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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Logic.

It’s amazing how many people today accept surface level explanations and don’t consider unintended consequences or ulterior motives.

Parents think they are smarter than the colleges and AOs. Especially when their DC gets deferred or rejected.

If colleges don't want to be test optional they won't state that they are. The highly selective schools have their pick of the students they want to shape the class they want in any given admissions cycle - test optional or not.

A few schools have recently made statements indicating they are test preferred. They are saying it.

Which schools? And where are they saying this?

And obscure podcasts don't count. Where is it on the college's website?

It’s not.

So at our private, I personally know TO applicants who got into:

Vanderbilt
Cornell
Northwestern
Colgate
UofChicago (no surprise)

I’m sure there are others. I have a senior who’s friends with these folks. Don’t know any others.

So many insist that TO is for poor minorities. See above for more proof that even the well-to do apply TO successfully.

That is definitely California. None of the UCs or CalStates even look at test scores. So no one takes them anymore. It's been like for a few years now. But California is such a huge state with lots of very qualified students that it distorts the picture nationally.

People have been observing that Vanderbilt for instance takes nearly 40 percent of their class TO. You can assume at least half of those are from California. A more accurate understanding would be that outside of students applying from California, more than 80 percent of applicants submitted scores. And that strikes me as more intuitively correct. But California is so big that it creates misperceptions at the national level private universities.

Having shepherded two kids through the college application process recently, I have come to believe that the world is only test optional for recruited athletes, UMCs, the offspring of VIPs and major donors, and students from California. If you are applying to any school in the top 80 or so, and don't fall into one of those categories, going TO is a major strike against the applicant.

This characterization of standardized testing in the State of California departs significantly from what I've seen. That's fancy talk for calling it B.S.

Students who are planning to apply beyond the UC and CSU systems, which includes most of the students in the higher performing school districts, are absolutely continuing to sit for the ACT and/or the SAT. Why do you think it's such a hassle to get a seat in a testing center within 60 miles of one's home? In my son's high school this past year (2023), 78% of his 500+ student senior class sat for one or both tests. Of the 22% who didn't, I'm assuming a significant portion are students who are dead set on a UC or CSU offer (with ELC and the statewide guarantee, a percentage of students already know they're in, even if it's a UC Merced scenario), recruited athletes already committed to either of those systems or an out-of-state school where D1 recruitment or a TO pre-read wasn't held against them), or the lowest performing students who are vectoring toward a community college start to their college education anyway.

Nobody in California is realistically thinking T20 outside the UC system "and I'll try it TO" ... to suggest that is idiotic.

Well, I sat through an information session at Vandy where they specifically stated they didn’t expect test scores from Californians. And there have been other posters from CA stating kids aren’t taking tests. So not sure why we should take your word for it.

USC has one of the highest test optional rates in the country. I’m sure that has nothing in do with the fact that 40 percent of its students are Californians.

I do believe Californians are in a kind of unique situation. And I moved to the DMV from California, so quite familiar with the state.

Broadly, taking the SAT or ACT is not a thing anymore. The UCs and Cal States don't even look at it. No consideration at all. And absolutely everyone applies to state schools. Even the best of the best. Berkeley and UCLA are elite schools. And not only do they not care about test scores, they don't even glance at them. So, obviously, since the majority of California residents go to state schools, very few bother with standardized tests.

But I think California is an outlier.

If you look at colleges, they are doing the Test Optional thing one year at a time. They love the extra applications. The lower their acceptance rate, they happier they are. And it allows them to easily admit "priority" students. But they are also mindful of the academic preparedness of their students. MIT noped out real quick when they saw that the TO students weren't hacking it.

So it's a balancing act for most of let's say the top 50 schools. They revel in all the extra applications. They can admit their athletes and legacy and DEI without any question about their academic qualifications. And those that do submit scores invariably have very high scores, which also boosts their selectivity.

Win-win for selective colleges.

But if you are not a "priority" high school student, it sucks. Median test scores for accepted students are in the stratosphere. Don't even look in that direction unless you have a 34 or a 1500. And your smart asian or white kid from the burbs - outside of California - will definitely have to submit. There is so much more pressure on high school kids today compared to 5 years ago.

For the 1,000th time, the students who are also applying outside the State of California, which is nearly EVERY SINGLE STUDENT in an affluent area of the state, are absolutely taking the ACT or SAT or both. Students who have a realistic shot at getting into Berkeley or UCLA or UCSD almost invariably also look at the Ivies, and other Top 20 programs around the country, too. In addition to the fact that TO is a facade for certain groups when applying outside the state, you're also talking about MANY hyper-competitive kids who want to take the ACT and/or SAT to notch another feather in their cap. Speaking from personal experience, my son and his cohort seemed to be looking forward to taking the SAT (just like they look forward to comparing AP exam results in July each year) - probably as much for reasons relating to competing with each other over their score as much as for validating their grades.

I don't have the ACT and SAT registration data for 2023, but I can tell you that the one time my son registered for the SAT, it was brutal finding a seat in a testing site within 100 miles of our metro area.

Except for the Asian and white students applying from a California private and admitted ed described in an earlier post in this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our private has this rule for T20:

Consider TO if GPA above 3.85 (3.9 for T10) and scores are not at least 34 ACT (maybe 33.

If GPA below, need some scores - if at 25% generally need something else out of the ordinary (pointy national level ECs)….

My public school kid came to this conculsion himself. His grades were OK, he was top 30% in his public school. He does have strong ECs, especially for Math and Science, plus is captain of his varsity sports team, so he is not a one trick pony. However, he knew he had to kill the tests. He took botht he ACT and SAT and scored 36/1560 (800 on math). He got into Rice EA for engineering. We were suprosed becuase of his class rank. It was not so high beucase he hates the humanities and never challenged himself in that area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Logic.

It’s amazing how many people today accept surface level explanations and don’t consider unintended consequences or ulterior motives.

Parents think they are smarter than the colleges and AOs. Especially when their DC gets deferred or rejected.

If colleges don't want to be test optional they won't state that they are. The highly selective schools have their pick of the students they want to shape the class they want in any given admissions cycle - test optional or not.

A few schools have recently made statements indicating they are test preferred. They are saying it.

Which schools? And where are they saying this?

And obscure podcasts don't count. Where is it on the college's website?

It’s not.

So at our private, I personally know TO applicants who got into:

Vanderbilt
Cornell
Northwestern
Colgate
UofChicago (no surprise)

I’m sure there are others. I have a senior who’s friends with these folks. Don’t know any others.

So many insist that TO is for poor minorities. See above for more proof that even the well-to do apply TO successfully.

That is definitely California. None of the UCs or CalStates even look at test scores. So no one takes them anymore. It's been like for a few years now. But California is such a huge state with lots of very qualified students that it distorts the picture nationally.

People have been observing that Vanderbilt for instance takes nearly 40 percent of their class TO. You can assume at least half of those are from California. A more accurate understanding would be that outside of students applying from California, more than 80 percent of applicants submitted scores. And that strikes me as more intuitively correct. But California is so big that it creates misperceptions at the national level private universities.

Having shepherded two kids through the college application process recently, I have come to believe that the world is only test optional for recruited athletes, UMCs, the offspring of VIPs and major donors, and students from California. If you are applying to any school in the top 80 or so, and don't fall into one of those categories, going TO is a major strike against the applicant.

This characterization of standardized testing in the State of California departs significantly from what I've seen. That's fancy talk for calling it B.S.

Students who are planning to apply beyond the UC and CSU systems, which includes most of the students in the higher performing school districts, are absolutely continuing to sit for the ACT and/or the SAT. Why do you think it's such a hassle to get a seat in a testing center within 60 miles of one's home? In my son's high school this past year (2023), 78% of his 500+ student senior class sat for one or both tests. Of the 22% who didn't, I'm assuming a significant portion are students who are dead set on a UC or CSU offer (with ELC and the statewide guarantee, a percentage of students already know they're in, even if it's a UC Merced scenario), recruited athletes already committed to either of those systems or an out-of-state school where D1 recruitment or a TO pre-read wasn't held against them), or the lowest performing students who are vectoring toward a community college start to their college education anyway.

Nobody in California is realistically thinking T20 outside the UC system "and I'll try it TO" ... to suggest that is idiotic.

Well, I sat through an information session at Vandy where they specifically stated they didn’t expect test scores from Californians. And there have been other posters from CA stating kids aren’t taking tests. So not sure why we should take your word for it.

USC has one of the highest test optional rates in the country. I’m sure that has nothing in do with the fact that 40 percent of its students are Californians.

I do believe Californians are in a kind of unique situation. And I moved to the DMV from California, so quite familiar with the state.

Broadly, taking the SAT or ACT is not a thing anymore. The UCs and Cal States don't even look at it. No consideration at all. And absolutely everyone applies to state schools. Even the best of the best. Berkeley and UCLA are elite schools. And not only do they not care about test scores, they don't even glance at them. So, obviously, since the majority of California residents go to state schools, very few bother with standardized tests.

But I think California is an outlier.

If you look at colleges, they are doing the Test Optional thing one year at a time. They love the extra applications. The lower their acceptance rate, they happier they are. And it allows them to easily admit "priority" students. But they are also mindful of the academic preparedness of their students. MIT noped out real quick when they saw that the TO students weren't hacking it.

So it's a balancing act for most of let's say the top 50 schools. They revel in all the extra applications. They can admit their athletes and legacy and DEI without any question about their academic qualifications. And those that do submit scores invariably have very high scores, which also boosts their selectivity.

Win-win for selective colleges.

But if you are not a "priority" high school student, it sucks. Median test scores for accepted students are in the stratosphere. Don't even look in that direction unless you have a 34 or a 1500. And your smart asian or white kid from the burbs - outside of California - will definitely have to submit. There is so much more pressure on high school kids today compared to 5 years ago.

For the 1,000th time, the students who are also applying outside the State of California, which is nearly EVERY SINGLE STUDENT in an affluent area of the state, are absolutely taking the ACT or SAT or both. Students who have a realistic shot at getting into Berkeley or UCLA or UCSD almost invariably also look at the Ivies, and other Top 20 programs around the country, too. In addition to the fact that TO is a facade for certain groups when applying outside the state, you're also talking about MANY hyper-competitive kids who want to take the ACT and/or SAT to notch another feather in their cap. Speaking from personal experience, my son and his cohort seemed to be looking forward to taking the SAT (just like they look forward to comparing AP exam results in July each year) - probably as much for reasons relating to competing with each other over their score as much as for validating their grades.

I don't have the ACT and SAT registration data for 2023, but I can tell you that the one time my son registered for the SAT, it was brutal finding a seat in a testing site within 100 miles of our metro area.

Which again proves the point. California is unique.

In the rest of the country, people do not have to travel a 100 miles to take the SAT or ACT. It's offered a gazillion times a year, locally. Taking standardized tests is not a big deal. Typically, its offered at their high school several times a year.

California is very much an outlier.

But it's a huge state. So all those students not taking the SAT or ACT impact the TO percentages at national universities. Which leads to misperceptions about whether or not you need to submit a score. California distorts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Grade inflation has reached the point where nearly 60% of students at most "competitive" high schools across the country apply in the fall and winter of their senior year with "an A average", which is more than 3x what that %age was 30 years ago when test scores (adjusted for re-centering) were essentially the same. How has classroom performance increased so dramatically without a reasonably corresponding increase in test scores?

Whenever I make this point, the TO proponents attack. Apparently, kids that are “poor test takers” only do poorly on the SAT/ACT. They do just fine on all the tests at school to earn the As that get them at 4.5 GPA. It has nothing to do with test re-takes, equitable grading, lack of deadlines for homework, etc.

YUP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

1480 is a great score. It is absolutely insane that the TO landscape has made this one questionnable. Nonsense.

[Anonymous]

The answer is obviously yes. You reap what you sow. You voted for DEI and woke nonsense, you take the consequences. So in that sense, you all deserve this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The answer is obviously yes. You reap what you sow. You voted for DEI and woke nonsense, you take the consequences. So in that sense, you all deserve this.

True..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Logic.

It’s amazing how many people today accept surface level explanations and don’t consider unintended consequences or ulterior motives.

Parents think they are smarter than the colleges and AOs. Especially when their DC gets deferred or rejected.

If colleges don't want to be test optional they won't state that they are. The highly selective schools have their pick of the students they want to shape the class they want in any given admissions cycle - test optional or not.

A few schools have recently made statements indicating they are test preferred. They are saying it.

Which schools? And where are they saying this?

And obscure podcasts don't count. Where is it on the college's website?

It’s not.

So at our private, I personally know TO applicants who got into:

Vanderbilt
Cornell
Northwestern
Colgate
UofChicago (no surprise)

I’m sure there are others. I have a senior who’s friends with these folks. Don’t know any others.

So many insist that TO is for poor minorities. See above for more proof that even the well-to do apply TO successfully.

That is definitely California. None of the UCs or CalStates even look at test scores. So no one takes them anymore. It's been like for a few years now. But California is such a huge state with lots of very qualified students that it distorts the picture nationally.

People have been observing that Vanderbilt for instance takes nearly 40 percent of their class TO. You can assume at least half of those are from California. A more accurate understanding would be that outside of students applying from California, more than 80 percent of applicants submitted scores. And that strikes me as more intuitively correct. But California is so big that it creates misperceptions at the national level private universities.

Having shepherded two kids through the college application process recently, I have come to believe that the world is only test optional for recruited athletes, UMCs, the offspring of VIPs and major donors, and students from California. If you are applying to any school in the top 80 or so, and don't fall into one of those categories, going TO is a major strike against the applicant.

This characterization of standardized testing in the State of California departs significantly from what I've seen. That's fancy talk for calling it B.S.

Students who are planning to apply beyond the UC and CSU systems, which includes most of the students in the higher performing school districts, are absolutely continuing to sit for the ACT and/or the SAT. Why do you think it's such a hassle to get a seat in a testing center within 60 miles of one's home? In my son's high school this past year (2023), 78% of his 500+ student senior class sat for one or both tests. Of the 22% who didn't, I'm assuming a significant portion are students who are dead set on a UC or CSU offer (with ELC and the statewide guarantee, a percentage of students already know they're in, even if it's a UC Merced scenario), recruited athletes already committed to either of those systems or an out-of-state school where D1 recruitment or a TO pre-read wasn't held against them), or the lowest performing students who are vectoring toward a community college start to their college education anyway.

Nobody in California is realistically thinking T20 outside the UC system "and I'll try it TO" ... to suggest that is idiotic.

Well, I sat through an information session at Vandy where they specifically stated they didn’t expect test scores from Californians. And there have been other posters from CA stating kids aren’t taking tests. So not sure why we should take your word for it.

USC has one of the highest test optional rates in the country. I’m sure that has nothing in do with the fact that 40 percent of its students are Californians.

I do believe Californians are in a kind of unique situation. And I moved to the DMV from California, so quite familiar with the state.

Broadly, taking the SAT or ACT is not a thing anymore. The UCs and Cal States don't even look at it. No consideration at all. And absolutely everyone applies to state schools. Even the best of the best. Berkeley and UCLA are elite schools. And not only do they not care about test scores, they don't even glance at them. So, obviously, since the majority of California residents go to state schools, very few bother with standardized tests.

But I think California is an outlier.

If you look at colleges, they are doing the Test Optional thing one year at a time. They love the extra applications. The lower their acceptance rate, they happier they are. And it allows them to easily admit "priority" students. But they are also mindful of the academic preparedness of their students. MIT noped out real quick when they saw that the TO students weren't hacking it.

So it's a balancing act for most of let's say the top 50 schools. They revel in all the extra applications. They can admit their athletes and legacy and DEI without any question about their academic qualifications. And those that do submit scores invariably have very high scores, which also boosts their selectivity.

Win-win for selective colleges.

But if you are not a "priority" high school student, it sucks. Median test scores for accepted students are in the stratosphere. Don't even look in that direction unless you have a 34 or a 1500. And your smart asian or white kid from the burbs - outside of California - will definitely have to submit. There is so much more pressure on high school kids today compared to 5 years ago.

Not true for our NYC private. Plenty of TO and did well on ED.

Let’s see what happens in RD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Grade inflation has reached the point where nearly 60% of students at most "competitive" high schools across the country apply in the fall and winter of their senior year with "an A average", which is more than 3x what that %age was 30 years ago when test scores (adjusted for re-centering) were essentially the same. How has classroom performance increased so dramatically without a reasonably corresponding increase in test scores?

Whenever I make this point, the TO proponents attack. Apparently, kids that are “poor test takers” only do poorly on the SAT/ACT. They do just fine on all the tests at school to earn the As that get them at 4.5 GPA. It has nothing to do with test re-takes, equitable grading, lack of deadlines for homework, etc.

DP: Not a TO proponent/just a realist. For most colleges, TO is here to stay.

Classroom performance hasn't increased dramatically. Grade inflation is real--but what is your point? A few of the elite schools may find the courage to make testing mandatory, but most want to compete with their peers and will be "test aware" or "test preferred" to benefit from the best of both worlds. Yale and Dartmouth AOs publically admitted that a significant number of TO students are not doing well and the data is becoming clear in their 5-year TO experiments. Dartmouth's AO stated that last year had the highest number of kids on academic probation. They need students to submit at the 25th percentile and for under-resourced kids, even lower. A student scoring 1300 on the SAT can graduate from Yale but a 1100 will struggle and risk failing.

Interesting. After my son crushed the ACT the start of junior year, the initial mailings he got the first few months were all from Ivies. Yale’s letter specifically mentioned his scores as being the reason he was on the mailing list. Harvard sent that thick catalog.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Logic.

It’s amazing how many people today accept surface level explanations and don’t consider unintended consequences or ulterior motives.

Parents think they are smarter than the colleges and AOs. Especially when their DC gets deferred or rejected.

If colleges don't want to be test optional they won't state that they are. The highly selective schools have their pick of the students they want to shape the class they want in any given admissions cycle - test optional or not.

A few schools have recently made statements indicating they are test preferred. They are saying it.

Which schools? And where are they saying this?

And obscure podcasts don't count. Where is it on the college's website?

It’s not.

So at our private, I personally know TO applicants who got into:

Vanderbilt
Cornell
Northwestern
Colgate
UofChicago (no surprise)

I’m sure there are others. I have a senior who’s friends with these folks. Don’t know any others.

So many insist that TO is for poor minorities. See above for more proof that even the well-to do apply TO successfully.

That is definitely California. None of the UCs or CalStates even look at test scores. So no one takes them anymore. It's been like for a few years now. But California is such a huge state with lots of very qualified students that it distorts the picture nationally.

People have been observing that Vanderbilt for instance takes nearly 40 percent of their class TO. You can assume at least half of those are from California. A more accurate understanding would be that outside of students applying from California, more than 80 percent of applicants submitted scores. And that strikes me as more intuitively correct. But California is so big that it creates misperceptions at the national level private universities.

Having shepherded two kids through the college application process recently, I have come to believe that the world is only test optional for recruited athletes, UMCs, the offspring of VIPs and major donors, and students from California. If you are applying to any school in the top 80 or so, and don't fall into one of those categories, going TO is a major strike against the applicant.

This characterization of standardized testing in the State of California departs significantly from what I've seen. That's fancy talk for calling it B.S.

Students who are planning to apply beyond the UC and CSU systems, which includes most of the students in the higher performing school districts, are absolutely continuing to sit for the ACT and/or the SAT. Why do you think it's such a hassle to get a seat in a testing center within 60 miles of one's home? In my son's high school this past year (2023), 78% of his 500+ student senior class sat for one or both tests. Of the 22% who didn't, I'm assuming a significant portion are students who are dead set on a UC or CSU offer (with ELC and the statewide guarantee, a percentage of students already know they're in, even if it's a UC Merced scenario), recruited athletes already committed to either of those systems or an out-of-state school where D1 recruitment or a TO pre-read wasn't held against them), or the lowest performing students who are vectoring toward a community college start to their college education anyway.

Nobody in California is realistically thinking T20 outside the UC system "and I'll try it TO" ... to suggest that is idiotic.

Well, I sat through an information session at Vandy where they specifically stated they didn’t expect test scores from Californians. And there have been other posters from CA stating kids aren’t taking tests. So not sure why we should take your word for it.

USC has one of the highest test optional rates in the country. I’m sure that has nothing in do with the fact that 40 percent of its students are Californians.

I do believe Californians are in a kind of unique situation. And I moved to the DMV from California, so quite familiar with the state.

Broadly, taking the SAT or ACT is not a thing anymore. The UCs and Cal States don't even look at it. No consideration at all. And absolutely everyone applies to state schools. Even the best of the best. Berkeley and UCLA are elite schools. And not only do they not care about test scores, they don't even glance at them. So, obviously, since the majority of California residents go to state schools, very few bother with standardized tests.

But I think California is an outlier.

If you look at colleges, they are doing the Test Optional thing one year at a time. They love the extra applications. The lower their acceptance rate, they happier they are. And it allows them to easily admit "priority" students. But they are also mindful of the academic preparedness of their students. MIT noped out real quick when they saw that the TO students weren't hacking it.

So it's a balancing act for most of let's say the top 50 schools. They revel in all the extra applications. They can admit their athletes and legacy and DEI without any question about their academic qualifications. And those that do submit scores invariably have very high scores, which also boosts their selectivity.

Win-win for selective colleges.

But if you are not a "priority" high school student, it sucks. Median test scores for accepted students are in the stratosphere. Don't even look in that direction unless you have a 34 or a 1500. And your smart asian or white kid from the burbs - outside of California - will definitely have to submit. There is so much more pressure on high school kids today compared to 5 years ago.

For the 1,000th time, the students who are also applying outside the State of California, which is nearly EVERY SINGLE STUDENT in an affluent area of the state, are absolutely taking the ACT or SAT or both. Students who have a realistic shot at getting into Berkeley or UCLA or UCSD almost invariably also look at the Ivies, and other Top 20 programs around the country, too. In addition to the fact that TO is a facade for certain groups when applying outside the state, you're also talking about MANY hyper-competitive kids who want to take the ACT and/or SAT to notch another feather in their cap. Speaking from personal experience, my son and his cohort seemed to be looking forward to taking the SAT (just like they look forward to comparing AP exam results in July each year) - probably as much for reasons relating to competing with each other over their score as much as for validating their grades.

I don't have the ACT and SAT registration data for 2023, but I can tell you that the one time my son registered for the SAT, it was brutal finding a seat in a testing site within 100 miles of our metro area.

This is because most students don’t take it in So Cal, so they have less testing locations. I’m sorry, it’s the truth. You’re being crazy insisting otherwise. You live in a small sub pocket and your experiences with testing are not the norm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Logic.

It’s amazing how many people today accept surface level explanations and don’t consider unintended consequences or ulterior motives.

Parents think they are smarter than the colleges and AOs. Especially when their DC gets deferred or rejected.

If colleges don't want to be test optional they won't state that they are. The highly selective schools have their pick of the students they want to shape the class they want in any given admissions cycle - test optional or not.

A few schools have recently made statements indicating they are test preferred. They are saying it.

Which schools? And where are they saying this?

And obscure podcasts don't count. Where is it on the college's website?

It’s not.

So at our private, I personally know TO applicants who got into:

Vanderbilt
Cornell
Northwestern
Colgate
UofChicago (no surprise)

I’m sure there are others. I have a senior who’s friends with these folks. Don’t know any others.

So many insist that TO is for poor minorities. See above for more proof that even the well-to do apply TO successfully.

That is definitely California. None of the UCs or CalStates even look at test scores. So no one takes them anymore. It's been like for a few years now. But California is such a huge state with lots of very qualified students that it distorts the picture nationally.

People have been observing that Vanderbilt for instance takes nearly 40 percent of their class TO. You can assume at least half of those are from California. A more accurate understanding would be that outside of students applying from California, more than 80 percent of applicants submitted scores. And that strikes me as more intuitively correct. But California is so big that it creates misperceptions at the national level private universities.

Having shepherded two kids through the college application process recently, I have come to believe that the world is only test optional for recruited athletes, UMCs, the offspring of VIPs and major donors, and students from California. If you are applying to any school in the top 80 or so, and don't fall into one of those categories, going TO is a major strike against the applicant.

This characterization of standardized testing in the State of California departs significantly from what I've seen. That's fancy talk for calling it B.S.

Students who are planning to apply beyond the UC and CSU systems, which includes most of the students in the higher performing school districts, are absolutely continuing to sit for the ACT and/or the SAT. Why do you think it's such a hassle to get a seat in a testing center within 60 miles of one's home? In my son's high school this past year (2023), 78% of his 500+ student senior class sat for one or both tests. Of the 22% who didn't, I'm assuming a significant portion are students who are dead set on a UC or CSU offer (with ELC and the statewide guarantee, a percentage of students already know they're in, even if it's a UC Merced scenario), recruited athletes already committed to either of those systems or an out-of-state school where D1 recruitment or a TO pre-read wasn't held against them), or the lowest performing students who are vectoring toward a community college start to their college education anyway.

Nobody in California is realistically thinking T20 outside the UC system "and I'll try it TO" ... to suggest that is idiotic.

Well, I sat through an information session at Vandy where they specifically stated they didn’t expect test scores from Californians. And there have been other posters from CA stating kids aren’t taking tests. So not sure why we should take your word for it.

USC has one of the highest test optional rates in the country. I’m sure that has nothing in do with the fact that 40 percent of its students are Californians.

I do believe Californians are in a kind of unique situation. And I moved to the DMV from California, so quite familiar with the state.

Broadly, taking the SAT or ACT is not a thing anymore. The UCs and Cal States don't even look at it. No consideration at all. And absolutely everyone applies to state schools. Even the best of the best. Berkeley and UCLA are elite schools. And not only do they not care about test scores, they don't even glance at them. So, obviously, since the majority of California residents go to state schools, very few bother with standardized tests.

But I think California is an outlier.

If you look at colleges, they are doing the Test Optional thing one year at a time. They love the extra applications. The lower their acceptance rate, they happier they are. And it allows them to easily admit "priority" students. But they are also mindful of the academic preparedness of their students. MIT noped out real quick when they saw that the TO students weren't hacking it.

So it's a balancing act for most of let's say the top 50 schools. They revel in all the extra applications. They can admit their athletes and legacy and DEI without any question about their academic qualifications. And those that do submit scores invariably have very high scores, which also boosts their selectivity.

Win-win for selective colleges.

But if you are not a "priority" high school student, it sucks. Median test scores for accepted students are in the stratosphere. Don't even look in that direction unless you have a 34 or a 1500. And your smart asian or white kid from the burbs - outside of California - will definitely have to submit. There is so much more pressure on high school kids today compared to 5 years ago.

For the 1,000th time, the students who are also applying outside the State of California, which is nearly EVERY SINGLE STUDENT in an affluent area of the state, are absolutely taking the ACT or SAT or both. Students who have a realistic shot at getting into Berkeley or UCLA or UCSD almost invariably also look at the Ivies, and other Top 20 programs around the country, too. In addition to the fact that TO is a facade for certain groups when applying outside the state, you're also talking about MANY hyper-competitive kids who want to take the ACT and/or SAT to notch another feather in their cap. Speaking from personal experience, my son and his cohort seemed to be looking forward to taking the SAT (just like they look forward to comparing AP exam results in July each year) - probably as much for reasons relating to competing with each other over their score as much as for validating their grades.

I don't have the ACT and SAT registration data for 2023, but I can tell you that the one time my son registered for the SAT, it was brutal finding a seat in a testing site within 100 miles of our metro area.

This is because most students don’t take it in So Cal, so they have less testing locations. I’m sorry, it’s the truth. You’re being crazy insisting otherwise. You live in a small sub pocket and your experiences with testing are not the norm.

DP. I'm seeing that 1.9M students took the SAT in 2023 and 1.7M took the SAT in 2016. The ACT, on the other hand, experienced a reduction from 2.1M to 1.4M over that same period. Combined, 3.8M to 3.3M, a decline of less than 15% across both tests. To listen to the parents liberated from having to defend their kid's test scores, you would expect that contraction to be closer to 50 - 60% nationwide, if not higher. And it is closer to a 50 - 60% decline in the State of California, for the reason that the UC and CSU systems are both functioning test blind for the time being; but again, that's not quite the same as "NOBODY is taking tests in California anymore". Over 100K seniors apparently did last year, which is quite a bit more than nobody.

[Anonymous]

*100K figure last year is not only seniors, but is only a measure of the SAT tests taken. Presume that the ACT would add another 10 - 15K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Logic.

It’s amazing how many people today accept surface level explanations and don’t consider unintended consequences or ulterior motives.

Parents think they are smarter than the colleges and AOs. Especially when their DC gets deferred or rejected.

If colleges don't want to be test optional they won't state that they are. The highly selective schools have their pick of the students they want to shape the class they want in any given admissions cycle - test optional or not.

A few schools have recently made statements indicating they are test preferred. They are saying it.

Which schools? And where are they saying this?

And obscure podcasts don't count. Where is it on the college's website?

It’s not.

So at our private, I personally know TO applicants who got into:

Vanderbilt
Cornell
Northwestern
Colgate
UofChicago (no surprise)

I’m sure there are others. I have a senior who’s friends with these folks. Don’t know any others.

So many insist that TO is for poor minorities. See above for more proof that even the well-to do apply TO successfully.

That is definitely California. None of the UCs or CalStates even look at test scores. So no one takes them anymore. It's been like for a few years now. But California is such a huge state with lots of very qualified students that it distorts the picture nationally.

People have been observing that Vanderbilt for instance takes nearly 40 percent of their class TO. You can assume at least half of those are from California. A more accurate understanding would be that outside of students applying from California, more than 80 percent of applicants submitted scores. And that strikes me as more intuitively correct. But California is so big that it creates misperceptions at the national level private universities.

Having shepherded two kids through the college application process recently, I have come to believe that the world is only test optional for recruited athletes, UMCs, the offspring of VIPs and major donors, and students from California. If you are applying to any school in the top 80 or so, and don't fall into one of those categories, going TO is a major strike against the applicant.

This characterization of standardized testing in the State of California departs significantly from what I've seen. That's fancy talk for calling it B.S.

Students who are planning to apply beyond the UC and CSU systems, which includes most of the students in the higher performing school districts, are absolutely continuing to sit for the ACT and/or the SAT. Why do you think it's such a hassle to get a seat in a testing center within 60 miles of one's home? In my son's high school this past year (2023), 78% of his 500+ student senior class sat for one or both tests. Of the 22% who didn't, I'm assuming a significant portion are students who are dead set on a UC or CSU offer (with ELC and the statewide guarantee, a percentage of students already know they're in, even if it's a UC Merced scenario), recruited athletes already committed to either of those systems or an out-of-state school where D1 recruitment or a TO pre-read wasn't held against them), or the lowest performing students who are vectoring toward a community college start to their college education anyway.

Nobody in California is realistically thinking T20 outside the UC system "and I'll try it TO" ... to suggest that is idiotic.

Well, I sat through an information session at Vandy where they specifically stated they didn’t expect test scores from Californians. And there have been other posters from CA stating kids aren’t taking tests. So not sure why we should take your word for it.

USC has one of the highest test optional rates in the country. I’m sure that has nothing in do with the fact that 40 percent of its students are Californians.

I do believe Californians are in a kind of unique situation. And I moved to the DMV from California, so quite familiar with the state.

Broadly, taking the SAT or ACT is not a thing anymore. The UCs and Cal States don't even look at it. No consideration at all. And absolutely everyone applies to state schools. Even the best of the best. Berkeley and UCLA are elite schools. And not only do they not care about test scores, they don't even glance at them. So, obviously, since the majority of California residents go to state schools, very few bother with standardized tests.

But I think California is an outlier.

If you look at colleges, they are doing the Test Optional thing one year at a time. They love the extra applications. The lower their acceptance rate, they happier they are. And it allows them to easily admit "priority" students. But they are also mindful of the academic preparedness of their students. MIT noped out real quick when they saw that the TO students weren't hacking it.

So it's a balancing act for most of let's say the top 50 schools. They revel in all the extra applications. They can admit their athletes and legacy and DEI without any question about their academic qualifications. And those that do submit scores invariably have very high scores, which also boosts their selectivity.

Win-win for selective colleges.

But if you are not a "priority" high school student, it sucks. Median test scores for accepted students are in the stratosphere. Don't even look in that direction unless you have a 34 or a 1500. And your smart asian or white kid from the burbs - outside of California - will definitely have to submit. There is so much more pressure on high school kids today compared to 5 years ago.

Not true for our NYC private. Plenty of TO and did well on ED.

Let’s see what happens in RD.

Also not relevant to the DMV. And unlikely to be unhooked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Logic.

It’s amazing how many people today accept surface level explanations and don’t consider unintended consequences or ulterior motives.

Parents think they are smarter than the colleges and AOs. Especially when their DC gets deferred or rejected.

If colleges don't want to be test optional they won't state that they are. The highly selective schools have their pick of the students they want to shape the class they want in any given admissions cycle - test optional or not.

A few schools have recently made statements indicating they are test preferred. They are saying it.

Which schools? And where are they saying this?

And obscure podcasts don't count. Where is it on the college's website?

It’s not.

So at our private, I personally know TO applicants who got into:

Vanderbilt
Cornell
Northwestern
Colgate
UofChicago (no surprise)

I’m sure there are others. I have a senior who’s friends with these folks. Don’t know any others.

So many insist that TO is for poor minorities. See above for more proof that even the well-to do apply TO successfully.

That is definitely California. None of the UCs or CalStates even look at test scores. So no one takes them anymore. It's been like for a few years now. But California is such a huge state with lots of very qualified students that it distorts the picture nationally.

People have been observing that Vanderbilt for instance takes nearly 40 percent of their class TO. You can assume at least half of those are from California. A more accurate understanding would be that outside of students applying from California, more than 80 percent of applicants submitted scores. And that strikes me as more intuitively correct. But California is so big that it creates misperceptions at the national level private universities.

Having shepherded two kids through the college application process recently, I have come to believe that the world is only test optional for recruited athletes, UMCs, the offspring of VIPs and major donors, and students from California. If you are applying to any school in the top 80 or so, and don't fall into one of those categories, going TO is a major strike against the applicant.

This characterization of standardized testing in the State of California departs significantly from what I've seen. That's fancy talk for calling it B.S.

Students who are planning to apply beyond the UC and CSU systems, which includes most of the students in the higher performing school districts, are absolutely continuing to sit for the ACT and/or the SAT. Why do you think it's such a hassle to get a seat in a testing center within 60 miles of one's home? In my son's high school this past year (2023), 78% of his 500+ student senior class sat for one or both tests. Of the 22% who didn't, I'm assuming a significant portion are students who are dead set on a UC or CSU offer (with ELC and the statewide guarantee, a percentage of students already know they're in, even if it's a UC Merced scenario), recruited athletes already committed to either of those systems or an out-of-state school where D1 recruitment or a TO pre-read wasn't held against them), or the lowest performing students who are vectoring toward a community college start to their college education anyway.

Nobody in California is realistically thinking T20 outside the UC system "and I'll try it TO" ... to suggest that is idiotic.

Well, I sat through an information session at Vandy where they specifically stated they didn’t expect test scores from Californians. And there have been other posters from CA stating kids aren’t taking tests. So not sure why we should take your word for it.

USC has one of the highest test optional rates in the country. I’m sure that has nothing in do with the fact that 40 percent of its students are Californians.

I do believe Californians are in a kind of unique situation. And I moved to the DMV from California, so quite familiar with the state.

Broadly, taking the SAT or ACT is not a thing anymore. The UCs and Cal States don't even look at it. No consideration at all. And absolutely everyone applies to state schools. Even the best of the best. Berkeley and UCLA are elite schools. And not only do they not care about test scores, they don't even glance at them. So, obviously, since the majority of California residents go to state schools, very few bother with standardized tests.

But I think California is an outlier.

If you look at colleges, they are doing the Test Optional thing one year at a time. They love the extra applications. The lower their acceptance rate, they happier they are. And it allows them to easily admit "priority" students. But they are also mindful of the academic preparedness of their students. MIT noped out real quick when they saw that the TO students weren't hacking it.

So it's a balancing act for most of let's say the top 50 schools. They revel in all the extra applications. They can admit their athletes and legacy and DEI without any question about their academic qualifications. And those that do submit scores invariably have very high scores, which also boosts their selectivity.

Win-win for selective colleges.

But if you are not a "priority" high school student, it sucks. Median test scores for accepted students are in the stratosphere. Don't even look in that direction unless you have a 34 or a 1500. And your smart asian or white kid from the burbs - outside of California - will definitely have to submit. There is so much more pressure on high school kids today compared to 5 years ago.

For the 1,000th time, the students who are also applying outside the State of California, which is nearly EVERY SINGLE STUDENT in an affluent area of the state, are absolutely taking the ACT or SAT or both. Students who have a realistic shot at getting into Berkeley or UCLA or UCSD almost invariably also look at the Ivies, and other Top 20 programs around the country, too. In addition to the fact that TO is a facade for certain groups when applying outside the state, you're also talking about MANY hyper-competitive kids who want to take the ACT and/or SAT to notch another feather in their cap. Speaking from personal experience, my son and his cohort seemed to be looking forward to taking the SAT (just like they look forward to comparing AP exam results in July each year) - probably as much for reasons relating to competing with each other over their score as much as for validating their grades.

I don't have the ACT and SAT registration data for 2023, but I can tell you that the one time my son registered for the SAT, it was brutal finding a seat in a testing site within 100 miles of our metro area.

This is because most students don’t take it in So Cal, so they have less testing locations. I’m sorry, it’s the truth. You’re being crazy insisting otherwise. You live in a small sub pocket and your experiences with testing are not the norm.

DP. I'm seeing that 1.9M students took the SAT in 2023 and 1.7M took the SAT in 2016. The ACT, on the other hand, experienced a reduction from 2.1M to 1.4M over that same period. Combined, 3.8M to 3.3M, a decline of less than 15% across both tests. To listen to the parents liberated from having to defend their kid's test scores, you would expect that contraction to be closer to 50 - 60% nationwide, if not higher. And it is closer to a 50 - 60% decline in the State of California, for the reason that the UC and CSU systems are both functioning test blind for the time being; but again, that's not quite the same as "NOBODY is taking tests in California anymore". Over 100K seniors apparently did last year, which is quite a bit more than nobody.

There are around 500,000 seniors in high school in California. So one in five took SAT, at best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Logic.

It’s amazing how many people today accept surface level explanations and don’t consider unintended consequences or ulterior motives.

Parents think they are smarter than the colleges and AOs. Especially when their DC gets deferred or rejected.

If colleges don't want to be test optional they won't state that they are. The highly selective schools have their pick of the students they want to shape the class they want in any given admissions cycle - test optional or not.

A few schools have recently made statements indicating they are test preferred. They are saying it.

Which schools? And where are they saying this?

And obscure podcasts don't count. Where is it on the college's website?

It’s not.

So at our private, I personally know TO applicants who got into:

Vanderbilt
Cornell
Northwestern
Colgate
UofChicago (no surprise)

I’m sure there are others. I have a senior who’s friends with these folks. Don’t know any others.

So many insist that TO is for poor minorities. See above for more proof that even the well-to do apply TO successfully.

That is definitely California. None of the UCs or CalStates even look at test scores. So no one takes them anymore. It's been like for a few years now. But California is such a huge state with lots of very qualified students that it distorts the picture nationally.

People have been observing that Vanderbilt for instance takes nearly 40 percent of their class TO. You can assume at least half of those are from California. A more accurate understanding would be that outside of students applying from California, more than 80 percent of applicants submitted scores. And that strikes me as more intuitively correct. But California is so big that it creates misperceptions at the national level private universities.

Having shepherded two kids through the college application process recently, I have come to believe that the world is only test optional for recruited athletes, UMCs, the offspring of VIPs and major donors, and students from California. If you are applying to any school in the top 80 or so, and don't fall into one of those categories, going TO is a major strike against the applicant.

This characterization of standardized testing in the State of California departs significantly from what I've seen. That's fancy talk for calling it B.S.

Students who are planning to apply beyond the UC and CSU systems, which includes most of the students in the higher performing school districts, are absolutely continuing to sit for the ACT and/or the SAT. Why do you think it's such a hassle to get a seat in a testing center within 60 miles of one's home? In my son's high school this past year (2023), 78% of his 500+ student senior class sat for one or both tests. Of the 22% who didn't, I'm assuming a significant portion are students who are dead set on a UC or CSU offer (with ELC and the statewide guarantee, a percentage of students already know they're in, even if it's a UC Merced scenario), recruited athletes already committed to either of those systems or an out-of-state school where D1 recruitment or a TO pre-read wasn't held against them), or the lowest performing students who are vectoring toward a community college start to their college education anyway.

Nobody in California is realistically thinking T20 outside the UC system "and I'll try it TO" ... to suggest that is idiotic.

Well, I sat through an information session at Vandy where they specifically stated they didn’t expect test scores from Californians. And there have been other posters from CA stating kids aren’t taking tests. So not sure why we should take your word for it.

USC has one of the highest test optional rates in the country. I’m sure that has nothing in do with the fact that 40 percent of its students are Californians.

I do believe Californians are in a kind of unique situation. And I moved to the DMV from California, so quite familiar with the state.

Broadly, taking the SAT or ACT is not a thing anymore. The UCs and Cal States don't even look at it. No consideration at all. And absolutely everyone applies to state schools. Even the best of the best. Berkeley and UCLA are elite schools. And not only do they not care about test scores, they don't even glance at them. So, obviously, since the majority of California residents go to state schools, very few bother with standardized tests.

But I think California is an outlier.

If you look at colleges, they are doing the Test Optional thing one year at a time. They love the extra applications. The lower their acceptance rate, they happier they are. And it allows them to easily admit "priority" students. But they are also mindful of the academic preparedness of their students. MIT noped out real quick when they saw that the TO students weren't hacking it.

So it's a balancing act for most of let's say the top 50 schools. They revel in all the extra applications. They can admit their athletes and legacy and DEI without any question about their academic qualifications. And those that do submit scores invariably have very high scores, which also boosts their selectivity.

Win-win for selective colleges.

But if you are not a "priority" high school student, it sucks. Median test scores for accepted students are in the stratosphere. Don't even look in that direction unless you have a 34 or a 1500. And your smart asian or white kid from the burbs - outside of California - will definitely have to submit. There is so much more pressure on high school kids today compared to 5 years ago.

Not true for our NYC private. Plenty of TO and did well on ED.

Let’s see what happens in RD.

Also not relevant to the DMV. And unlikely to be unhooked.

Our experience. Two DC's -- one last year, one this year. Unhooked -- no URM, athlete, legacy. Both strong students at DMV private (not Big 3). Both decided early in the application process not to take either the SAT/ACT and instead put tutoring/test-taking time into academics and extracurriculars. They knew this meant they could only apply to test optional schools. They each had good grades, great recommendations and strong essays. One ED acceptance at a high-ranked SLAC and one ED acceptance at a Top 10. TO admittance does happen at these schools for unhooked kids in the DMV.