Test optional is total BS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:just listen very carefully to AOs when asked this question - and they're all asked it.

we've heard quite a lot of top 20 presenters say, "my advice is to look up our numbers from last year, and submit if you're at 50% or higher"

they want their averages to go up - it works for their rankings.

Sounds like you are describing a game of Blackjack.

If don't gamble it works like this:

Try to get as close to 21 without going over. Whoever has the highest number wins.

The trick is in inducing the other players to keep reaching for higher numbers until they break through 21 and are out of the game.

Most people think they can only win with a 21. People who gamble for a living win with 16s all the time.

I’m not describing that at all. Test scores are becoming as relevant to top 40 schools as major math awards. You are not dinged by not ever participating (gambling). You are awarded for being top winner (1540+). Schools like to say they have this many debate champs, history day winners, math medalists. And that 1550 avg matters to their marketing and ranking.

But opting out of all of it doesn’t hurt and will soon be standard.

A quote from the Harvard Crimson

Admitted students from the Class of 2025 had an average SAT score of 1494 and an average ACT score of 34. These numbers varied significantly along athlete and income status. Recruited athletes had an average SAT score of 1397, whereas non-athletes averaged 1501. The average SAT score of students with family income under $40,000 was 1443, while those with a family income of more than $500,000 averaged 1520. Legacy students also had a higher average SAT score than non-legacy students, at 1523 for legacy students and 1491 for non-legacy students.

Nobody but nobody needs a 1540 to get in. Opting out may not hurt. But folks should be clear-eyed about the facts. You don't even need a 1500 to get into these schools. This whole conceit that schools want you to apply test optional if you don't have a 1540+ is wrong.

The schools aren't saying this.

The test prep companies and tutors are.

Rational people like most of the college counselors are citing the 50% in CDS.

This year many college counselors are shifting to within the 25-75 range.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we're a cycle away from 60% of people not submitting. and probably three cycles away from most people not bothering to even take it unless PSAT shows you're already about there. just not worth the squeeze.

You're likely more right than wrong here.

People aren't coming to terms with the prospect of test optional becoming more entrenched ( including most of the selective colleges) in the admissions process going forward.

What do they need to “come to terms” with? It makes it difficult for schools, but it’s easier for families and students. My kid is a good test-taker and prepping for the SATs, but…if the schools she was interested suddenly went test blind, she wouldn’t care. Most kids who test high (1500) also have rigor schedules, high GPAs, interesting outside activities, good recommendations, and so on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we're a cycle away from 60% of people not submitting. and probably three cycles away from most people not bothering to even take it unless PSAT shows you're already about there. just not worth the squeeze.

You're likely more right than wrong here.

People aren't coming to terms with the prospect of test optional becoming more entrenched ( including most of the selective colleges) in the admissions process going forward.

What do they need to “come to terms” with? It makes it difficult for schools, but it’s easier for families and students. My kid is a good test-taker and prepping for the SATs, but…if the schools she was interested suddenly went test blind, she wouldn’t care. Most kids who test high (1500) also have rigor schedules, high GPAs, interesting outside activities, good recommendations, and so on.

Sure, but there are more people who have those things and fewer people who have those things plus the 1500. So without the testing information, her odds of getting in would be lower.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we're a cycle away from 60% of people not submitting. and probably three cycles away from most people not bothering to even take it unless PSAT shows you're already about there. just not worth the squeeze.

You're likely more right than wrong here.

People aren't coming to terms with the prospect of test optional becoming more entrenched ( including most of the selective colleges) in the admissions process going forward.

What do they need to “come to terms” with? It makes it difficult for schools, but it’s easier for families and students. My kid is a good test-taker and prepping for the SATs, but…if the schools she was interested suddenly went test blind, she wouldn’t care. Most kids who test high (1500) also have rigor schedules, high GPAs, interesting outside activities, good recommendations, and so on.

Sure, but there are more people who have those things and fewer people who have those things plus the 1500. So without the testing information, her odds of getting in would be lower.

Maybe but if kids have a balanced list, they will get in places they love and all will end well. Parents need to be open minded, and remind them there are multiple paths to their end-goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we're a cycle away from 60% of people not submitting. and probably three cycles away from most people not bothering to even take it unless PSAT shows you're already about there. just not worth the squeeze.

You're likely more right than wrong here.

People aren't coming to terms with the prospect of test optional becoming more entrenched ( including most of the selective colleges) in the admissions process going forward.

What do they need to “come to terms” with? It makes it difficult for schools, but it’s easier for families and students. My kid is a good test-taker and prepping for the SATs, but…if the schools she was interested suddenly went test blind, she wouldn’t care. Most kids who test high (1500) also have rigor schedules, high GPAs, interesting outside activities, good recommendations, and so on.

No it's not. Now you have a far less idea of which schools are going to accept you and whether you should send in your scores. You have to do a lot more applications and/or do early decision. It used to be much more predictable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we're a cycle away from 60% of people not submitting. and probably three cycles away from most people not bothering to even take it unless PSAT shows you're already about there. just not worth the squeeze.

You're likely more right than wrong here.

People aren't coming to terms with the prospect of test optional becoming more entrenched ( including most of the selective colleges) in the admissions process going forward.

What do they need to “come to terms” with? It makes it difficult for schools, but it’s easier for families and students. My kid is a good test-taker and prepping for the SATs, but…if the schools she was interested suddenly went test blind, she wouldn’t care. Most kids who test high (1500) also have rigor schedules, high GPAs, interesting outside activities, good recommendations, and so on.

No it doesn't. AOs know how to evaluate applicants without test scores under holistic admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we're a cycle away from 60% of people not submitting. and probably three cycles away from most people not bothering to even take it unless PSAT shows you're already about there. just not worth the squeeze.

You're likely more right than wrong here.

People aren't coming to terms with the prospect of test optional becoming more entrenched ( including most of the selective colleges) in the admissions process going forward.

What do they need to “come to terms” with? It makes it difficult for schools, but it’s easier for families and students. My kid is a good test-taker and prepping for the SATs, but…if the schools she was interested suddenly went test blind, she wouldn’t care. Most kids who test high (1500) also have rigor schedules, high GPAs, interesting outside activities, good recommendations, and so on.

No it's not. Now you have a far less idea of which schools are going to accept you and whether you should send in your scores. You have to do a lot more applications and/or do early decision. It used to be much more predictable.

When was it predictable? 1950 for rich white guys?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:just listen very carefully to AOs when asked this question - and they're all asked it.

we've heard quite a lot of top 20 presenters say, "my advice is to look up our numbers from last year, and submit if you're at 50% or higher"

they want their averages to go up - it works for their rankings.

Sounds like you are describing a game of Blackjack.

If don't gamble it works like this:

Try to get as close to 21 without going over. Whoever has the highest number wins.

The trick is in inducing the other players to keep reaching for higher numbers until they break through 21 and are out of the game.

Most people think they can only win with a 21. People who gamble for a living win with 16s all the time.

I’m not describing that at all. Test scores are becoming as relevant to top 40 schools as major math awards. You are not dinged by not ever participating (gambling). You are awarded for being top winner (1540+). Schools like to say they have this many debate champs, history day winners, math medalists. And that 1550 avg matters to their marketing and ranking.

But opting out of all of it doesn’t hurt and will soon be standard.

A quote from the Harvard Crimson

Admitted students from the Class of 2025 had an average SAT score of 1494 and an average ACT score of 34. These numbers varied significantly along athlete and income status. Recruited athletes had an average SAT score of 1397, whereas non-athletes averaged 1501. The average SAT score of students with family income under $40,000 was 1443, while those with a family income of more than $500,000 averaged 1520. Legacy students also had a higher average SAT score than non-legacy students, at 1523 for legacy students and 1491 for non-legacy students.

Nobody but nobody needs a 1540 to get in. Opting out may not hurt. But folks should be clear-eyed about the facts. You don't even need a 1500 to get into these schools. This whole conceit that schools want you to apply test optional if you don't have a 1540+ is wrong.

White, asian and unhooked do. You could have mentioned that the 75th percentile at harvard university was a 1580, meaning 25 percent had higher. Harvard SAT Score Analysis (New 1600 SAT). My valedictorian (real valedictorian) legacy kid had a 36 and didn't get in - but we couldn't afford to donate large amounts so it was anticipated
The 25th percentile New SAT score is 1460, and the 75th percentile SAT score is 1580.

Wow that's crazy about your kid's denial. I am sure it was disappointing but sounds like you went in with eyes open. Can you share where they ended up? It all works out, I'm sure they will do great things, sounds like you have an exceptional kid.

[Anonymous]

I don't really think that TO changed much of anything for colleges. It's just there to confuse parents imo.

Before this cycle, they had other policies that effectively discounted value of the scores for some students over others.

Now, they are leaving it up to the parents to decide, probably because parents have sued over what they did in their offices.

I think it's bad for the students, however. SAT does have predictive value in how students do academically in college. It's not a coincidence that a lot of these selective schools are opening tutoring centers at the same time that more of their applicants have been accepted applying TO. You'll hear eggheads debate this and come up with gerryrigged data to refute it, but the SAT has been around for a long time. Also, common sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't really think that TO changed much of anything for colleges. It's just there to confuse parents imo.

Before this cycle, they had other policies that effectively discounted value of the scores for some students over others.

Now, they are leaving it up to the parents to decide, probably because parents have sued over what they did in their offices.

I think it's bad for the students, however. SAT does have predictive value in how students do academically in college. It's not a coincidence that a lot of these selective schools are opening tutoring centers at the same time that more of their applicants have been accepted applying TO. You'll hear eggheads debate this and come up with gerryrigged data to refute it, but the SAT has been around for a long time. Also, common sense.

I agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we're a cycle away from 60% of people not submitting. and probably three cycles away from most people not bothering to even take it unless PSAT shows you're already about there. just not worth the squeeze.

You're likely more right than wrong here.

People aren't coming to terms with the prospect of test optional becoming more entrenched ( including most of the selective colleges) in the admissions process going forward.

What do they need to “come to terms” with? It makes it difficult for schools, but it’s easier for families and students. My kid is a good test-taker and prepping for the SATs, but…if the schools she was interested suddenly went test blind, she wouldn’t care. Most kids who test high (1500) also have rigor schedules, high GPAs, interesting outside activities, good recommendations, and so on.

No it doesn't. AOs know how to evaluate applicants without test scores under holistic admissions.

No they don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really think that TO changed much of anything for colleges. It's just there to confuse parents imo.

Before this cycle, they had other policies that effectively discounted value of the scores for some students over others.

Now, they are leaving it up to the parents to decide, probably because parents have sued over what they did in their offices.

I think it's bad for the students, however. SAT does have predictive value in how students do academically in college. It's not a coincidence that a lot of these selective schools are opening tutoring centers at the same time that more of their applicants have been accepted applying TO. You'll hear eggheads debate this and come up with gerryrigged data to refute it, but the SAT has been around for a long time. Also, common sense.

I agree

Yes. It’s people who can’t get good scores arguing for TO/getting rid of tests. Let’s get rid of essays too. I mean some kids are very smart, but can’t write well. And see how this goes….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we're a cycle away from 60% of people not submitting. and probably three cycles away from most people not bothering to even take it unless PSAT shows you're already about there. just not worth the squeeze.

You're likely more right than wrong here.

People aren't coming to terms with the prospect of test optional becoming more entrenched ( including most of the selective colleges) in the admissions process going forward.

What do they need to “come to terms” with? It makes it difficult for schools, but it’s easier for families and students. My kid is a good test-taker and prepping for the SATs, but…if the schools she was interested suddenly went test blind, she wouldn’t care. Most kids who test high (1500) also have rigor schedules, high GPAs, interesting outside activities, good recommendations, and so on.

No it doesn't. AOs know how to evaluate applicants without test scores under holistic admissions.

No they don’t.

Are you saying that you submitted test scores and they couldn't evaluate? Or that they cannot without test scores?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Forget college if you can't even handle SAT

Hmmm. I was about 80th percentile on the SAT. Top 5% of my college (a T20).

You wouldn't be accepted today

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't really think that TO changed much of anything for colleges. It's just there to confuse parents imo.

Before this cycle, they had other policies that effectively discounted value of the scores for some students over others.

Now, they are leaving it up to the parents to decide, probably because parents have sued over what they did in their offices.

I think it's bad for the students, however. SAT does have predictive value in how students do academically in college. It's not a coincidence that a lot of these selective schools are opening tutoring centers at the same time that more of their applicants have been accepted applying TO. You'll hear eggheads debate this and come up with gerryrigged data to refute it, but the SAT has been around for a long time. Also, common sense.

Data that supports my position = good

Data that refutes my position = gerryrigged by eggheads