Swarthmore officially test optional for rising seniors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have no choice. In this day and age they need as many applicants as they can get. Especially for liberal arts colleges, requiring high SAT's would destroy supply of applicants.

+1

Class of 2025 is the largest high school class and then high school senior numbers start to decline. If even Middlebury is having fewer applicants, this does not bode well for LACs. I do wish a few would go test required, even if it radically increase their acceptance rate. DD has decent test scores but but lower grades.

[Anonymous]

I am a graduate of a SLAC and have noticed the quality go down with test optional with current students. I have current students reach out to me and they have lackluster accomplishments and struggle more with even landing an internship compared to before test optional.

However, SLACs have to meet athlete requirements and they take up a high percentage so it is what it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is interesting. Swarthmore was holding out on this decision and "looking at data" (per its admissions office) because first semester grades are pass/fail and they were looking at correlation between scores and grades of incoming students. Just last week they were saying they might require standardized tests for the next admissions cycle, which would have made them the only selective liberal arts school to do so. They've now announced they are test optional, suggesting there is little/no correlation between grades of incoming students who submitted scores and those who didn't.

No they are saying there is a population cliff and they need to remain competitive in attracting full pay students irrespective of their standardized testing capability.

[Anonymous]

People here are yapping without information. Before covid, Swarthmore's acceptance rate was around 8-10%. They really don't need more applicants

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a graduate of a SLAC and have noticed the quality go down with test optional with current students. I have current students reach out to me and they have lackluster accomplishments and struggle more with even landing an internship compared to before test optional.

However, SLACs have to meet athlete requirements and they take up a high percentage so it is what it is.

Meanwhile, my alma mater has students contacting me with multiple internships, projects, and research experience. Maybe...they aren't that interested in your work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People here are yapping without information. Before covid, Swarthmore's acceptance rate was around 8-10%. They really don't need more applicants

Yep. So much abject speculation dressed up as confident proclamation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Twenty-seven percent of the admitted students are among the first generation in their family to attend college. A total of 27% are affiliated with local, national, and international community-based organizations such as A Better Chance (ABC), College Match, EducationUSA, Gear Up, Lenfest Scholars Foundation, Matriculate, Heights Philadelphia, Open Dreams, Our Moon Education, TeenSharp, and QuestBridge."


One third of Swarthmore admits are FGLI. I applaud the school for doing the right thing.

Purely from a strategy point of view, it's better for a regular unhook Asian applicant to apply to national universities rather than SLAC such as Swarthmore. The lacs are already really small. With 1/3 spots to FGLI, the chances for a regular unhook Asian applicant is much smaller.

I am more supportive of diversity efforts than more than half of America, based on the last election. But 27% is really going overboard. And the need to scream this from the rooftops is also going overboard. I have a hard time believing that all 27% are up to par with the rest of the applicant pool. I'm all for giving them the benefit of the doubt if it is close, but my guess is that there are plenty for whom it isn't even close. Which is unfortunate because it drags down those who actually meet standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Twenty-seven percent of the admitted students are among the first generation in their family to attend college. A total of 27% are affiliated with local, national, and international community-based organizations such as A Better Chance (ABC), College Match, EducationUSA, Gear Up, Lenfest Scholars Foundation, Matriculate, Heights Philadelphia, Open Dreams, Our Moon Education, TeenSharp, and QuestBridge."


One third of Swarthmore admits are FGLI. I applaud the school for doing the right thing.

Purely from a strategy point of view, it's better for a regular unhook Asian applicant to apply to national universities rather than SLAC such as Swarthmore. The lacs are already really small. With 1/3 spots to FGLI, the chances for a regular unhook Asian applicant is much smaller.

I am more supportive of diversity efforts than more than half of America, based on the last election. But 27% is really going overboard. And the need to scream this from the rooftops is also going overboard. I have a hard time believing that all 27% are up to par with the rest of the applicant pool. I'm all for giving them the benefit of the doubt if it is close, but my guess is that there are plenty for whom it isn't even close. Which is unfortunate because it drags down those who actually meet standards.

You are literally kicking your feet that poor children are getting an education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have no choice. In this day and age they need as many applicants as they can get. Especially for liberal arts colleges, requiring high SAT's would destroy supply of applicants.

This is just nonsense. The top 25 SLACS all have acceptance rates under 20% with more than a couple under 10%. And score submission is going up as well.

Nonsense, no. Common sense, yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Twenty-seven percent of the admitted students are among the first generation in their family to attend college. A total of 27% are affiliated with local, national, and international community-based organizations such as A Better Chance (ABC), College Match, EducationUSA, Gear Up, Lenfest Scholars Foundation, Matriculate, Heights Philadelphia, Open Dreams, Our Moon Education, TeenSharp, and QuestBridge."


One third of Swarthmore admits are FGLI. I applaud the school for doing the right thing.

Purely from a strategy point of view, it's better for a regular unhook Asian applicant to apply to national universities rather than SLAC such as Swarthmore. The lacs are already really small. With 1/3 spots to FGLI, the chances for a regular unhook Asian applicant is much smaller.

I am more supportive of diversity efforts than more than half of America, based on the last election. But 27% is really going overboard. And the need to scream this from the rooftops is also going overboard. I have a hard time believing that all 27% are up to par with the rest of the applicant pool. I'm all for giving them the benefit of the doubt if it is close, but my guess is that there are plenty for whom it isn't even close. Which is unfortunate because it drags down those who actually meet standards.

What about another 1/3 of Swarthmore who are athletes and legacies? Are they "close"?

My takeaway is do not ED Swat if you are unhooked. Same goes for Williams, Amherst, and Bowdoin. It's better for the unhooked high score applicants to just play the RD lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Twenty-seven percent of the admitted students are among the first generation in their family to attend college. A total of 27% are affiliated with local, national, and international community-based organizations such as A Better Chance (ABC), College Match, EducationUSA, Gear Up, Lenfest Scholars Foundation, Matriculate, Heights Philadelphia, Open Dreams, Our Moon Education, TeenSharp, and QuestBridge."


One third of Swarthmore admits are FGLI. I applaud the school for doing the right thing.

Purely from a strategy point of view, it's better for a regular unhook Asian applicant to apply to national universities rather than SLAC such as Swarthmore. The lacs are already really small. With 1/3 spots to FGLI, the chances for a regular unhook Asian applicant is much smaller.

I am more supportive of diversity efforts than more than half of America, based on the last election. But 27% is really going overboard. And the need to scream this from the rooftops is also going overboard. I have a hard time believing that all 27% are up to par with the rest of the applicant pool. I'm all for giving them the benefit of the doubt if it is close, but my guess is that there are plenty for whom it isn't even close. Which is unfortunate because it drags down those who actually meet standards.

You are literally kicking your feet that poor children are getting an education.

+1 those community based organizations don't discriminate: they're for poor students. The entitlement is jarring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Twenty-seven percent of the admitted students are among the first generation in their family to attend college. A total of 27% are affiliated with local, national, and international community-based organizations such as A Better Chance (ABC), College Match, EducationUSA, Gear Up, Lenfest Scholars Foundation, Matriculate, Heights Philadelphia, Open Dreams, Our Moon Education, TeenSharp, and QuestBridge."


One third of Swarthmore admits are FGLI. I applaud the school for doing the right thing.

Purely from a strategy point of view, it's better for a regular unhook Asian applicant to apply to national universities rather than SLAC such as Swarthmore. The lacs are already really small. With 1/3 spots to FGLI, the chances for a regular unhook Asian applicant is much smaller.

I am more supportive of diversity efforts than more than half of America, based on the last election. But 27% is really going overboard. And the need to scream this from the rooftops is also going overboard. I have a hard time believing that all 27% are up to par with the rest of the applicant pool. I'm all for giving them the benefit of the doubt if it is close, but my guess is that there are plenty for whom it isn't even close. Which is unfortunate because it drags down those who actually meet standards.

They scream this from the rooftops EVERY single year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Twenty-seven percent of the admitted students are among the first generation in their family to attend college. A total of 27% are affiliated with local, national, and international community-based organizations such as A Better Chance (ABC), College Match, EducationUSA, Gear Up, Lenfest Scholars Foundation, Matriculate, Heights Philadelphia, Open Dreams, Our Moon Education, TeenSharp, and QuestBridge."


One third of Swarthmore admits are FGLI. I applaud the school for doing the right thing.

Purely from a strategy point of view, it's better for a regular unhook Asian applicant to apply to national universities rather than SLAC such as Swarthmore. The lacs are already really small. With 1/3 spots to FGLI, the chances for a regular unhook Asian applicant is much smaller.

I am more supportive of diversity efforts than more than half of America, based on the last election. But 27% is really going overboard. And the need to scream this from the rooftops is also going overboard. I have a hard time believing that all 27% are up to par with the rest of the applicant pool. I'm all for giving them the benefit of the doubt if it is close, but my guess is that there are plenty for whom it isn't even close. Which is unfortunate because it drags down those who actually meet standards.

What about another 1/3 of Swarthmore who are athletes and legacies? Are they "close"?

My takeaway is do not ED Swat if you are unhooked. Same goes for Williams, Amherst, and Bowdoin. It's better for the unhooked high score applicants to just play the RD lottery.

I think these schools have also shifted too far in terms of bending their standards for athletes. Legacies pay the bills, and unless you are writing huge checks (I'm talking a few applicants a year, max), legacies don't have the admissions flexibility that minorities, FGLI and athletes do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a graduate of a SLAC and have noticed the quality go down with test optional with current students. I have current students reach out to me and they have lackluster accomplishments and struggle more with even landing an internship compared to before test optional.

However, SLACs have to meet athlete requirements and they take up a high percentage so it is what it is.

Meanwhile, my alma mater has students contacting me with multiple internships, projects, and research experience. Maybe...they aren't that interested in your work.

I am not trying to hire them, they are reaching out for advice as an alumnus. And they don't have much internship experience at all which they should at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Twenty-seven percent of the admitted students are among the first generation in their family to attend college. A total of 27% are affiliated with local, national, and international community-based organizations such as A Better Chance (ABC), College Match, EducationUSA, Gear Up, Lenfest Scholars Foundation, Matriculate, Heights Philadelphia, Open Dreams, Our Moon Education, TeenSharp, and QuestBridge."


One third of Swarthmore admits are FGLI. I applaud the school for doing the right thing.

Purely from a strategy point of view, it's better for a regular unhook Asian applicant to apply to national universities rather than SLAC such as Swarthmore. The lacs are already really small. With 1/3 spots to FGLI, the chances for a regular unhook Asian applicant is much smaller.

I am more supportive of diversity efforts than more than half of America, based on the last election. But 27% is really going overboard. And the need to scream this from the rooftops is also going overboard. I have a hard time believing that all 27% are up to par with the rest of the applicant pool. I'm all for giving them the benefit of the doubt if it is close, but my guess is that there are plenty for whom it isn't even close. Which is unfortunate because it drags down those who actually meet standards.

This is admitted students. Of 966 admitted this is ~260 students. Swarthmore seems to be a pretty self-selecting bunch as well. Seems perfectly plausible for them to admit 260 well-qualified first-gen students out of 3.8 million high school students....