Superscore vs. “One and Done”

[Anonymous]

It absolutely matters for the most selective schools. There is so little distinction between an abundance of perfect candidates that anything distinctive matters.

AOs know it is much harder to score a 1560 in a single sitting versus as a superscore.

Beyond the top tier of schools, any high score is exceptional regardless of the manner it is achieved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It absolutely matters for the most selective schools. There is so little distinction between an abundance of perfect candidates that anything distinctive matters.

AOs know it is much harder to score a 1560 in a single sitting versus as a superscore.

Beyond the top tier of schools, any high score is exceptional regardless of the manner it is achieved.

You are stating fiction with such confidence.

The AO sees your total score and the two components. They aren’t spending anytime to know if you scored a 1560 in one sitting or 10 sittings if they take super scores.

Literally, if you were bold enough to prank a college you could score an 800 on one section and then leave the other blank, then do the reverse on your second take.

AO would see you scored a 1600.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That is not a part of holistic admissions. Get smart on what T25 colleges want. It’s not only test scores. It’s a small tiny piece of the puzzle that is forgotten about the minute you walk through the door. Test scores, and grades get you in the door. And they are never referred to again.

Everything else matters then.

Tiny?

Explain why year after year ivies hold their 25% and 75% test scores the same? 1510/1570?

If it’s small and tiny, the variation between years would be large. The consistency in holding the lines indicates it’s not “tiny.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do colleges/universities give greater weight to “one and done” scores vs. superscores ACT or SAT? Assuming the difference is apparent in the reporting.

Asking this in the overall context of scores being just one piece of the overall puzzle.

No difference whatsoever.

Bottom line score is what matters.

If colleges cared about "one and done" scores they wouldn't allow superscoring. 🙂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid took the ACT once and got a 36. Subject scores were all 36 exceot for one 35. We were told this will not be an advantage and could actually be seen as a negative because "taking it again to fix that 35 would show perseverance". Kid chose not to take it again and we agreed.

Who gave you that terrible advice.

As an example, MIT would likely reject your kid if they had taken it twice because it shows a narrow-minded view on testing vs going out and accomplishing other things.

Head AO is routinely asked if a kid with say a 1570 should take it again and he routinely tells people they won’t look kindly on someone who does.

Cite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid took the ACT once and got a 36. Subject scores were all 36 exceot for one 35. We were told this will not be an advantage and could actually be seen as a negative because "taking it again to fix that 35 would show perseverance". Kid chose not to take it again and we agreed.

Who gave you that terrible advice.

As an example, MIT would likely reject your kid if they had taken it twice because it shows a narrow-minded view on testing vs going out and accomplishing other things.

Head AO is routinely asked if a kid with say a 1570 should take it again and he routinely tells people they won’t look kindly on someone who does.

Cite?

Fiction

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It absolutely matters for the most selective schools. There is so little distinction between an abundance of perfect candidates that anything distinctive matters.

AOs know it is much harder to score a 1560 in a single sitting versus as a superscore.

Beyond the top tier of schools, any high score is exceptional regardless of the manner it is achieved.

They aren’t using this as a distinction. My son was accepted REA, unhooked to a HYP with a 1540 superscore. I’m sure he got in over thousands of kids with 1600s in one sitting.

It’s just not a distinction the AOs are making.

He will have a chance to look at his admissions file this spring and I’ll be happy to share what’s mentioned. I guarantee the SAT won’t be a focal point.

[Anonymous]

Usually it does not matter. A few colleges ask for a single-sitting score (the best you have). A rare few ask for all the scores.

[Anonymous]

Agree that it doesn't matter. It's an incredibly small part of the application. I also have an unhooked kid who got into 2 Ivies with a 1530 super score, over many other students from their own school, district, and state who had higher scores. There is no prize for being a master of test-taking.

[Anonymous]

My DS is at Yale. Took SAT 3x and superscored it to 1510. He got in RD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It absolutely matters for the most selective schools. There is so little distinction between an abundance of perfect candidates that anything distinctive matters.

AOs know it is much harder to score a 1560 in a single sitting versus as a superscore.

Beyond the top tier of schools, any high score is exceptional regardless of the manner it is achieved.

They aren’t using this as a distinction. My son was accepted REA, unhooked to a HYP with a 1540 superscore. I’m sure he got in over thousands of kids with 1600s in one sitting.

It’s just not a distinction the AOs are making.

He will have a chance to look at his admissions file this spring and I’ll be happy to share what’s mentioned. I guarantee the SAT won’t be a focal point.

There aren't thousands of 1600s.
More full scores nowadays, but still very few.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DS is at Yale. Took SAT 3x and superscored it to 1510. He got in RD.

1510 and below fills only 1/4 of Yale's admits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS is at Yale. Took SAT 3x and superscored it to 1510. He got in RD.

1510 and below fills only 1/4 of Yale's admits.

And that 1/4 is full of hooked kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS is at Yale. Took SAT 3x and superscored it to 1510. He got in RD.

1510 and below fills only 1/4 of Yale's admits.

Based on stats from which years?

The year that PP’s kid applied?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They don't care. Not one iota. They want to know that you can do reasonably well and then they evaluate applicants on other things. they are crafting a class, not a cohort of testing-taking robots.

I also have 2 Ivy league kids who both got on unhooked.

Visiting the one right now and this kid was saying at dinner last how many kids they meet with ACT scores of 33, 34, etc. I don't recall how this came up but the kid was saying "the obsession with scores is such a DC thing."

💯
My kid is at an Ivy with a 33.

Of course they are. The Ivies only admit kids scoring 33 or below. The test scores they advertise? Made up lies.

No the score didn’t make my kids application.
Their passion did.