignment (small legal/analytical written piece). We want to see how people think and reason and make sure they can write coherently.

And my workplace is getting rid of cover letters and sending interview questions in advance in order to accomodate poor writers and the less able to think on their feet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My prediction is that colleges in other countries (in Europe? Canada? Australia?) will take the places of US colleges in world rankings within the next decade or so. The colleges where performance is still the measure for getting in and they can keep academic standards high and therefore graduation prospects really good will become much more in demand. High performing kids will be applying elsewhere, not here.

Soooo - colleges are not ranked based on the students that attend but on the faculty who teach there. Your argument makes no sense, especially when one of the changing factors is that US schools are taking more and more international students. A great example of this is in graduate school - where most top US STEM programs have fewer than 50% of their graduate students as US citizens.

That’s sad. We need the best and brightest to get Ph.D’s in STEM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The workplace is figuring out that school brands are kind of meaningless -and testing at all levels is on the rise. My daughter is a recruiter in finance and top employers now require a LOT of testing just to get in the door, including personality, math, logic and writing assessments. You can't prep for these tests or take them over again - and there are no accommodations. Candidates (of all races and backgrounds), including the sort of "elite" credentials many DCUMers salivate over here, often bomb or don't get by the tests. Top employers want proof that the candidate is as good as they look on paper, because degrees don't prove much of anything these days.

Interesting. I hire inside counsel and we give an assignment (small legal/analytical written piece). We want to see how people think and reason and make sure they can write coherently.

And my workplace is getting rid of cover letters and sending interview questions in advance in order to accomodate poor writers and the less able to think on their feet.

Good luck - you realize you will be getting the candidates' moms, or a job coach or Googles answers a lot of the time .....your faith in humanity is laudable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My prediction is that colleges in other countries (in Europe? Canada? Australia?) will take the places of US colleges in world rankings within the next decade or so. The colleges where performance is still the measure for getting in and they can keep academic standards high and therefore graduation prospects really good will become much more in demand. High performing kids will be applying elsewhere, not here.

Soooo - colleges are not ranked based on the students that attend but on the faculty who teach there. Your argument makes no sense, especially when one of the changing factors is that US schools are taking more and more international students. A great example of this is in graduate school - where most top US STEM programs have fewer than 50% of their graduate students as US citizens.

Academics want to work at universities that have a high quality student base. It’s a lot less work and more fulfilling for the academics to teach those students. Not to mention the fact that grad students do most of the heavy lifting in academia.

The shift might not happen overnight, but the good academics will go where the good students are.

Are you a professor? I’m an academic and I would disagree. Most want to work with the best grad students and at institutions that provide the best research opportunities. High achieving undergrads are a bonus, but honestly most of my colleagues at R1 institutions are not there because of teaching. Most tenure track faculty will do anything to lower their course load, especially if they have to teach undergrads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I always laugh when DCUM posters say their kid didn’t get in because of “yield protection.” They’re basically saying “my kid is too good for the school.”

Yeah. Right.

+1

[Anonymous]

Standardized testing is overrated.

Within 15 years, 95% of colleges will either be test optional or test blind for admissions purposes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My prediction is that colleges in other countries (in Europe? Canada? Australia?) will take the places of US colleges in world rankings within the next decade or so. The colleges where performance is still the measure for getting in and they can keep academic standards high and therefore graduation prospects really good will become much more in demand. High performing kids will be applying elsewhere, not here.

Soooo - colleges are not ranked based on the students that attend but on the faculty who teach there. Your argument makes no sense, especially when one of the changing factors is that US schools are taking more and more international students. A great example of this is in graduate school - where most top US STEM programs have fewer than 50% of their graduate students as US citizens.

Academics want to work at universities that have a high quality student base. It’s a lot less work and more fulfilling for the academics to teach those students. Not to mention the fact that grad students do most of the heavy lifting in academia.

The shift might not happen overnight, but the good academics will go where the good students are.

It would take decades to see this shift as people retire and are replaced, and our culture will have to change a lot for the top grad students to say they want to work at ASU instead of Harvard. Instead, they will go to Harvard and then complain to each other about the quality of students (or they themselves will not understand how to write, etc. so won't even notice.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good kids are getting rejected from top schools, because top schools no longer care about academic excellence as much as they care about "Diversity"
There are very few students who meet ALL of the following criteria
1) Top 1-3% of graduating class
2) 1550 in SATor 35 ACT or higher in test scores
3) National AP scholar.
4) 750 or higher in 2 Subject Tests

These are truly gifted students. All of them could easily be accommodated in the top 15 schools, many times over, but most don't get in, because top schools are obsessed with diversity.

This is a tragedy for this country in the long run, because as any economist will tell you, we are grossly misallocating some of the best resources of our academic institutions on some very questionable talent, instead of focusing them on talent that can benefit the most from them and consequently turbocharge the US economy into the next generation.

But eh. Becoming fat, dumb and careless is probably necessary for the baton to pass from the US to some other nation. That's the way history has worked

No---the difference between someone with a 1520 and a 1580 is minuscule. Both are really smart people---one may just not test as well. Does not mean they are not as smart or as valuable as an employee. In fact, plenty who have test anxiety do exceedingly well in life. Universities have recognized that the SAT/ACT is not the best indicator of excellence and adjusted accordingly.

Fun fact: my 26 ACT kid (who despite hours of tutoring could not change the score) graduated college, employed by a great company, 1 year out just got the highest raise possible for the "first year cohorts". Even those who my kid thought were "top contributors"and as good as my kid got lower raises. The company "ranks the same year cohorts" and distributes raises according to that ranking. That means my "so-so academic kiddo" based on ACT testing, is somehow excelling in the real world. We always knew that---give them the opportunity and they have the drive and desire to do well and everyone would want them on their team. They are working alongside kids who went to "better universities" and those kids likely have higher GPAs and higher SAT scores. Yet somehow it doesn't matter if you have the right drive and work ethic.

Still comparing and ranking huh.

Not really. Just observing/confirming that where you go does not really matter. It's what you do while you are there and while you are on the job. And proud of my kid who struggled in school to see all the hard work pay off and them excel at their job and life.