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

[Anonymous]

For schools that now have averages that are very high due to TO policies, the schools can’t assume you have bad scores if you don’t submit. The TO applicant could have an 1190 but he could also have a 1430 and the 75% is a 1490 so he didn’t submit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Other schools will wonder why you're not submitting tests. For these, you'd better submit anything that is better than the published mid-range of scores (or in the upper range of that interval). If you don't, they will assume you tested poorly.

The problem with this is that kids are now scared to submit anything below the 50th percentile. And if this keeps happening, the number of kids who submit will go down and the test scores will go up. And then you left with (mostly likely) wealthy, well prepped kids submitting scores. Colleges must realize that and take that into account.

PP you replied to. Yes, which is why I'm expecting at some point that more colleges return to test-mandatory. If only some people submit tests, then nothing makes sense.

"at some point" won't be within the next 2 to 3 years - if at all.

Test Optional is pretty much here to stay. There won't be a major shift back to test mandatory. After the SCOTUS bans affirmative action, Test Optional will be the primary vehicle to consider diverse candidates.

The "test phase" of this has been happening since COVID hit a couple of years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's patent that applications without test scores signify poor test scores, whether due to lack of aptitude, lack of preparation, poor preparatory education, or something else. Consequently, there's little practical difference between submitting poor scores versus no scores.

The weight given to either scenario by any given school is difficult to know, since test scores are not the only factor in admissions decisions.

Wrong. You can't be judged on what you don't submit. Whereas if you submit a poor score, it's part of your application.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's patent that applications without test scores signify poor test scores, whether due to lack of aptitude, lack of preparation, poor preparatory education, or something else. Consequently, there's little practical difference between submitting poor scores versus no scores.

The weight given to either scenario by any given school is difficult to know, since test scores are not the only factor in admissions decisions.

Wrong. You can't be judged on what you don't submit. Whereas if you submit a poor score, it's part of your application.

I was told "nobody is not submitting a 34-36 ACT or 1500+ SAT". If you are applying to the most selective schools it is going to be assumed you did not fall in their average test score acceptance rates which will only matter if you aren't First Gen or an URM, that is who they designed test optional for.

[Anonymous]

My kid’s test prep tutor (who also does college counseling) says test optional is real for everyone. As others have said, if you don’t submit test scores, everything else becomes more important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
After the SCOTUS bans affirmative action,
.

yep it’s coming - and schools are acting accordingly this year -

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
After the SCOTUS bans affirmative action,
.

yep it’s coming - and schools are acting accordingly this year -

As in admitting as many URMs as they can or adopting the ban?

[Anonymous]

This is what Grinnell says about this, just to use one example of a competitive school that I’m familiar with. I don’t think it’s too hard to read between the lines.

If you think your scores are an accurate representation of your ability, then you should feel free to submit them. If you feel they are not, then don’t submit them.

If you get the score you hoped for, and especially if it’s above average for Grinnell, submitting the score may help you in the admission process.

Keep in mind that we consider your test score in context. Even if your score is not above average for Grinnell, but it is for your high school or neighborhood, your score may help you in the admission process.

A high SAT or ACT score can offset a low GPA. If you don’t submit a score, we have less information about your academic performance. If you have a low GPA but do well on the SAT or ACT, your test score can be an important indicator of your potential to succeed in college-level classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's patent that applications without test scores signify poor test scores, whether due to lack of aptitude, lack of preparation, poor preparatory education, or something else. Consequently, there's little practical difference between submitting poor scores versus no scores.

The weight given to either scenario by any given school is difficult to know, since test scores are not the only factor in admissions decisions.

Wrong. You can't be judged on what you don't submit. Whereas if you submit a poor score, it's part of your application.

I was told "nobody is not submitting a 34-36 ACT or 1500+ SAT". If you are applying to the most selective schools it is going to be assumed you did not fall in their average test score acceptance rates which will only matter if you aren't First Gen or an URM, that is who they designed test optional for.

OP here - this is my original point - if it’s only a hook for first gen or URM,
colleges should be open and upfront about it - pretty disingenuous imo

[Anonymous]

If you are applying to the most selective schools it is going to be assumed you did not fall in their average test score acceptance rates which will only matter if you aren't First Gen or an URM, that is who they designed test optional for.

This is completely FALSE. Why post when you don't know what the hell you're talking about? Many AOs have confirmed this via admissions events, and it's also what our HS counselor and private counselor have told us. Quite a few schools were TO before the pandemic and then something like 1500 followed suit when SAT/ACTs were disrupted. the entire UC system is test blind - they won't event look at it if you submit it. Plenty of PPs have provided the truth - if it helps you submit a test score, skip it if it won't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's patent that applications without test scores signify poor test scores, whether due to lack of aptitude, lack of preparation, poor preparatory education, or something else. Consequently, there's little practical difference between submitting poor scores versus no scores.

The weight given to either scenario by any given school is difficult to know, since test scores are not the only factor in admissions decisions.

But the issue is that the scores are rising to the point where a “bad” score today wasn’t a “bad” score 3 years ago. So it is really a bad score? Or have we screwed scores to make normal look bad?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's patent that applications without test scores signify poor test scores, whether due to lack of aptitude, lack of preparation, poor preparatory education, or something else. Consequently, there's little practical difference between submitting poor scores versus no scores.

The weight given to either scenario by any given school is difficult to know, since test scores are not the only factor in admissions decisions.

But the issue is that the scores are rising to the point where a “bad” score today wasn’t a “bad” score 3 years ago. So it is really a bad score? Or have we screwed scores to make normal look bad?

Sorry that should has skewed. But screwed may also apply. The point remains that it’s hard to say it’s a bad score if it was acceptable pre-pandemic, and is only considered “bad” because the the very polices which lead to inflated scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's patent that applications without test scores signify poor test scores, whether due to lack of aptitude, lack of preparation, poor preparatory education, or something else. Consequently, there's little practical difference between submitting poor scores versus no scores.

The weight given to either scenario by any given school is difficult to know, since test scores are not the only factor in admissions decisions.

Wrong. You can't be judged on what you don't submit. Whereas if you submit a poor score, it's part of your application.

I was told "nobody is not submitting a 34-36 ACT or 1500+ SAT". If you are applying to the most selective schools it is going to be assumed you did not fall in their average test score acceptance rates which will only matter if you aren't First Gen or an URM, that is who they designed test optional for.

OP here - this is my original point - if it’s only a hook for first gen or URM,
colleges should be open and upfront about it - pretty disingenuous imo

The schools are up front about TO. DCUM doesn’t believe them. On every tour I attend they were very, very clear that they mean what they say. One (top school) went so far as to say that “no one is looking to invite a lawsuit.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's patent that applications without test scores signify poor test scores, whether due to lack of aptitude, lack of preparation, poor preparatory education, or something else. Consequently, there's little practical difference between submitting poor scores versus no scores.

The weight given to either scenario by any given school is difficult to know, since test scores are not the only factor in admissions decisions.

Wrong. You can't be judged on what you don't submit. Whereas if you submit a poor score, it's part of your application.

I was told "nobody is not submitting a 34-36 ACT or 1500+ SAT". If you are applying to the most selective schools it is going to be assumed you did not fall in their average test score acceptance rates which will only matter if you aren't First Gen or an URM, that is who they designed test optional for.

Fair-minded Georgetown makes it easy by requiring the entire history of your scores (SAT/ACT and AP). That way they can weed out the ones who tested 10 times on their parents' dime in favor of someone who tested once, just because it was required.

Their mid-range of scores is very high.

I agree with PP that for very selective universities, not submitting a score means you have a bad one, unless the rest of the application is incredible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's patent that applications without test scores signify poor test scores, whether due to lack of aptitude, lack of preparation, poor preparatory education, or something else. Consequently, there's little practical difference between submitting poor scores versus no scores.

The weight given to either scenario by any given school is difficult to know, since test scores are not the only factor in admissions decisions.

Wrong. You can't be judged on what you don't submit. Whereas if you submit a poor score, it's part of your application.

I was told "nobody is not submitting a 34-36 ACT or 1500+ SAT". If you are applying to the most selective schools it is going to be assumed you did not fall in their average test score acceptance rates which will only matter if you aren't First Gen or an URM, that is who they designed test optional for.

Fair-minded Georgetown makes it easy by requiring the entire history of your scores (SAT/ACT and AP). That way they can weed out the ones who tested 10 times on their parents' dime in favor of someone who tested once, just because it was required.

Their mid-range of scores is very high.

I agree with PP that for very selective universities, not submitting a score means you have a bad one, unless the rest of the application is incredible.

That isn’t a fair minded policy because it tell you nothing about private tutoring.

And again, if the school is TO, you really have no idea what a bad score is anymore. My DD will go TO at several schools where her score was above the 50% percentile in 2019.

Georgetown and MIT are playing to the elites that line their pockets. No thanks.