Caltech “Bucket System” for SAT / ACT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:two thoughts

35 is a lot easier to get than 780, esp for verbal side.

- This busts the myth that everything above a 1500 or 1520 is the same. "A hurdle to pass". Nope they think 780 is higher than 750.

lol They also said a perfect score is a dime a dozen.

Where do they say some a dozen?

Perfect scores are more common than they used to be but there are less than 1000 of them every year. There used to be like 7 of them. You'd make the news in the 1980s of you got a perfect score.

By "they" I don't mean Caltech. I meant DCUM moms ...

CalTech and MIT are the only schools looking to fill 75% of the class from that 1580+ bucket, though. HYPS fill 25% of the class from that bucket, 50% from the 1500-1570 bucket, and 25% from the sub-1500 bucket. So DCUM moms are correct that 1500 or 1520 is the threshold for an unhooked kid to bother applying.

Where are you getting that MIT targets to have 75% of the class as 1580 and over?

My child was told by a recruiter that only 25% of MIT are above 1570.

Or do you just mean MIT is "looking to fill" as in it aspires to have 75% in the 1580 bucket, but the reality is that MIT constantly falls far, far short of this "looking to fill" ideal? If that's what you are saying, I think that's an important distinction of MIT's goals for building a class vs. the reality of MIT admission.

No, I think you’re right and MIT, like HYPS, is only shooting for 25% from that 1580 bucket.

Ok thanks!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:two thoughts

35 is a lot easier to get than 780, esp for verbal side.

- This busts the myth that everything above a 1500 or 1520 is the same. "A hurdle to pass". Nope they think 780 is higher than 750.

lol They also said a perfect score is a dime a dozen.

Where do they say some a dozen?

Perfect scores are more common than they used to be but there are less than 1000 of them every year. There used to be like 7 of them. You'd make the news in the 1980s of you got a perfect score.

By "they" I don't mean Caltech. I meant DCUM moms ...

CalTech and MIT are the only schools looking to fill 75% of the class from that 1580+ bucket, though. HYPS fill 25% of the class from that bucket, 50% from the 1500-1570 bucket, and 25% from the sub-1500 bucket. So DCUM moms are correct that 1500 or 1520 is the threshold for an unhooked kid to bother applying.

Where are you getting that MIT targets to have 75% of the class as 1580 and over?

My child was told by a recruiter that only 25% of MIT are above 1570.

Or do you just mean MIT is "looking to fill" as in it aspires to have 75% in the 1580 bucket, but the reality is that MIT constantly falls far, far short of this "looking to fill" ideal? If that's what you are saying, I think that's an important distinction of MIT's goals for building a class vs. the reality of MIT admission.

No, I think you’re right and MIT, like HYPS, is only shooting for 25% from that 1580 bucket.

My DD has 1580, 3.9 from a no-grade-inflation school, good ECs but none of the math, science competitions. Should she apply to Caltech or no chance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:two thoughts

35 is a lot easier to get than 780, esp for verbal side.

- This busts the myth that everything above a 1500 or 1520 is the same. "A hurdle to pass". Nope they think 780 is higher than 750.

lol They also said a perfect score is a dime a dozen.

Where do they say some a dozen?

Perfect scores are more common than they used to be but there are less than 1000 of them every year. There used to be like 7 of them. You'd make the news in the 1980s of you got a perfect score.

By "they" I don't mean Caltech. I meant DCUM moms ...

CalTech and MIT are the only schools looking to fill 75% of the class from that 1580+ bucket, though. HYPS fill 25% of the class from that bucket, 50% from the 1500-1570 bucket, and 25% from the sub-1500 bucket. So DCUM moms are correct that 1500 or 1520 is the threshold for an unhooked kid to bother applying.

Where are you getting that MIT targets to have 75% of the class as 1580 and over?

My child was told by a recruiter that only 25% of MIT are above 1570.

Or do you just mean MIT is "looking to fill" as in it aspires to have 75% in the 1580 bucket, but the reality is that MIT constantly falls far, far short of this "looking to fill" ideal? If that's what you are saying, I think that's an important distinction of MIT's goals for building a class vs. the reality of MIT admission.

No, I think you’re right and MIT, like HYPS, is only shooting for 25% from that 1580 bucket.

They aren’t limiting the kids they take with Bucket A kids to 75 percent of the class, there simply isn’t that many kids with those scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:two thoughts

35 is a lot easier to get than 780, esp for verbal side.

- This busts the myth that everything above a 1500 or 1520 is the same. "A hurdle to pass". Nope they think 780 is higher than 750.

lol They also said a perfect score is a dime a dozen.

Where do they say some a dozen?

Perfect scores are more common than they used to be but there are less than 1000 of them every year. There used to be like 7 of them. You'd make the news in the 1980s of you got a perfect score.

By "they" I don't mean Caltech. I meant DCUM moms ...

CalTech and MIT are the only schools looking to fill 75% of the class from that 1580+ bucket, though. HYPS fill 25% of the class from that bucket, 50% from the 1500-1570 bucket, and 25% from the sub-1500 bucket. So DCUM moms are correct that 1500 or 1520 is the threshold for an unhooked kid to bother applying.

Where are you getting that MIT targets to have 75% of the class as 1580 and over?

My child was told by a recruiter that only 25% of MIT are above 1570.

Or do you just mean MIT is "looking to fill" as in it aspires to have 75% in the 1580 bucket, but the reality is that MIT constantly falls far, far short of this "looking to fill" ideal? If that's what you are saying, I think that's an important distinction of MIT's goals for building a class vs. the reality of MIT admission.

No, I think you’re right and MIT, like HYPS, is only shooting for 25% from that 1580 bucket.

They aren’t limiting the kids they take with Bucket A kids to 75 percent of the class, there simply isn’t that many kids with those scores.

Sorry meant to say 25 percent of the class.

[Anonymous]

I wonder why they are worried about kids self selecting out. It’s a small school that it seems to have a very distinct academic culture that appeals strongly to the right students. Are they anticipating issues with getting sufficient apps? They only enroll ~250 a class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:two thoughts

35 is a lot easier to get than 780, esp for verbal side.

- This busts the myth that everything above a 1500 or 1520 is the same. "A hurdle to pass". Nope they think 780 is higher than 750.

lol They also said a perfect score is a dime a dozen.

Where do they say some a dozen?

Perfect scores are more common than they used to be but there are less than 1000 of them every year. There used to be like 7 of them. You'd make the news in the 1980s of you got a perfect score.

By "they" I don't mean Caltech. I meant DCUM moms ...

CalTech and MIT are the only schools looking to fill 75% of the class from that 1580+ bucket, though. HYPS fill 25% of the class from that bucket, 50% from the 1500-1570 bucket, and 25% from the sub-1500 bucket. So DCUM moms are correct that 1500 or 1520 is the threshold for an unhooked kid to bother applying.

Where are you getting that MIT targets to have 75% of the class as 1580 and over?

My child was told by a recruiter that only 25% of MIT are above 1570.

Or do you just mean MIT is "looking to fill" as in it aspires to have 75% in the 1580 bucket, but the reality is that MIT constantly falls far, far short of this "looking to fill" ideal? If that's what you are saying, I think that's an important distinction of MIT's goals for building a class vs. the reality of MIT admission.

No, I think you’re right and MIT, like HYPS, is only shooting for 25% from that 1580 bucket.

My DD has 1580, 3.9 from a no-grade-inflation school, good ECs but none of the math, science competitions. Should she apply to Caltech or no chance?

No chance if she doesn’t apply. Nobody here can tell you if it’s no chance. And you shouldn’t believe them if they do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder why they are worried about kids self selecting out. It’s a small school that it seems to have a very distinct academic culture that appeals strongly to the right students. Are they anticipating issues with getting sufficient apps? They only enroll ~250 a class.

Girls and people of color. Girls, in particular, are more likely to self-select out.

[Anonymous]

There was a huge revolt among faculty at Caltech about TO and this seems to be some system they've come up with to accommodate the faculty (the head of undergraduate admissions was strongly pro-TO). I have the impression from this article that a faculty committee might have come up with the idea.

One thing conspicuously missing from this story is the discrepancy between standards for male and female applicants. I feel quite certain those "buckets" are going to work differently depending on the gender of the applicant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:two thoughts

35 is a lot easier to get than 780, esp for verbal side.

- This busts the myth that everything above a 1500 or 1520 is the same. "A hurdle to pass". Nope they think 780 is higher than 750.

lol They also said a perfect score is a dime a dozen.

Where do they say some a dozen?

Perfect scores are more common than they used to be but there are less than 1000 of them every year. There used to be like 7 of them. You'd make the news in the 1980s of you got a perfect score.

By "they" I don't mean Caltech. I meant DCUM moms ...

CalTech and MIT are the only schools looking to fill 75% of the class from that 1580+ bucket, though. HYPS fill 25% of the class from that bucket, 50% from the 1500-1570 bucket, and 25% from the sub-1500 bucket. So DCUM moms are correct that 1500 or 1520 is the threshold for an unhooked kid to bother applying.

Where are you getting that MIT targets to have 75% of the class as 1580 and over?

My child was told by a recruiter that only 25% of MIT are above 1570.

Or do you just mean MIT is "looking to fill" as in it aspires to have 75% in the 1580 bucket, but the reality is that MIT constantly falls far, far short of this "looking to fill" ideal? If that's what you are saying, I think that's an important distinction of MIT's goals for building a class vs. the reality of MIT admission.

No, I think you’re right and MIT, like HYPS, is only shooting for 25% from that 1580 bucket.

They aren’t limiting the kids they take with Bucket A kids to 25 percent of the class, there simply isn’t that many kids with those scores.

I wish I could believe this. But nothing I’ve heard about college admissions in the past 10 years suggests that any of these schools would take a high-scoring but otherwise unremarkable kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This does not make sense to me. How does 770 equate to a 34? A 770 is the equivalent to a 35 or possibly even a 36.

I imagine the people at CalTech have done the math on this one.

That is an interesting question because CalTech is slightly misaligned relative to the actual concordance tables. I suspect that it is because they detect a bigger difference at a 33.

If they want to keep the buckets balanced they needed to push 770 down to create two 30 point buckets for the SAT side. They stated that the differences are small so I doubt bucket A or bucket B will matter at all.their goal is to get more 750s to apply, not hurt kids with 770.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.admissions.caltech.edu/apply/first-year-applicants/standardized-tests/standardized-testing-buckets

Interesting approach. Less stress for kids?

""We feel like we lose a lot of people who self-select out of our pool that we would have wanted to admit." the Institute has typically admitted a handful of students with scores below 750 each year. "

I don't think people self-select out because they don't have the perfect score. They self-select out because CalTech is for students who want to pursue Ph.D. and research.

Unfortunately, a lot of high scorers want a different path, Wall Street, med school, or law school for example.

But good to know that they do differentiate between 790 and 750.

Do they really? I’m not sure that they will in the actual process based on their remarks. Two missed questions can be a 770 or a 780 depending on the individual test, it’s just not that accurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There was a huge revolt among faculty at Caltech about TO and this seems to be some system they've come up with to accommodate the faculty (the head of undergraduate admissions was strongly pro-TO). I have the impression from this article that a faculty committee might have come up with the idea.

One thing conspicuously missing from this story is the discrepancy between standards for male and female applicants. I feel quite certain those "buckets" are going to work differently depending on the gender of the applicant.

Probably

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There was a huge revolt among faculty at Caltech about TO and this seems to be some system they've come up with to accommodate the faculty (the head of undergraduate admissions was strongly pro-TO). I have the impression from this article that a faculty committee might have come up with the idea.

One thing conspicuously missing from this story is the discrepancy between standards for male and female applicants. I feel quite certain those "buckets" are going to work differently depending on the gender of the applicant.

I think being a small school really helps Caltech in this case. Faculty actually have a say in admissions. They were able to demand admission office to admit qualified applicants.

In a larger school I think admission office has more power in setting test requirements. It’s also more difficult to have consensus among faculty. That’s why most ivies remained test optional for an elongated period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:two thoughts

35 is a lot easier to get than 780, esp for verbal side.

- This busts the myth that everything above a 1500 or 1520 is the same. "A hurdle to pass". Nope they think 780 is higher than 750.

lol They also said a perfect score is a dime a dozen.

Where do they say some a dozen?

Perfect scores are more common than they used to be but there are less than 1000 of them every year. There used to be like 7 of them. You'd make the news in the 1980s of you got a perfect score.

By "they" I don't mean Caltech. I meant DCUM moms ...

CalTech and MIT are the only schools looking to fill 75% of the class from that 1580+ bucket, though. HYPS fill 25% of the class from that bucket, 50% from the 1500-1570 bucket, and 25% from the sub-1500 bucket. So DCUM moms are correct that 1500 or 1520 is the threshold for an unhooked kid to bother applying.

Where are you getting that MIT targets to have 75% of the class as 1580 and over?

My child was told by a recruiter that only 25% of MIT are above 1570.

Or do you just mean MIT is "looking to fill" as in it aspires to have 75% in the 1580 bucket, but the reality is that MIT constantly falls far, far short of this "looking to fill" ideal? If that's what you are saying, I think that's an important distinction of MIT's goals for building a class vs. the reality of MIT admission.

No, I think you’re right and MIT, like HYPS, is only shooting for 25% from that 1580 bucket.

My DD has 1580, 3.9 from a no-grade-inflation school, good ECs but none of the math, science competitions. Should she apply to Caltech or no chance?

The article and the new system encourage students like your DD to apply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Test scores are predictive of success, even into students' sophomore and junior years," says Tamuz. "So, we don't want to give up on the SAT or ACT."


No more TO!!!

This is an important point.