Is it me or are test scores now more important than ever?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, OP is correct. The way schools use test optional now, there is no difference between a 1200 and a 1500 (both are advised to apply test optional), but all the difference in the world between a 1500 and a 1520. Which puts kids scoring at the upper end of the test optional range under enormous pressure to get their objectively very good scores up to the reportable level.

Wouldn't that depends on the school?

[Anonymous]

Neo wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, OP is correct. The way schools use test optional now, there is no difference between a 1200 and a 1500 (both are advised to apply test optional), but all the difference in the world between a 1500 and a 1520. Which puts kids scoring at the upper end of the test optional range under enormous pressure to get their objectively very good scores up to the reportable level.

Very true, in the recent Dartmouth ED round.. two identical profiles from same school, they accepted one with 1560 and rejected the 1540. Even though, 1540 was a shade better in ECs.

While it's unfortunate that your kid with 3.5/1540 was not admitted ED to Dartmouth, the 1540 is not the reason they were denied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, OP is correct. The way schools use test optional now, there is no difference between a 1200 and a 1500 (both are advised to apply test optional), but all the difference in the world between a 1500 and a 1520. Which puts kids scoring at the upper end of the test optional range under enormous pressure to get their objectively very good scores up to the reportable level.

I advise people to submit scores above 1300 except to t20. Most people aren't thinking about those schools in the first place. If the education you want can only be found at a t20 then anything over 1400 can be used. The odds are against you but going TO when you have a 1400 just let's the admissions officers assume you have a 1050.

I agree with this principle. Submitting a score just outside the range is better than applying test optional.

I'm not sure where I'd draw the line, obviously depends on the school and the student's transcript.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TO is just a mechanism to let schools cherry pick the reason they accept students without having supporting data to show their bias in selection. Lets them shape the class they want without providing ammunition for lawsuits by Asian students.

I wonder how liberally they are using TO with recruited athletes now. I'm aware of an excellent athlete who was recruited to a top 25 national university (the type that generally requires 1500+ and a 4.0) as a junior with one AP class under his belt (foreign language). Not a particularly bright kid at all, and not URM. But a truly excellent athlete. Had to be TO.

TO for any recruited athlete, of course. But this really changes nothing for this population. Test scores have never been a factor for recruited athletes.

[Anonymous]

Yes. It’s seems to be everywhere. So much for test optional. From those schools that provide information, there seems to be a slight bias in favor of kids who submit scores, especially higher scores. I got this info from the Paying for College 101 lady’s presentation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TO is just a mechanism to let schools cherry pick the reason they accept students without having supporting data to show their bias in selection. Lets them shape the class they want without providing ammunition for lawsuits by Asian students.

I wonder how liberally they are using TO with recruited athletes now. I'm aware of an excellent athlete who was recruited to a top 25 national university (the type that generally requires 1500+ and a 4.0) as a junior with one AP class under his belt (foreign language). Not a particularly bright kid at all, and not URM. But a truly excellent athlete. Had to be TO.

TO for any recruited athlete, of course. But this really changes nothing for this population. Test scores have never been a factor for recruited athletes.

But this is a kid who likely couldn’t get a respectable score. He takes all non honors classes where if you do your homework you can get an A. TO seems to mask how seriously unqualified he is academically for this particular school. At least in the past AOs would be looking at a 1080. Not a D1 school even.

[Anonymous]

Some of us have been saying this for 2 years, test optional is for institutional priorities and tests still matter for everyone else. At the most selective schools.

Schools that are truly test optional include usc, Tulane and NE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes. It’s seems to be everywhere. So much for test optional. From those schools that provide information, there seems to be a slight bias in favor of kids who submit scores, especially higher scores. I got this info from the Paying for College 101 lady’s presentation.

It's only TO for certain groups. For other groups, if you don't submit, they will assume the score was low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, OP is correct. The way schools use test optional now, there is no difference between a 1200 and a 1500 (both are advised to apply test optional), but all the difference in the world between a 1500 and a 1520. Which puts kids scoring at the upper end of the test optional range under enormous pressure to get their objectively very good scores up to the reportable level.

I advise people to submit scores above 1300 except to t20. Most people aren't thinking about those schools in the first place. If the education you want can only be found at a t20 then anything over 1400 can be used. The odds are against you but going TO when you have a 1400 just let's the admissions officers assume you have a 1050.

Do you know how true this is? I always wondered about it. My kid has a 1480- which I think is a great score, but it seems like (based on what I read on this board), it is a test optional score for the top 30 schools. I keep hearing mixed things. Regardless - my kid sent her score to all the schools that she applied to- which includes a few in the top 20- we'll see what happens.

[Anonymous]

Agree - TO made the pressure for scores worse and the importance of them greater.

[Anonymous]

For colleges that are test optional, no - test scores are not "more important than ever."

Logic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some of us have been saying this for 2 years, test optional is for institutional priorities and tests still matter for everyone else. At the most selective schools.

Schools that are truly test optional include usc, Tulane and NE.

Vanderbilt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, OP is correct. The way schools use test optional now, there is no difference between a 1200 and a 1500 (both are advised to apply test optional), but all the difference in the world between a 1500 and a 1520. Which puts kids scoring at the upper end of the test optional range under enormous pressure to get their objectively very good scores up to the reportable level.

I advise people to submit scores above 1300 except to t20. Most people aren't thinking about those schools in the first place. If the education you want can only be found at a t20 then anything over 1400 can be used. The odds are against you but going TO when you have a 1400 just let's the admissions officers assume you have a 1050.

Do you know how true this is? I always wondered about it. My kid has a 1480- which I think is a great score, but it seems like (based on what I read on this board), it is a test optional score for the top 30 schools. I keep hearing mixed things. Regardless - my kid sent her score to all the schools that she applied to- which includes a few in the top 20- we'll see what happens.

DP. I think submitting 1480 is the right call.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For colleges that are test optional, no - test scores are not "more important than ever."

Logic.

+1600

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, OP is correct. The way schools use test optional now, there is no difference between a 1200 and a 1500 (both are advised to apply test optional), but all the difference in the world between a 1500 and a 1520. Which puts kids scoring at the upper end of the test optional range under enormous pressure to get their objectively very good scores up to the reportable level.

I advise people to submit scores above 1300 except to t20. Most people aren't thinking about those schools in the first place. If the education you want can only be found at a t20 then anything over 1400 can be used. The odds are against you but going TO when you have a 1400 just let's the admissions officers assume you have a 1050.

Do you know how true this is? I always wondered about it. My kid has a 1480- which I think is a great score, but it seems like (based on what I read on this board), it is a test optional score for the top 30 schools. I keep hearing mixed things. Regardless - my kid sent her score to all the schools that she applied to- which includes a few in the top 20- we'll see what happens.

I would submit anything above a 1450 everywhere.