Per NYT, Yale now “test flexible”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This, this, this!
When test scores are discussed here it seems that people regard it as a be-all ranking. It is not used like that with TO schools or test-aware schools or test-required schools. It is one more piece of the applicant puzzle.

Pre-TO: ABC College has 100 applicants, 10 are accepted. 10% acceptance rate.

TO: ABC College has 200 applicants, 100 are TO and 100 submit. 5 TO are accepted, 5 non-TO are accepted.

Not only does the acceptance rate get slashed in half for ABC College, but now applicants with previously high scores are made to be less competitive due to rising medians. This should be obvious: More previously unqualified applicants accepted at similar rates = more competition = lower acceptance rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This. Exactly. All these small-minded posters who think they're 1500 kid didn't get in because some dumb kid who didn't have to submit their scores did are completely missing the point. Finally, incredibly bright students with 1300-1400 and 31-32 scores can have the opportunities they deserve. TO skewed the scores so high that they became irrelevant. Reinstating levels the field--for everyone--not just high-scoring, highly-tutored white kids. 1600s are really not setting kids apart from 1400s. The AOs understand this so much better than bitter DCUM parents.

Not sure how you can homogenize AOs when schools like MIT had no problem reinstating test requirements after last year, and when schools like Yale and Dartmouth returned requirements for this exact reason:

https://president.dartmouth.edu/news/2024/02/reactivating-satact-requirement-dartmouth-undergraduate-admissions
"Second, in a test-optional system, many applicants don't submit test scores. This disadvantages applicants from less-resourced families because Dartmouth admissions considers applicants' scores in relation to local norms of their high school (so, for example, a 1400 SAT score from an applicant whose high school has an SAT mean of 1000 gives us valuable information about that applicant's ability to excel in their environment, at Dartmouth, and beyond). In a test-optional system, Dartmouth admissions often misses the opportunity to consider this information."

https://news.yale.edu/2024/02/22/yale-announces-new-test-flexible-admissions-policy
"Yes, students with greater resources earn higher scores on average, but they also benefit from advantages in every other element of the application. Our whole person review process allows us to consider every piece of the application, including testing, in the context of a student’s high school, neighborhood, and household....When an application lacks testing, admissions officers place greater emphasis on other elements of the file. For students attending well-resourced high schools, substitutes for standardized tests are relatively easy to find: transcripts brim with advanced courses, teachers are accustomed to praising students’ unique classroom contributions, and activities lists are full of enrichment opportunities...

For students attending high schools with fewer resources, applications without scores can inadvertently leave admissions officers with scant evidence of their readiness for Yale. When students attending these high schools include a score with their application — even a score below Yale’s median range — they give the committee greater confidence that they are likely to achieve academic success in college. Our research strongly suggests that requiring scores of all applicants serves to benefit and not disadvantage students from under-resourced backgrounds."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I say make the kids submit all their test scores, like Georgetown does. Do away with superscoring. Colleges can elect to consider whatever they like, but at least they have an accurate full picture.

Well said.
Not fair when some can afford to take the SAT/ACT multiple times and others cannot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This, this, this!
When test scores are discussed here it seems that people regard it as a be-all ranking. It is not used like that with TO schools or test-aware schools or test-required schools. It is one more piece of the applicant puzzle.

Pre-TO: ABC College has 100 applicants, 10 are accepted. 10% acceptance rate.

TO: ABC College has 200 applicants, 100 are TO and 100 submit. 5 TO are accepted, 5 non-TO are accepted.

Not only does the acceptance rate get slashed in half for ABC College, but now applicants with previously high scores are made to be less competitive due to rising medians. This should be obvious: More previously unqualified applicants accepted at similar rates = more competition = lower acceptance rate.

One isn't deemed "unqualified" because he/she didn't submit a test score. The applicant was accepted!