Dartmouth Announces Test Scores Required Starting Next Year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. There may not be much difference between at 1500 and a 1600, but a 1200 does speak to the ability of a kid with a great GPA to succeed in a competitive college environment

There is no reason a college environment should be competitive.

Did you read the article? It's saying the opposite. Dartmouth wants to find people with SAT scores below 1400, and they were frustrated that their target audience wasn't taking the SAT.

That’s not what the charts show. They correlate non-reporters with a test level of 1400. And the “crossover point” on admission advantage was 1400. Implying that there were less advantaged students with 1400s who didn’t submit, but would have been admitted if they had. They’re saying they’d take a less advantaged student with a 1400 over an advantaged student with a 1600.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think colleges can spot counselor written essays a mile away

What is a counselor written essay?

[Anonymous]

Dartmouth's news should attract attention from juniors with high scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. There may not be much difference between at 1500 and a 1600, but a 1200 does speak to the ability of a kid with a great GPA to succeed in a competitive college environment

There is no reason a college environment should be competitive.

Did you read the article? It's saying the opposite. Dartmouth wants to find people with SAT scores below 1400, and they were frustrated that their target audience wasn't taking the SAT.

That’s not what the charts show. They correlate non-reporters with a test level of 1400. And the “crossover point” on admission advantage was 1400. Implying that there were less advantaged students with 1400s who didn’t submit, but would have been admitted if they had. They’re saying they’d take a less advantaged student with a 1400 over an advantaged student with a 1600.

They make this clear in the full report. They identified less advantaged students with 1400+ sats who didn’t submit who would have had a better chance of admission had they done so.

https://home.dartmouth.edu/sites/home/files/2024-02/sat-undergrad-admissions.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My UMC kid said this means she needs to get her 1530 up to 1550. I don't think so .. do you?

No.

It means her 1530 has returned to having value like it did pre-test optional.

Also means that the score will be evaluated in context. The "value" will be based on zip code and HS resources.

A low income kid with a 1400 has just a good a chance at Dartmouth as a UMC kid with a 1530.

Are you OK with that?

Our magnate schools provide SAT prep to all students on free lunch level family income but not to muddle class families. Many middle class students can't afford private prep centers, they are at a disadvantage.

So recognize the privilege of not being middle class and how much easier it is to achieve a better score.

One on one tutoring is efficient. However, most students can't tutor their way to a 1550, no. If it were that straightforward, all rich kids would have such a score. They don't.

Almost all of the kids in my circle attend prep centers, their SAT and PSAT scores are all over the board, only few go national merit or above 1550.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They don’t seem to care, they are so flooded with applications they don’t seem to think it will have a big effect on their rate.

they said they don't care about their rate. And they shouldn't.

[Anonymous]

If prep was so really so effective, prep schools would give guarantees and everyone and their cousin would be a national merit scholar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My UMC kid said this means she needs to get her 1530 up to 1550. I don't think so .. do you?

No.

It means her 1530 has returned to having value like it did pre-test optional.

Also means that the score will be evaluated in context. The "value" will be based on zip code and HS resources.

A low income kid with a 1400 has just a good a chance at Dartmouth as a UMC kid with a 1530.

Are you OK with that?

Our magnate schools provide SAT prep to all students on free lunch level family income but not to muddle class families. Many middle class students can't afford private prep centers, they are at a disadvantage.

So recognize the privilege of not being middle class and how much easier it is to achieve a better score.

One on one tutoring is efficient. However, most students can't tutor their way to a 1550, no. If it were that straightforward, all rich kids would have such a score. They don't.

Almost all of the kids in my circle attend prep centers, their SAT and PSAT scores are all over the board, only few go national merit or above 1550.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think colleges can spot counselor written essays a mile away

can they spot the essays written by someone else who was paid $$$ to do so? I doubt it.

[Anonymous]

Friends who read these essays for a living tell me they definitely can tell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really sucks for us if they go back to test required.

DC SAT score 1580, applied to college last year. So many colleges were TO. DC got rejected to T15. I do wonder if TO hurt DC.

DC#2 is a sophomore, not as high achieving and will probably have an SAT score around 1300 mark. TO would be great for this DC.

I know life is unfair, but this really stinks for my kids.

There will still be plenty of schools that are TO in 2 years. Some have gone test blind and do not plan to change---most of those were moving to test blind well before covid hit.

Interestingly, why would you want your "DC#2 not as high achieving" to be at a T25 school? If their SAT is 1300 and as you state they are not as high achieving, they don't seem like the ideal candidate for a T25. Wouldn't they actually be better off at a school that is a much better fit for them? Most non-high achievers will sink at schools that are filled with "high achievers". I have a "high achiever" who is not a striver and I'm actually glad they didn't get into a T20 school, as I think the 30-40 ranked school they are at is a much better environment for them

NP here. But one of the many ironies is that PP’s lower achieving kid would be fine. There are very few Cs given at Ivies and the like. With grade inflation there that daughter would be okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My UMC kid said this means she needs to get her 1530 up to 1550. I don't think so .. do you?

No.

It means her 1530 has returned to having value like it did pre-test optional.

Also means that the score will be evaluated in context. The "value" will be based on zip code and HS resources.

A low income kid with a 1400 has just a good a chance at Dartmouth as a UMC kid with a 1530.

Are you OK with that?

Our magnate schools provide SAT prep to all students on free lunch level family income but not to muddle class families. Many middle class students can't afford private prep centers, they are at a disadvantage.

So recognize the privilege of not being middle class and how much easier it is to achieve a better score.

One on one tutoring is efficient. However, most students can't tutor their way to a 1550, no. If it were that straightforward, all rich kids would have such a score. They don't.

Almost all of the kids in my circle attend prep centers, their SAT and PSAT scores are all over the board, only few go national merit or above 1550.

I have 2 kids over 1500. No prep, no tutors, no kumon. One and done. They both have IQs in the upper 90s.

A friend's kid worked their tail off all summer and into the fall with a private tutor. Took the test multiple times. Raised their score to a top superscore of just over 1200. They worked so hard and it was a score to be proud of.

Private test prep or hard work does not guarantee a high SAT score. There must be a threshold of intellect to correspond with the achievement. A kid who raises their mid range score to above a 1500 might simply be an underachiever with poor test taking skills or low confidence/high nerves and a high IQ. But most kids will not be able to do this without starting from a naturally higher iQ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My UMC kid said this means she needs to get her 1530 up to 1550. I don't think so .. do you?

No.

It means her 1530 has returned to having value like it did pre-test optional.

Also means that the score will be evaluated in context. The "value" will be based on zip code and HS resources.

A low income kid with a 1400 has just a good a chance at Dartmouth as a UMC kid with a 1530.

Are you OK with that?

Our magnate schools provide SAT prep to all students on free lunch level family income but not to muddle class families. Many middle class students can't afford private prep centers, they are at a disadvantage.

So recognize the privilege of not being middle class and how much easier it is to achieve a better score.

One on one tutoring is efficient. However, most students can't tutor their way to a 1550, no. If it were that straightforward, all rich kids would have such a score. They don't.

Almost all of the kids in my circle attend prep centers, their SAT and PSAT scores are all over the board, only few go national merit or above 1550.

I have 2 kids over 1500. No prep, no tutors, no kumon. One and done. They both have IQs in the upper 90s.

A friend's kid worked their tail off all summer and into the fall with a private tutor. Took the test multiple times. Raised their score to a top superscore of just over 1200. They worked so hard and it was a score to be proud of.

Private test prep or hard work does not guarantee a high SAT score. There must be a threshold of intellect to correspond with the achievement. A kid who raises their mid range score to above a 1500 might simply be an underachiever with poor test taking skills or low confidence/high nerves and a high IQ. But most kids will not be able to do this without starting from a naturally higher iQ.

Notable achievements from individuals with IQ scores in the upper 90s!

Agree with the rest, though. One and done, as far as I'm concerned - maybe a second administration for legitimate reasons. Super scoring, however, is ridiculous and should be banished forever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dartmouth's news should attract attention from juniors with high scores.

Juniors with "high scores" interested in Dartmouth were going to apply anyways.

[Anonymous]

I think this is good. Hopefully more schools go back to test-preferred or test-required status.