Dartmouth Announces Test Scores Required Starting Next Year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that Dartmouth and Georgetown, the two elite schools that have seen their prestige erode the most recently, are both using an allegiance to standardized testing to try to differentiate and gain back some lost relevance.

Telling that Dartmouth laundered the announcement through David Leonhardt rather than a journalist. Leonhardt's poor reputation rests on his willingness to spread pandemic-era disinformation to huge audiences. A journalist would ask inconvenient questions about things like how the shift to a digital SAT makes Dartmouth's data useless.

Also revealing that Dartmouth's new president has been looking for ways to mollify right-wing trolls scalp-hunting for Ivy leaders. The WSJ duly trumpeted the SAT mandate (however, without quite realizing that Dartmouth couched it in strong pro-DEI terms).

Can't just take Coffin at his word, unfortunately.

I've probably missed something, but how have Dartmouth and Georgetown had "their prestige erode the most"?

Also, I'm no Leonhardt fan--can't stand the guy--but the Washington Post had an article on this, too. I think Dartmouth must have put out a press release, and some newspapers picked it up. It doesn't look like they sent it to Leonhardt specifically.

Leonhardt broke the story several weeks ago. Made a big deal about it. Presumably because Coffin contacted him.

Georgetown had Duke-like cachet not too long ago. But it became too difficult to apply to. it's also known for rat infestations and flooded dorms as a result of a popular Instagram account. It's at the level of Emory now, not Penn. Just talking about brand equity and nothing to do with the actual quality of a Georgetown education. Still elite for banking and foreign affairs. Dartmouth is small and remote and viewed by strivers as a "low-tier Ivy" along with Cornell, which some view as a state school. The shifting preferences of second-generation Asian-American students now determine which elite schools are prestigious and which aren't, and Georgetown and Dartmouth aren't on their radar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the article - it suggests 1400 AND being from an inner city high school or school lacking resources would get in. But NOT an upper middle class DCUM DS or DD with a 1400. Point being if you managed a 1400 without out all the resources and benefits you probably have the grit and intellect to hold your own.

So go to a crap high school and get a middling score will be the new playbook?

1400 is not a middling score.

Do you people know anything about standardized tests?

It's a middling score for selective schools.
It's probably high score for 3000+ other schools.
Do you know anything about college admissions?

No it isn’t. Historically that was a score that a number of admits had, or around that score. A 1400 is 95th percentile. A 1500 is 98 percentile, fyi. A 95 percentile score shows you can likely manage the work at an Ivy.

Nope sorry.
1,400 is well below the 25th percentile for Dartmouth and other Ivies and highly selective schools.
It's not even middling. It's a low score for highly selective scores probably from athletes, URMs, legacies, etc.

think that many people on this board seem to have a highly inflated view of kids at Ivies and what it takes to graduate from one. There are, undoubtedly, some brilliant kids at Ivies. There are also, undoubtedly, some above average kids who get in for a variety of reasons and then do just fine. Someone who scores in the 95th percentile in the country is not too dumb to succeed at an Ivy or other selective school. I think the mystique is misleading, and anyone who has been to one or knows a lot of people who went to Ivies would say the same if they’re being honest.

What are you babbling about??
We have numbers. The fact is 1,400 is well below the 25th percentile for Dartmouth and other Ivies and highly selective schools.

I'm sure they are not too dumb, but not good enough for highly selective schools as there are plenty of 1500+ kids to choose from.

I think our problem is actually your posts aren't very clear.

Are you simply arguing that Dartmouth does and should accept more kids with 1500+...or are you claiming someone with a 1400 will struggle at Dartmouth?

Certainly, the current 25%ile bracket is inflated due to TO. After next year's admission cycle, Dartmouth's range will drop now that tests are required. There is no reason to believe it will not revert to 2019 ranges of 1450 - 1550.

I'm just stating the fact.
This is from 2017-2018 CDS before pandemic when scores were mandatory.
https://www.dartmouth.edu/oir/pdfs/cds_2017-2018.pdf
Middle 50 is around 1450 - 1550. Not much difference for TO.
1400 is not middleing, it's lower end, 0-25

I still don't understand your point. You do realize that it means that Dartmouth historically has 25% of its class with a score lower than 1450. I doubt they are all at 1440. I also doubt many of those kids are struggling either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the article - it suggests 1400 AND being from an inner city high school or school lacking resources would get in. But NOT an upper middle class DCUM DS or DD with a 1400. Point being if you managed a 1400 without out all the resources and benefits you probably have the grit and intellect to hold your own.

So go to a crap high school and get a middling score will be the new playbook?

1400 is not a middling score.

Do you people know anything about standardized tests?

+1

95th percentile isn't middling.

It's lower than middlling for highly selective schools like Dartmouth.

1,400 is well below the 25th percentile for Dartmouth.

It's a high score for JMU

95th percentile is just that.

Dartmouth states that one can do the work @1400. Remember, admissions are still holistic. Other factors in admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the article - it suggests 1400 AND being from an inner city high school or school lacking resources would get in. But NOT an upper middle class DCUM DS or DD with a 1400. Point being if you managed a 1400 without out all the resources and benefits you probably have the grit and intellect to hold your own.

So go to a crap high school and get a middling score will be the new playbook?

1400 is not a middling score.

Do you people know anything about standardized tests?

+1

95th percentile isn't middling.

It's lower than middlling for highly selective schools like Dartmouth.

1,400 is well below the 25th percentile for Dartmouth.

It's a high score for JMU

95th percentile is just that.

Dartmouth states that one can do the work @1400. Remember, admissions are still holistic. Other factors in admissions.

95 percentile doesn't mean anything.
It's 0-25 percentile for Dartmouth, and it's mostly reserved for athletes, legacy, URM, big donation, celebrities, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that Dartmouth and Georgetown, the two elite schools that have seen their prestige erode the most recently, are both using an allegiance to standardized testing to try to differentiate and gain back some lost relevance.

Telling that Dartmouth laundered the announcement through David Leonhardt rather than a journalist. Leonhardt's poor reputation rests on his willingness to spread pandemic-era disinformation to huge audiences. A journalist would ask inconvenient questions about things like how the shift to a digital SAT makes Dartmouth's data useless.

Also revealing that Dartmouth's new president has been looking for ways to mollify right-wing trolls scalp-hunting for Ivy leaders. The WSJ duly trumpeted the SAT mandate (however, without quite realizing that Dartmouth couched it in strong pro-DEI terms).

Can't just take Coffin at his word, unfortunately.

I've probably missed something, but how have Dartmouth and Georgetown had "their prestige erode the most"?

Also, I'm no Leonhardt fan--can't stand the guy--but the Washington Post had an article on this, too. I think Dartmouth must have put out a press release, and some newspapers picked it up. It doesn't look like they sent it to Leonhardt specifically.

Leonhardt broke the story several weeks ago. Made a big deal about it. Presumably because Coffin contacted him.

Georgetown had Duke-like cachet not too long ago. But it became too difficult to apply to. it's also known for rat infestations and flooded dorms as a result of a popular Instagram account. It's at the level of Emory now, not Penn. Just talking about brand equity and nothing to do with the actual quality of a Georgetown education. Still elite for banking and foreign affairs. Dartmouth is small and remote and viewed by strivers as a "low-tier Ivy" along with Cornell, which some view as a state school. The shifting preferences of second-generation Asian-American students now determine which elite schools are prestigious and which aren't, and Georgetown and Dartmouth aren't on their radar.

Where was this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the article - it suggests 1400 AND being from an inner city high school or school lacking resources would get in. But NOT an upper middle class DCUM DS or DD with a 1400. Point being if you managed a 1400 without out all the resources and benefits you probably have the grit and intellect to hold your own.

So go to a crap high school and get a middling score will be the new playbook?

1400 is not a middling score.

Do you people know anything about standardized tests?

+1

95th percentile isn't middling.

It's lower than middlling for highly selective schools like Dartmouth.

1,400 is well below the 25th percentile for Dartmouth.

It's a high score for JMU

95th percentile is just that.

Dartmouth states that one can do the work @1400. Remember, admissions are still holistic. Other factors in admissions.

95 percentile doesn't mean anything.
It's 0-25 percentile for Dartmouth, and it's mostly reserved for athletes, legacy, URM, big donation, celebrities, etc.

And they take easy take easy majors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that Dartmouth and Georgetown, the two elite schools that have seen their prestige erode the most recently, are both using an allegiance to standardized testing to try to differentiate and gain back some lost relevance.

Telling that Dartmouth laundered the announcement through David Leonhardt rather than a journalist. Leonhardt's poor reputation rests on his willingness to spread pandemic-era disinformation to huge audiences. A journalist would ask inconvenient questions about things like how the shift to a digital SAT makes Dartmouth's data useless.

Also revealing that Dartmouth's new president has been looking for ways to mollify right-wing trolls scalp-hunting for Ivy leaders. The WSJ duly trumpeted the SAT mandate (however, without quite realizing that Dartmouth couched it in strong pro-DEI terms).

Can't just take Coffin at his word, unfortunately.

I've probably missed something, but how have Dartmouth and Georgetown had "their prestige erode the most"?

Also, I'm no Leonhardt fan--can't stand the guy--but the Washington Post had an article on this, too. I think Dartmouth must have put out a press release, and some newspapers picked it up. It doesn't look like they sent it to Leonhardt specifically.

Leonhardt broke the story several weeks ago. Made a big deal about it. Presumably because Coffin contacted him.

Georgetown had Duke-like cachet not too long ago. But it became too difficult to apply to. it's also known for rat infestations and flooded dorms as a result of a popular Instagram account. It's at the level of Emory now, not Penn. Just talking about brand equity and nothing to do with the actual quality of a Georgetown education. Still elite for banking and foreign affairs. Dartmouth is small and remote and viewed by strivers as a "low-tier Ivy" along with Cornell, which some view as a state school. The shifting preferences of second-generation Asian-American students now determine which elite schools are prestigious and which aren't, and Georgetown and Dartmouth aren't on their radar.

Where was this?

I'm not PP, but it's possible PP is referring to this Leonhardt article, which has the information about the *data,* but not about Dartmouth going back to requiring testing.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/07/briefing/the-misguided-war-on-the-sat.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the article - it suggests 1400 AND being from an inner city high school or school lacking resources would get in. But NOT an upper middle class DCUM DS or DD with a 1400. Point being if you managed a 1400 without out all the resources and benefits you probably have the grit and intellect to hold your own.

So go to a crap high school and get a middling score will be the new playbook?

1400 is not a middling score.

Do you people know anything about standardized tests?

+1

95th percentile isn't middling.

It's lower than middlling for highly selective schools like Dartmouth.

1,400 is well below the 25th percentile for Dartmouth.

It's a high score for JMU

95th percentile is just that.

Dartmouth states that one can do the work @1400. Remember, admissions are still holistic. Other factors in admissions.

95 percentile doesn't mean anything.
It's 0-25 percentile for Dartmouth, and it's mostly reserved for athletes, legacy, URM, big donation, celebrities, etc.

People love to throw URM into the mix, but it's not true. Roland Fryer who is a Harvard economist actually did an analysis on the URM population at Harvard and it is actually wealthier with same or better test scores than the average Harvard student.

He was arguing that AA policies were actually nonsense...that Harvard wasn't finding the gem from Anacostia HS, but rather accepting the child of the Nigerian diplomat or wealthy doctor at Sidwell.

Sure, there are some Questbridge kids in there, but it's not the profile of the Ivy league URM on average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the article - it suggests 1400 AND being from an inner city high school or school lacking resources would get in. But NOT an upper middle class DCUM DS or DD with a 1400. Point being if you managed a 1400 without out all the resources and benefits you probably have the grit and intellect to hold your own.

So go to a crap high school and get a middling score will be the new playbook?

1400 is not a middling score.

Do you people know anything about standardized tests?

+1

95th percentile isn't middling.

It's lower than middlling for highly selective schools like Dartmouth.

1,400 is well below the 25th percentile for Dartmouth.

It's a high score for JMU

95th percentile is just that.

Dartmouth states that one can do the work @1400. Remember, admissions are still holistic. Other factors in admissions.

95 percentile doesn't mean anything.
It's 0-25 percentile for Dartmouth, and it's mostly reserved for athletes, legacy, URM, big donation, celebrities, etc.

People love to throw URM into the mix, but it's not true. Roland Fryer who is a Harvard economist actually did an analysis on the URM population at Harvard and it is actually wealthier with same or better test scores than the average Harvard student.

He was arguing that AA policies were actually nonsense...that Harvard wasn't finding the gem from Anacostia HS, but rather accepting the child of the Nigerian diplomat or wealthy doctor at Sidwell.

Sure, there are some Questbridge kids in there, but it's not the profile of the Ivy league URM on average.

Yes. Very.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the article - it suggests 1400 AND being from an inner city high school or school lacking resources would get in. But NOT an upper middle class DCUM DS or DD with a 1400. Point being if you managed a 1400 without out all the resources and benefits you probably have the grit and intellect to hold your own.

So go to a crap high school and get a middling score will be the new playbook?

1400 is not a middling score.

Do you people know anything about standardized tests?

+1

95th percentile isn't middling.

It's lower than middlling for highly selective schools like Dartmouth.

1,400 is well below the 25th percentile for Dartmouth.

It's a high score for JMU

95th percentile is just that.

Dartmouth states that one can do the work @1400. Remember, admissions are still holistic. Other factors in admissions.

95 percentile doesn't mean anything.
It's 0-25 percentile for Dartmouth, and it's mostly reserved for athletes, legacy, URM, big donation, celebrities, etc.

People love to throw URM into the mix, but it's not true. Roland Fryer who is a Harvard economist actually did an analysis on the URM population at Harvard and it is actually wealthier with same or better test scores than the average Harvard student.

He was arguing that AA policies were actually nonsense...that Harvard wasn't finding the gem from Anacostia HS, but rather accepting the child of the Nigerian diplomat or wealthy doctor at Sidwell.

Sure, there are some Questbridge kids in there, but it's not the profile of the Ivy league URM on average.

Agree. All these posts saying the scores are lower due to URM admits are ridiculous and just plain wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The PSAT/NMSQT is a one-shot deal. Why not the SAT/ACT?

The PSAT can be taken up to three times. Many do it freshman, sophomore and junior year as practice before the SAT. Recently I've seen neighborhood kids do the PSAT freshman and sophomore year and then the SAT 2x junior year. Once at the very beginning and once in the summer before senior year. They treat it like dress rehearsal to cut down on the jitters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the article - it suggests 1400 AND being from an inner city high school or school lacking resources would get in. But NOT an upper middle class DCUM DS or DD with a 1400. Point being if you managed a 1400 without out all the resources and benefits you probably have the grit and intellect to hold your own.

So go to a crap high school and get a middling score will be the new playbook?

1400 is not a middling score.

Do you people know anything about standardized tests?

+1

95th percentile isn't middling.

It's lower than middlling for highly selective schools like Dartmouth.

1,400 is well below the 25th percentile for Dartmouth.

It's a high score for JMU

95th percentile is just that.

Dartmouth states that one can do the work @1400. Remember, admissions are still holistic. Other factors in admissions.

95 percentile doesn't mean anything.
It's 0-25 percentile for Dartmouth, and it's mostly reserved for athletes, legacy, URM, big donation, celebrities, etc.

It does to Dartmouth. They have made it clear. Feel free to read their findings.

Now, YOU might not like it, but that's ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PSAT/NMSQT is a one-shot deal. Why not the SAT/ACT?

The PSAT can be taken up to three times. Many do it freshman, sophomore and junior year as practice before the SAT. Recently I've seen neighborhood kids do the PSAT freshman and sophomore year and then the SAT 2x junior year. Once at the very beginning and once in the summer before senior year. They treat it like dress rehearsal to cut down on the jitters.

But when it counts (yes, I know it doesn’t count for much), it’s one and done. No super scoring. One score.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that Dartmouth and Georgetown, the two elite schools that have seen their prestige erode the most recently, are both using an allegiance to standardized testing to try to differentiate and gain back some lost relevance.

Telling that Dartmouth laundered the announcement through David Leonhardt rather than a journalist. Leonhardt's poor reputation rests on his willingness to spread pandemic-era disinformation to huge audiences. A journalist would ask inconvenient questions about things like how the shift to a digital SAT makes Dartmouth's data useless.

Also revealing that Dartmouth's new president has been looking for ways to mollify right-wing trolls scalp-hunting for Ivy leaders. The WSJ duly trumpeted the SAT mandate (however, without quite realizing that Dartmouth couched it in strong pro-DEI terms).

Can't just take Coffin at his word, unfortunately.

I've probably missed something, but how have Dartmouth and Georgetown had "their prestige erode the most"?

Also, I'm no Leonhardt fan--can't stand the guy--but the Washington Post had an article on this, too. I think Dartmouth must have put out a press release, and some newspapers picked it up. It doesn't look like they sent it to Leonhardt specifically.

Leonhardt broke the story several weeks ago. Made a big deal about it. Presumably because Coffin contacted him.

Georgetown had Duke-like cachet not too long ago. But it became too difficult to apply to. it's also known for rat infestations and flooded dorms as a result of a popular Instagram account. It's at the level of Emory now, not Penn. Just talking about brand equity and nothing to do with the actual quality of a Georgetown education. Still elite for banking and foreign affairs. Dartmouth is small and remote and viewed by strivers as a "low-tier Ivy" along with Cornell, which some view as a state school. The shifting preferences of second-generation Asian-American students now determine which elite schools are prestigious and which aren't, and Georgetown and Dartmouth aren't on their radar.

Where was this?

I'm not PP, but it's possible PP is referring to this Leonhardt article, which has the information about the *data,* but not about Dartmouth going back to requiring testing.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/07/briefing/the-misguided-war-on-the-sat.html

Thanks for pointing to this (NYT is a solid source). The Dartmouth announcement about required testing was the earlier reference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that Dartmouth and Georgetown, the two elite schools that have seen their prestige erode the most recently, are both using an allegiance to standardized testing to try to differentiate and gain back some lost relevance.

Telling that Dartmouth laundered the announcement through David Leonhardt rather than a journalist. Leonhardt's poor reputation rests on his willingness to spread pandemic-era disinformation to huge audiences. A journalist would ask inconvenient questions about things like how the shift to a digital SAT makes Dartmouth's data useless.

Also revealing that Dartmouth's new president has been looking for ways to mollify right-wing trolls scalp-hunting for Ivy leaders. The WSJ duly trumpeted the SAT mandate (however, without quite realizing that Dartmouth couched it in strong pro-DEI terms).

Can't just take Coffin at his word, unfortunately.

I've probably missed something, but how have Dartmouth and Georgetown had "their prestige erode the most"?

Also, I'm no Leonhardt fan--can't stand the guy--but the Washington Post had an article on this, too. I think Dartmouth must have put out a press release, and some newspapers picked it up. It doesn't look like they sent it to Leonhardt specifically.

Leonhardt broke the story several weeks ago. Made a big deal about it. Presumably because Coffin contacted him.

Georgetown had Duke-like cachet not too long ago. But it became too difficult to apply to. it's also known for rat infestations and flooded dorms as a result of a popular Instagram account. It's at the level of Emory now, not Penn. Just talking about brand equity and nothing to do with the actual quality of a Georgetown education. Still elite for banking and foreign affairs. Dartmouth is small and remote and viewed by strivers as a "low-tier Ivy" along with Cornell, which some view as a state school. The shifting preferences of second-generation Asian-American students now determine which elite schools are prestigious and which aren't, and Georgetown and Dartmouth aren't on their radar.

Perhaps, but I don't see the dorm issues as having damaged Georgetown's prestige. It's still one of the most-applied-to colleges from our high school, so kids (and their parents) either don't know or don't care about rats and mould, or the education and experience outweigh those things.

I thought that the schools whose prestige eroded the most were the ones caught up in the recent Congressional hearings. Or, from a quantitative standpoint, a school like Tulane, due to its dramatic USNWR tumble.