Swarthmore College will continue its test-optional admissions policy for up to five more years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't blame them. Imagine the precipitous decline in average test scores.

Not to mention the precipitous drop in the number of applicants, particularity the demographic cliff.

[Anonymous]

My kid is waiting on ED news from Swarthmore and knew very well they had to submit scores, given they are white, and go to a good school, with parents who have graduate degrees. This is all a game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This school is really interested in educating kids and not just boosting its own rankings or profits or random social media reputation. It’s so refreshing to see how seriously they take their mission.

Isn’t it the opposite? We are the only country in the world that does not have an entrance exam for our most prestigious universities. Why allow test optional other than to lower yield? It makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This school is really interested in educating kids and not just boosting its own rankings or profits or random social media reputation. It’s so refreshing to see how seriously they take their mission.

If they were not interested in rankings, they would have everyone submit a test score and then admit kids who didn’t score as high but who they feel are worthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This school is really interested in educating kids and not just boosting its own rankings or profits or random social media reputation. It’s so refreshing to see how seriously they take their mission.

Isn’t it the opposite? We are the only country in the world that does not have an entrance exam for our most prestigious universities. Why allow test optional other than to lower yield? It makes no sense.

Agree 100%. At worst, the test scores are another data point, and a valuable one at that. If we're going to make test scores optional, why not make GPAs (which are more subjective!) optional too?

[Anonymous]

I wish US News took into account percentage of students who submit ACT/SAT scores in rankings. That’s probably the only thing that would change a lot of schools minds about being test optional. Seems like they students, but quality is probably going down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This school is really interested in educating kids and not just boosting its own rankings or profits or random social media reputation. It’s so refreshing to see how seriously they take their mission.

Isn’t it the opposite? We are the only country in the world that does not have an entrance exam for our most prestigious universities. Why allow test optional other than to lower yield? It makes no sense.

Agree 100%. At worst, the test scores are another data point, and a valuable one at that. If we're going to make test scores optional, why not make GPAs (which are more subjective!) optional too?

I’d like to see more examination that has actual conclusions. Apush, Ap Precalc, Ap English Literature, and some AP science scores as a minimum for application. Your private school kid can pay for a few AP exams for college admission, and they should expect a 5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish US News took into account percentage of students who submit ACT/SAT scores in rankings. That’s probably the only thing that would change a lot of schools minds about being test optional. Seems like the students, but quality is probably going down.

Can you show any proof of quality of students worsening at say Williams?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish US News took into account percentage of students who submit ACT/SAT scores in rankings. That’s probably the only thing that would change a lot of schools minds about being test optional. Seems like the students, but quality is probably going down.

Can you show any proof of quality of students worsening at say Williams?

Not Williams, but in that recent WSJ article about Harvard grade inflation, there was Psychology professor who said that freshmen are getting 10% lower on his multiple choice tests vs. 10 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish US News took into account percentage of students who submit ACT/SAT scores in rankings. That’s probably the only thing that would change a lot of schools minds about being test optional. Seems like the students, but quality is probably going down.

Can you show any proof of quality of students worsening at say Williams?

Not Williams, but in that recent WSJ article about Harvard grade inflation, there was Psychology professor who said that freshmen are getting 10% lower on his multiple choice tests vs. 10 years ago.

So 1 professor in an easy, backup major has had worse students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This school is really interested in educating kids and not just boosting its own rankings or profits or random social media reputation. It’s so refreshing to see how seriously they take their mission.

If they were not interested in rankings, they would have everyone submit a test score and then admit kids who didn’t score as high but who they feel are worthy.

+ You can just require tests from everyone and admit the 1200 scorers that you want. Without tests, you risk being like UC San Diego and admitting students who don't know fractions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they are trying to hang onto more application volume as the enrollment cliff approaches.

This. Keep the selectivity numbers higher, by encouraging those with lower test scores to apply. Their statement says that the test optional people have weaker outcomes than those who submit test scores but that the difference isn't huge. But they don't say what share of kids they accept are test optional. It could be that they're just accepting a few kids who seem to be academic superstars grade-wise, but don't submit test scores...and nearly everyone they accept is submitting test scores.

This. Precisely. It’s a marketing move to keep selectivity numbers up. Many SLACs are taking measures like this simply to keep the number of applications static. A drop gets reported to USNWR and makes the school appear less select. For the same reason we saw this week several schools drop application fees. It’s not benevolent on part of the college - as the PR people want you to think - it’s simply to keep students applying so they can be turned down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 1580+ SAT takers are still going to be in such demand.

With this test optional policy, those scores are the new hook.

My 1580 (one sitting) / 4.0 UW from a top private -- with good (but no big awards) ECs -- was rejected from Swarthmore. So top scores are not the hook you think they are.

Sure seem to be a lot of "top" privates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish US News took into account percentage of students who submit ACT/SAT scores in rankings. That’s probably the only thing that would change a lot of schools minds about being test optional. Seems like they students, but quality is probably going down.

US News barely accounts for the use of standardized test scores as it is, less than 5%. It also doesn't account for acceptance rate. The biggest factors are social equity and mobility and reputation. All subjective criteria.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 1580+ SAT takers are still going to be in such demand.

With this test optional policy, those scores are the new hook.

My 1580 (one sitting) / 4.0 UW from a top private -- with good (but no big awards) ECs -- was rejected from Swarthmore. So top scores are not the hook you think they are.

Did your kid apply ED or RD?