Test optional and top LACs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your kid’s transcript is not very strong relative to their high school, a 1500 wasn’t going to get them into Swarthmore anyway. But a 3.85 UW and 1440ish SAT should find plenty of landing spots in the 26-50 range. The snobbery on the board generally produces a lot of dismissive talk about schools in this range but there are many really great options.

OP here - I agree with this, and I think my DD will be fine! There are many great schools in that band, and I trust she'll get into one and be happy there. It just struck me as ironic that, for us, test optional is actually magnifying the importance of test scores and limiting where she applies. I don't want to get into the minutiae of my kid's stats - she has some factors in her favor that compensate for a lowish GPA, IMO - but this is not specifically about her and her chances. It's also not just about Swarthmore-level colleges. Haverford, ranked 24, has a 1490 25th percentile, 1520 median for 2024 (with 26 percent submitting SAT, 13 percent ACT). Prior to test optional, as best I can determine, their 25th percentile was 1320, average 1420. That's a huge difference! (And I get there's been some inflation in scores, but I wonder if that's partly because students are taking the test more and more often to improve their scores.)

The 1320 and below during test required era are for admitting hooked applicants. They always have different requirements for unhooked. Now that they are test optional, the hooked applicants get admitted without scores. And you don’t see 1320 anymore.

[Anonymous]

Check Oberlin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the prior poster’s point, I think you are thinking about this incorrectly, or not viewing the score in the proper context. Where does the 3.85 UW fall relative to the HS class? Did DD take advantage of available APs, IB, or honors courses? The level of rigor and how the student performs relative to what the HS offers is generally a much more important factor than an SAT score for the SLACs. You don’t have to take my word for it, just look at section C of the CDSs. Similarly for the SAT score, where does it fall relative to high performing peers at the HS. For the top 20ish SLACs a good score that sort of falls below the peer group aspiring to selective schools will only hurt your candidacy no matter where it falls within the colleges middle 50. Farther down the selectivity ladder, things might be a little more forgiving. If you are likely full pay, that’s another thumb on the scale. It’s not really an impact on your kid at all. If your kid’s transcript is not very strong relative to their high school, a 1500 wasn’t going to get them into Swarthmore anyway. But a 3.85 UW and 1440ish SAT should find plenty of landing spots in the 26-50 range. The snobbery on the board generally produces a lot of dismissive talk about schools in this range but there are many really great options.

+100 Post of the day!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your kid’s transcript is not very strong relative to their high school, a 1500 wasn’t going to get them into Swarthmore anyway. But a 3.85 UW and 1440ish SAT should find plenty of landing spots in the 26-50 range. The snobbery on the board generally produces a lot of dismissive talk about schools in this range but there are many really great options.

OP here - I agree with this, and I think my DD will be fine! There are many great schools in that band, and I trust she'll get into one and be happy there. It just struck me as ironic that, for us, test optional is actually magnifying the importance of test scores and limiting where she applies. I don't want to get into the minutiae of my kid's stats - she has some factors in her favor that compensate for a lowish GPA, IMO - but this is not specifically about her and her chances. It's also not just about Swarthmore-level colleges. Haverford, ranked 24, has a 1490 25th percentile, 1520 median for 2024 (with 26 percent submitting SAT, 13 percent ACT). Prior to test optional, as best I can determine, their 25th percentile was 1320, average 1420. That's a huge difference! (And I get there's been some inflation in scores, but I wonder if that's partly because students are taking the test more and more often to improve their scores.)

The upward drift in these schools’ middle 50 is more about TO sort of encouraging only the very high testers to submit than test score inflation. Many schools will tell you straight up in an admissions visit that you should not submit scores below the 50th percentile. Admissions offices love to tell their constituents (alumni, provost, board, etc.) how high the submitted scores were, even if only a third or so of applicants submit. It contributes to their perceived selectivity. But to your original point, I think you are putting too much emphasis on the SAT score. For most of these schools, it is a data point that is “considered” and given less weight than the GPA, Transcript, rigor, etc. Again, schools tell you this on the CDS. If the score isn’t helping you, withholding it isnt hurting you. The schools aren’t assuming anything about the student’s performance if they don’t submit, and even if you submit a score within range, at best it is just a threshold that is met.

Haverford is an amazing school BTW notwithstanding its US News ranking which is really only relevant for sorting purposes in my mind, but I digress. It’s major challenge seems to be a relatively small endowment, but they’ve got a cool thing going on there with their Quaker based honor code.

[Anonymous]

Haverford is a reach to high reach school for everyone in our school. Maybe an easier admit than Swat, but nonetheless very difficult. Don't look at the ranking, it's misleading. Richmond is also difficult.

[Anonymous]

SLACs in general are difficult admit due to their small sizes and institutional priorities. Hooked (athlete, legacy, fg, li) admits constitute half, in some schools 2/3, of the student body, leaving very limited seats to unhooked applicants.

[Anonymous]

Haverford is unrealistic with that stats. But Bryn Mawr may be a good fit though still a reach for many. It’s right across the street from Haverford so essentially it’s a same college considering they are both small. Bryn Mawr students also get to take classes at Haverford. I believe you may take as many classes from Haverford but I might be wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Haverford is unrealistic with that stats. But Bryn Mawr may be a good fit though still a reach for many. It’s right across the street from Haverford so essentially it’s a same college considering they are both small. Bryn Mawr students also get to take classes at Haverford. I believe you may take as many classes from Haverford but I might be wrong.

Please note that these schools reside 1.6 miles from each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haverford is unrealistic with that stats. But Bryn Mawr may be a good fit though still a reach for many. It’s right across the street from Haverford so essentially it’s a same college considering they are both small. Bryn Mawr students also get to take classes at Haverford. I believe you may take as many classes from Haverford but I might be wrong.

Please note that these schools reside 1.6 miles from each other.

I’d still say you can consider them the same college. My DD goes to Bryn Mawr and between the cross registration, shared clubs, shared departments, shared resources, and Bus that comes every 10-15 min, they’re essentially the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haverford is unrealistic with that stats. But Bryn Mawr may be a good fit though still a reach for many. It’s right across the street from Haverford so essentially it’s a same college considering they are both small. Bryn Mawr students also get to take classes at Haverford. I believe you may take as many classes from Haverford but I might be wrong.

Please note that these schools reside 1.6 miles from each other.

Bryn Mawr students can live on Haverford campus if a short bus ride becomes too inconvenient.