Dartmouth Announces Test Scores Required Starting Next Year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the DEI kids we know at TJ and in our public are not disadvantaged kids. They live in the same neighborhoods with professional parents.

There are plenty of disadvantaged URM kids at expensive private schools. What about them?

At my DD's private school, most of the URM kids are children of doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc...

[Anonymous]

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

really? How can they tell?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would make the crazy college process calm down if schools went back to the requirement.

Except that extreme randomness still exists. So, cue the cries of the parents of 1550 SAT kids who are (gasp!) deferred of "yield protection!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

really? How can they tell?

I don't know. I have two friends who read essays (one Ivy and one public Ivy), and they assure me they can detect the essays written (in whole or part) by admissions consultants or parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

really? How can they tell?

I don't know. I have two friends who read essays (one Ivy and one public Ivy), and they assure me they can detect the essays written (in whole or part) by admissions consultants or parents.

Their ego demands they believe that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

really? How can they tell?

I don't know. I have two friends who read essays (one Ivy and one public Ivy), and they assure me they can detect the essays written (in whole or part) by admissions consultants or parents.

Their ego demands they believe that.

And they have absolutely no way of actually knowing that this is the case. Do they go back and ask the applicants?

[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.

Do you think non reporters would have scores all exactly 1400, or a range of scores above and below, or nearly all above, or nearly al below?

And do you think those scores, if known, would have the same or different correlation to GPA as the reporters?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the DEI kids we know at TJ and in our public are not disadvantaged kids. They live in the same neighborhoods with professional parents.

There are plenty of disadvantaged URM kids at expensive private schools. What about them?

At my DD's private school, most of the URM kids are children of doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc...

Same here.
The minorities at the top DC privates are pretty much all upper middle class and wealthier.
It's probably different at the Catholic high schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the DEI kids we know at TJ and in our public are not disadvantaged kids. They live in the same neighborhoods with professional parents.

There are plenty of disadvantaged URM kids at expensive private schools. What about them?

At my DD's private school, most of the URM kids are children of doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc...

Same here.
The minorities at the top DC privates are pretty much all upper middle class and wealthier.
It's probably different at the Catholic high schools.

Agree. Visible diversity at the “top” privates but nothing more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree with PP who cautioned about assuming that a return to testing will automatically benefit high stats kids. I am a grad of YHP, and a few years ago, before TO, I attended an admissions panel discussing what the school looks for. They could FILL THER CLASS with high stats kids over and over again. They said don't chase the perfect stats. It is all about what else your kid has to offer. So many people on this thread are delusional about why their kid was rejected/now has a better chance of getting in to these elite schools if TO goes away. And, as I said before, calling kids "dumb" is appalling.

It's PYH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the DEI kids we know at TJ and in our public are not disadvantaged kids. They live in the same neighborhoods with professional parents.

There are plenty of disadvantaged URM kids at expensive private schools. What about them?

At my DD's private school, most of the URM kids are children of doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc...

Here in DC at my kid’s big3 private, the URM (talking primarily about AA) it is usually the parents AND the grandparents are lawyers, doctors, PHDs whatever. Old money and very well educated families.

[Anonymous]

Good for Dartmouth - let these schools do their thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

That's an overly broad statement - have you looked at the grade distributions at every one of these schools? Dartmouth doesn't grade inflate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the DEI kids we know at TJ and in our public are not disadvantaged kids. They live in the same neighborhoods with professional parents.

There are plenty of disadvantaged URM kids at expensive private schools. What about them?

At my DD's private school, most of the URM kids are children of doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc...

At my DC's school they are on a specific team and they are not advantaged.

[Anonymous]

Wishing to get into a selective school with 1400 SAT? Don't you have any conscience?