Should DC submit 1500 score to Duke?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And the fact that scores are so susceptible to prep makes it more clear you should submit; if the school assumes you prepped and still couldn't get a decent score, that's not a good look.

I don't get you logic. You think it's a better idea to submit a significantly below average score to Duke because you'd worry that, if you don't submit a score, Duke will assume that the student got a significantly below average score. Doesn't make much sense.
And I assume Duke would prefer to not have to put this mediocre score into its average.

Yes. And with no hesitation. The schools average is based on self selecting applicants. All of whom are reaching for a top school. Many of whom have been snookered into not submitting great scores.

Nationally (and internationally) a 1500 is a fantastic score. With 1.5m in the proband you know your percentile really means something. No one gets to opt out of being counted nationally.

1500 is a very good score nationally. But it's NOT a good score for Duke. It's a score that is significantly below Duke's average of scores submitted by enrolled students. Back in the old days, that would have been OK, as everyone had to submit a score and 1500 isn't a horribly bad score. But today, Duke doesn't have to take kids with lower than average scores. This kid might still be admitted DESPITE the 1500, but there's no good argument that the score will help her.

We're in the last years of the SAT, that's for certain. And you'll help your child most by being logical in how you play this game. And for here, Duke doesn't want that 1500 in its mix, if it can avoid it.

It’s certain, y’all. We have someone with a crystal ball up in here!

Gonna be fascinating to see the looks on the faces of the “my kid just doesn’t test well” crowd when the UC system reinstates standardized testing and the rest of the country slowly awakens to how relevant testing is to the admissions process.

Not happening.

Standardized testing has become LESS relevant each admissions cycle. Definitely lower stakes.

Don't be naive.

Unlimited number of students can have a 4.0 UW GPA. Only 2% of test takers hit 1500 and 1% of test takers achieve 1530. TO is the main cause of top 20s becoming lotteries. Using SATs/ACTs as one more valid data point, which can be compared on a level playing field across states, public, and privates will go a long way towards restoring sanity to the situation. It’ll happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Duke's most recent numbers: https://admissions.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2027ClassProfile.pdf
Did anyone here actually look up the numbers? The class profile for 2027 reports that the middle 50% for accepted students is 1520-1570. I assume that 1500 is in the bottom 10-15% of admits. Why would you want to be there? As Duke presumably wants to raise its average SAT number, you're better off if you can help them raise their average than knock it down. Not submitting a score at least doesn't knock down the average. Seems obvious.

Superficially, yeah. The average isn’t affected, but there are easy inferences that can be drawn.

You don’t actually think Duke and other schools that are TO believe that anyone submitting an application without a test score is actually capable of delivering a high score, right? Let’s say 1540 or 35 and above.

Just like everyone else, they aren’t fooled. They don’t think the application is lacking a test score because the family couldn’t afford the registration fee, because the applicant refused to take a “biased test”, or because the student is actually capable of a very high test score, but figured, why bother?

They assume the score was low, or would be low. Why wouldn’t they?

Yes, because 1000% anyone capable of a high score will be submitting one. So they know the absence of a score means a lower score. They just don't know how low. And you either have other parts of the application that override that unknown deficit (i.e. being an URM, being an Olympian, being a quadruple legacy) or not.
This isn't that difficult.

However, it does really suck. Basically everyone but minorities and the wealthy have been strong armed into prepping to a 1500+ (and preferably to a 1550+.). It's insane. Hope you all have $3K for test prep or a kid who naturally tests really well. We did Khan academy (beginning to end) and my kid got up to 1450 (PSAT). Now I'm paying the big bucks to get him kid through the final stretch and over the 1500 hump.

[Anonymous]

my kid did Khan too (and only Khan), got 1530 and was one and done. I dont know why preparing for a test and then doing well on a test is any different than preparing for your classes and doing well in your classes.

yes, like every other test you take, you can prep for it. but Khan has flattened the world of test taking - along with books available at every library - and not using any of these tools at all tells me more about a serious student than using them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Duke's most recent numbers: https://admissions.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2027ClassProfile.pdf
Did anyone here actually look up the numbers? The class profile for 2027 reports that the middle 50% for accepted students is 1520-1570. I assume that 1500 is in the bottom 10-15% of admits. Why would you want to be there? As Duke presumably wants to raise its average SAT number, you're better off if you can help them raise their average than knock it down. Not submitting a score at least doesn't knock down the average. Seems obvious.

Superficially, yeah. The average isn’t affected, but there are easy inferences that can be drawn.

You don’t actually think Duke and other schools that are TO believe that anyone submitting an application without a test score is actually capable of delivering a high score, right? Let’s say 1540 or 35 and above.

Just like everyone else, they aren’t fooled. They don’t think the application is lacking a test score because the family couldn’t afford the registration fee, because the applicant refused to take a “biased test”, or because the student is actually capable of a very high test score, but figured, why bother?

They assume the score was low, or would be low. Why wouldn’t they?

Yes, because 1000% anyone capable of a high score will be submitting one. So they know the absence of a score means a lower score. They just don't know how low. And you either have other parts of the application that override that unknown deficit (i.e. being an URM, being an Olympian, being a quadruple legacy) or not.
This isn't that difficult.

However, it does really suck. Basically everyone but minorities and the wealthy have been strong armed into prepping to a 1500+ (and preferably to a 1550+.). It's insane. Hope you all have $3K for test prep or a kid who naturally tests really well. We did Khan academy (beginning to end) and my kid got up to 1450 (PSAT). Now I'm paying the big bucks to get him kid through the final stretch and over the 1500 hump.

1450 on PSAT (out of max. 1520) already projects to 1540 or higher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Duke's most recent numbers: https://admissions.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2027ClassProfile.pdf
Did anyone here actually look up the numbers? The class profile for 2027 reports that the middle 50% for accepted students is 1520-1570. I assume that 1500 is in the bottom 10-15% of admits. Why would you want to be there? As Duke presumably wants to raise its average SAT number, you're better off if you can help them raise their average than knock it down. Not submitting a score at least doesn't knock down the average. Seems obvious.

Superficially, yeah. The average isn’t affected, but there are easy inferences that can be drawn.

You don’t actually think Duke and other schools that are TO believe that anyone submitting an application without a test score is actually capable of delivering a high score, right? Let’s say 1540 or 35 and above.

Just like everyone else, they aren’t fooled. They don’t think the application is lacking a test score because the family couldn’t afford the registration fee, because the applicant refused to take a “biased test”, or because the student is actually capable of a very high test score, but figured, why bother?

They assume the score was low, or would be low. Why wouldn’t they?

Yes, because 1000% anyone capable of a high score will be submitting one. So they know the absence of a score means a lower score. They just don't know how low. And you either have other parts of the application that override that unknown deficit (i.e. being an URM, being an Olympian, being a quadruple legacy) or not.
This isn't that difficult.

However, it does really suck. Basically everyone but minorities and the wealthy have been strong armed into prepping to a 1500+ (and preferably to a 1550+.). It's insane. Hope you all have $3K for test prep or a kid who naturally tests really well. We did Khan academy (beginning to end) and my kid got up to 1450 (PSAT). Now I'm paying the big bucks to get him kid through the final stretch and over the 1500 hump.

1450 on PSAT (out of max. 1520) already projects to 1540 or higher.

yep, it's 1450 out of 1520.

That is great new if it's true. I really wanted to avoid paying for $$$ tutoring. Both on principle and of course to save the money. I have the tutoring contract at my desk--- I don't have the time to prep my kid myself and he finished the Khan course.
He hasn't taken an actual SAT yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:my kid did Khan too (and only Khan), got 1530 and was one and done. I dont know why preparing for a test and then doing well on a test is any different than preparing for your classes and doing well in your classes.

yes, like every other test you take, you can prep for it. but Khan has flattened the world of test taking - along with books available at every library - and not using any of these tools at all tells me more about a serious student than using them.

Congrats to your kid, but considering only 1% of all kids taking the SAT score 1520+ (but far more than 1% of HS students at any school have straight As…including tough private school) you do know it’s different from just taking a test…it’s even much different than studying for and taking an AP test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Duke's most recent numbers: https://admissions.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2027ClassProfile.pdf
Did anyone here actually look up the numbers? The class profile for 2027 reports that the middle 50% for accepted students is 1520-1570. I assume that 1500 is in the bottom 10-15% of admits. Why would you want to be there? As Duke presumably wants to raise its average SAT number, you're better off if you can help them raise their average than knock it down. Not submitting a score at least doesn't knock down the average. Seems obvious.

Superficially, yeah. The average isn’t affected, but there are easy inferences that can be drawn.

You don’t actually think Duke and other schools that are TO believe that anyone submitting an application without a test score is actually capable of delivering a high score, right? Let’s say 1540 or 35 and above.

Just like everyone else, they aren’t fooled. They don’t think the application is lacking a test score because the family couldn’t afford the registration fee, because the applicant refused to take a “biased test”, or because the student is actually capable of a very high test score, but figured, why bother?

They assume the score was low, or would be low. Why wouldn’t they?

Yes, because 1000% anyone capable of a high score will be submitting one. So they know the absence of a score means a lower score. They just don't know how low. And you either have other parts of the application that override that unknown deficit (i.e. being an URM, being an Olympian, being a quadruple legacy) or not.
This isn't that difficult.

However, it does really suck. Basically everyone but minorities and the wealthy have been strong armed into prepping to a 1500+ (and preferably to a 1550+.). It's insane. Hope you all have $3K for test prep or a kid who naturally tests really well. We did Khan academy (beginning to end) and my kid got up to 1450 (PSAT). Now I'm paying the big bucks to get him kid through the final stretch and over the 1500 hump.

UMC/MC URMs will also need to submit scores or else there is another hooks besides race. No way schools will risk legal ramifications because it would be easily discoverable to find a pattern of accepting TO applicants based on race. TO will be primarily for 1st gen, low income, development, and some athletes regardless of race. In other words, there better be a significant number of white and Asian TO students to avoid being sued.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:my kid did Khan too (and only Khan), got 1530 and was one and done. I dont know why preparing for a test and then doing well on a test is any different than preparing for your classes and doing well in your classes.

yes, like every other test you take, you can prep for it. but Khan has flattened the world of test taking - along with books available at every library - and not using any of these tools at all tells me more about a serious student than using them.

Congrats to your kid, but considering only 1% of all kids taking the SAT score 1520+ (but far more than 1% of HS students at any school have straight As…including tough private school) you do know it’s different from just taking a test…it’s even much different than studying for and taking an AP test.

DP: more like 3-5% when you consider superscoring. You are only considering scores obtained from one sitting.

The data is available: https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/ca.research.publish/Research_Briefs_2022/2022_12_09_Apps_Per_Applicant_ResearchBrief.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:my kid did Khan too (and only Khan), got 1530 and was one and done. I dont know why preparing for a test and then doing well on a test is any different than preparing for your classes and doing well in your classes.

yes, like every other test you take, you can prep for it. but Khan has flattened the world of test taking - along with books available at every library - and not using any of these tools at all tells me more about a serious student than using them.

I don't want to upset you, but here's the truth. If instead of doing Khan and taking the test once, you had done what lots of umc+ parents do on here-- and spent more than 5k on private tutoring and coaching for 6 months or longer and took the test three or four times to superscore-- your kid would be closer to a 1600. That's the crazed arms race-- and the privilege-- that many parents on here are looking to preserve.

[Anonymous]

Here's the problem. In the old days, average SAT was calculated across all admitted students. That gave an advantage to high scorers, but colleges still had to fill out a class and would have to dip lower than they'd like on some applicants. But in a world where everyone with lower than average (for the previous year's class at the school) scores can withhold them, the SAT average can soar. The dilemma that OP can cause is that, if a good applicant has below average score, the school has to decide how much it really wants that student.
University of chicago has played this game very well. Pre-covid, it was the one top-ranked research university that went test optional. It was able to dump the scores that were bogging down its average. It now has the highest SAT average in the country.
OP, do what you want. But your counselor is giving you very standard advice on how things work when an applicant's score would be in the bottom quartile of admitted students.
If usnwr ever ditches SAT averages altogether as a factor, most colleges would quickly go test blind and end this nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:my kid did Khan too (and only Khan), got 1530 and was one and done. I dont know why preparing for a test and then doing well on a test is any different than preparing for your classes and doing well in your classes.

yes, like every other test you take, you can prep for it. but Khan has flattened the world of test taking - along with books available at every library - and not using any of these tools at all tells me more about a serious student than using them.

I don't want to upset you, but here's the truth. If instead of doing Khan and taking the test once, you had done what lots of umc+ parents do on here-- and spent more than 5k on private tutoring and coaching for 6 months or longer and took the test three or four times to superscore-- your kid would be closer to a 1600. That's the crazed arms race-- and the privilege-- that many parents on here are looking to preserve.

Less than 5,000 (out of 2.5M+) get a 1600 or 36 on the first and only attempt.

But nice try ... I'm sure somebody will fall for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's the problem. In the old days, average SAT was calculated across all admitted students. That gave an advantage to high scorers, but colleges still had to fill out a class and would have to dip lower than they'd like on some applicants. But in a world where everyone with lower than average (for the previous year's class at the school) scores can withhold them, the SAT average can soar. The dilemma that OP can cause is that, if a good applicant has below average score, the school has to decide how much it really wants that student.
University of chicago has played this game very well. Pre-covid, it was the one top-ranked research university that went test optional. It was able to dump the scores that were bogging down its average. It now has the highest SAT average in the country.
OP, do what you want. But your counselor is giving you very standard advice on how things work when an applicant's score would be in the bottom quartile of admitted students.
If usnwr ever ditches SAT averages altogether as a factor, most colleges would quickly go test blind and end this nonsense.

Nonsense?

Well, considering the rampant grade inflation over the past 25 years and the various ways in which students today can remediate their grades to preserve an unweighted 4.00 GPA, it seems like we will have to go GPA blind just as quickly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:my kid did Khan too (and only Khan), got 1530 and was one and done. I dont know why preparing for a test and then doing well on a test is any different than preparing for your classes and doing well in your classes.

yes, like every other test you take, you can prep for it. but Khan has flattened the world of test taking - along with books available at every library - and not using any of these tools at all tells me more about a serious student than using them.

I don't want to upset you, but here's the truth. If instead of doing Khan and taking the test once, you had done what lots of umc+ parents do on here-- and spent more than 5k on private tutoring and coaching for 6 months or longer and took the test three or four times to superscore-- your kid would be closer to a 1600. That's the crazed arms race-- and the privilege-- that many parents on here are looking to preserve.

+1, sadly. I grew up in a rural area and went to a very average rural high school. I took the SAT once junior year after doing a single practice test that the school guidance counselor told all of us to try doing at home. I ended up as a nmsf with a spectacular score. When I showed up at the Ivy that admitted me, my scores there were higher than nearly all of my friends, but only then did I learn how the umc rolls. No one else took the test only once and no one else took it without prep. Things turned out great for me, but I realized just how many of my college classmates were there only because their parents ' resources essentially let them leapfrog over some of my smarter high school friends.
Unless we someday come up with some kind of pop quiz type of test that is impossible to prep for and works off of a base of knowledge accessible to all high school students, I'm cheering on the slow death of the SAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:my kid did Khan too (and only Khan), got 1530 and was one and done. I dont know why preparing for a test and then doing well on a test is any different than preparing for your classes and doing well in your classes.

yes, like every other test you take, you can prep for it. but Khan has flattened the world of test taking - along with books available at every library - and not using any of these tools at all tells me more about a serious student than using them.

Anonymous wrote:
I don't want to upset you, but here's the truth. If instead of doing Khan and taking the test once, you had done what lots of umc+ parents do on here-- and spent more than 5k on private tutoring and coaching for 6 months or longer and took the test three or four times to superscore-- your kid would be closer to a 1600. That's the crazed arms race-- and the privilege-- that many parents on here are looking to preserve.

Anonymous wrote:

Less than 5,000 (out of 2.5M+) get a 1600 or 36 on the first and only attempt.

But nice try ... I'm sure somebody will fall for it.

Of course you won’t fall for it. Because you like reading comprehension. Read the bold text above. PP said super score. No one said anything about “first and only attempt” related to 1600.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:my kid did Khan too (and only Khan), got 1530 and was one and done. I dont know why preparing for a test and then doing well on a test is any different than preparing for your classes and doing well in your classes.

yes, like every other test you take, you can prep for it. but Khan has flattened the world of test taking - along with books available at every library - and not using any of these tools at all tells me more about a serious student than using them.

Anonymous wrote:
I don't want to upset you, but here's the truth. If instead of doing Khan and taking the test once, you had done what lots of umc+ parents do on here-- and spent more than 5k on private tutoring and coaching for 6 months or longer and took the test three or four times to superscore-- your kid would be closer to a 1600. That's the crazed arms race-- and the privilege-- that many parents on here are looking to preserve.

Anonymous wrote:

Less than 5,000 (out of 2.5M+) get a 1600 or 36 on the first and only attempt.

But nice try ... I'm sure somebody will fall for it.

Of course you won’t fall for it. Because you like reading comprehension. Read the bold text above. PP said super score. No one said anything about “first and only attempt” related to 1600.

And colleges see that, too! They know when it's one and done, in nearly all cases.

I think super scoring and/or multiple admins. are just as weak as pretending you have a legitimate reason for being against tests (other than the obvious fact that you kid can't perform).

I didn't overlook what was said - I speed bumped it because it doesn't matter. The college AOs already know, and most rank over one and done's over the applicants who need repeat administrations to Frankenstein their score.