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

[Anonymous]

25% took the SAT in California in 2022-23 https://reports.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/2023-california-sat-suite-of-assessments-annual-report-ADA.pdf

29% of the high school class of 2024 took the PSAT/NMSQT

[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.

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.

Thank you.

[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.

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.

Last year^

It’s unpredictable the last few years. Sons top schools have a lot of data that the TO are faring much worse and they have many more in academic probation than ever before.

This year no affirmative action.

The game keeps changing.

[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:

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.

Last year^

It’s unpredictable the last few years. Sons top schools have a lot of data that the TO are faring much worse and they have many more in academic probation than ever before.

This year no affirmative action.

The game keeps changing.

How do you know this?

[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:

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.

Last year^

It’s unpredictable the last few years. Sons top schools have a lot of data that the TO are faring much worse and they have many more in academic probation than ever before.

This year no affirmative action.

The game keeps changing.

How do you know this?

NP. Maybe they are referring to MIT.

Yale says "Yale’s internal research has consistently shown that standardized test scores are a significant predictor of a student’s undergraduate academic performance." Of course, "test scores are a significant predictor" is not quite the same thing as "test optional fare worse," although the general idea is that test optional = low scores.

Thus is born the idea that scores under, but close to, the 25th percentile should be submitted.

[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:

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.

Last year^

It’s unpredictable the last few years. Sons top schools have a lot of data that the TO are faring much worse and they have many more in academic probation than ever before.

This year no affirmative action.

The game keeps changing.

How do you know this?

Dp, but this was mentioned in the Atlantic article about test optional last year. It also explains why some schools are moving towards test preferred.

[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:

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.

Last year^

It’s unpredictable the last few years. Sons top schools have a lot of data that the TO are faring much worse and they have many more in academic probation than ever before.

This year no affirmative action.

The game keeps changing.

How do you know this?

NP. Maybe they are referring to MIT.

Yale says "Yale’s internal research has consistently shown that standardized test scores are a significant predictor of a student’s undergraduate academic performance." Of course, "test scores are a significant predictor" is not quite the same thing as "test optional fare worse," although the general idea is that test optional = low scores.

Thus is born the idea that scores under, but close to, the 25th percentile should be submitted.

Dartmouth and Yale have data from the last 5 years which show this.

[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:

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.

Last year^

It’s unpredictable the last few years. Sons top schools have a lot of data that the TO are faring much worse and they have many more in academic probation than ever before.

This year no affirmative action.

The game keeps changing.

How do you know this?

Dp, but this was mentioned in the Atlantic article about test optional last year. It also explains why some schools are moving towards test preferred.

+1

Consider TO- ‘test aware’ except for the UC schools.

[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:

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.

and yet they admit TO. BTW, Dartmouth doesn't publish this data, go figure
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.

Last year^

It’s unpredictable the last few years. Sons top schools have a lot of data that the TO are faring much worse and they have many more in academic probation than ever before.

This year no affirmative action.

The game keeps changing.

How do you know this?

NP. Maybe they are referring to MIT.

Yale says "Yale’s internal research has consistently shown that standardized test scores are a significant predictor of a student’s undergraduate academic performance." Of course, "test scores are a significant predictor" is not quite the same thing as "test optional fare worse," although the general idea is that test optional = low scores.

Thus is born the idea that scores under, but close to, the 25th percentile should be submitted.

Dartmouth and Yale have data from the last 5 years which show this.

[Anonymous]

I swear I heard the Dartmouth guy (Lee coffin?) saying that when, after admissions cycle ended, they solicited from College Board the scores for TO applicants who had taken the test, and saw a clear linear correlation between test scores and GPA. Very rarely did they diverge, so the SATs only backed up why they were already seeing without the scores. Did anyone else hear that conversation? Am I misremembering? Might have been on Your College Bound Kid. Maybe 4-5 months ago?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I swear I heard the Dartmouth guy (Lee coffin?) saying that when, after admissions cycle ended, they solicited from College Board the scores for TO applicants who had taken the test, and saw a clear linear correlation between test scores and GPA. Very rarely did they diverge, so the SATs only backed up why they were already seeing without the scores. Did anyone else hear that conversation? Am I misremembering? Might have been on Your College Bound Kid. Maybe 4-5 months ago?

Thinking out loud, if the relationship were always that linear, they wouldn't be angling toward test-recommended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I swear I heard the Dartmouth guy (Lee coffin?) saying that when, after admissions cycle ended, they solicited from College Board the scores for TO applicants who had taken the test, and saw a clear linear correlation between test scores and GPA. Very rarely did they diverge, so the SATs only backed up why they were already seeing without the scores. Did anyone else hear that conversation? Am I misremembering? Might have been on Your College Bound Kid. Maybe 4-5 months ago?

This doesn't make any sense. Assumably the test optional matriculants had high GPAs. And that Dartmouth subsequently learned that they also had high SAT scores that they just didn't submit?

Why would these kids have not submitted their high scores?

None of this makes sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I swear I heard the Dartmouth guy (Lee coffin?) saying that when, after admissions cycle ended, they solicited from College Board the scores for TO applicants who had taken the test, and saw a clear linear correlation between test scores and GPA. Very rarely did they diverge, so the SATs only backed up why they were already seeing without the scores. Did anyone else hear that conversation? Am I misremembering? Might have been on Your College Bound Kid. Maybe 4-5 months ago?

+1 Not sure if it was on YCBK or Dartmouth's podcast. I think the confusion is that he had a similar discussion with the AO from Yale.

Just to clarify, he was speaking within the context of test optional and academic performance at Dartmouth. He said a few things of relevance to this discussion:

1) last academic year, Dartmouth had the highest number of students on academic probation, which he attributed to TO.
2) Students should submit scores, even if they are within the 25-50th percentile because their research shows that the scores validate the GPAs. Also, students at under-resourced schools should also submit scores even if the scores are under 25th percentile because it could validate the grades. He implied that Dartmouth has the data to determine the cutoff score to succeed at Dartmouth, e.g., 1300.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I swear I heard the Dartmouth guy (Lee coffin?) saying that when, after admissions cycle ended, they solicited from College Board the scores for TO applicants who had taken the test, and saw a clear linear correlation between test scores and GPA. Very rarely did they diverge, so the SATs only backed up why they were already seeing without the scores. Did anyone else hear that conversation? Am I misremembering? Might have been on Your College Bound Kid. Maybe 4-5 months ago?

This doesn't make any sense. Assumably the test optional matriculants had high GPAs. And that Dartmouth subsequently learned that they also had high SAT scores that they just didn't submit?

Why would these kids have not submitted their high scores?

None of this makes sense.

I posted below (12:27) to clarify the OP. The students are not submitting high scores because they don't think the scores are high enough. In other words, students are not submitting, or else their score is at least within the 50-75 percentile and, in many cases, above the 75th, which is increasing the average at Dartmouth and peer schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I swear I heard the Dartmouth guy (Lee coffin?) saying that when, after admissions cycle ended, they solicited from College Board the scores for TO applicants who had taken the test, and saw a clear linear correlation between test scores and GPA. Very rarely did they diverge, so the SATs only backed up why they were already seeing without the scores. Did anyone else hear that conversation? Am I misremembering? Might have been on Your College Bound Kid. Maybe 4-5 months ago?

+1 Not sure if it was on YCBK or Dartmouth's podcast. I think the confusion is that he had a similar discussion with the AO from Yale.

Just to clarify, he was speaking within the context of test optional and academic performance at Dartmouth. He said a few things of relevance to this discussion:

1) last academic year, Dartmouth had the highest number of students on academic probation, which he attributed to TO.
2) Students should submit scores, even if they are within the 25-50th percentile because their research shows that the scores validate the GPAs. Also, students at under-resourced schools should also submit scores even if the scores are under 25th percentile because it could validate the grades. He implied that Dartmouth has the data to determine the cutoff score to succeed at Dartmouth, e.g., 1300.

oops:

**Just to clarify, he was speaking within the context of test optional, grade inflation, and academic performance at Dartmouth.