How much do test scores really matter?

[Anonymous]

[Post New]01/30/2016 06:54 Subject: Re:Candidates for the 2016 Presidential Scholars Program [Up]
Anonymous



Here is the sat accepted data set for MIT:

Distribution of SAT Reasoning Test Scores (Math)

Applicants Admits Admit rate
750-800 8,055 992 12%
700-740 2,460 184 7%
650-690 1,650 56 3%
600-640 781 3 0%
< 600 551 0 0%
Distribution of SAT Reasoning Test Scores (Critical Reading)

Applicants Admits Admit rate
750-800 4,206 613 15%
700-740 3,037 296 10%
650-690 2,578 190 7%
600-640 1,725 91 5%
< 600 1,951 45 2%
Distribution of SAT Reasoning Test Scores (Writing)

Applicants Admits Admit rate
750-800 4,524 649 15%
700-740 2,755 285 10%
650-690 2,669 196 7%
600-640 1,700 81 5%
<600 2,119 24 1%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody else seeing HYPS legacy kids with top stats applying (SC)EA to comparable schools where they aren't legacies precisely because they want the sense that they got in on their own merit? Seen it a couple times now and results are consistent with Harvard's claim (for example) that their YP legacy admission rates/standards are about the same as their H legacy admission rates/standards.

If that is the sole reason a child would choose one school over another, it seems sort of tragic. Don't they have anyone in their lives telling them that they should not be deriving their self worth from Ivy acceptances or rejections? Such hubris too--if they get in, then they'll feel that they deserved their acceptances more than a child with a legacy (or other hook)? Are worried that the brag value will be diminished by the possibility of a legacy rejoinder? I'd be sort of embarrassed for the kid and family, unless the kid had a poor relationship with the legacy parent(s) and decided not to apply early to the school out of spite. That would unfortunate, but very understandable in my view.

It's often a reaction to the school community and being fed up with hearing from classmates that of course they'll get into coveted school because, as a legacy, they have a huge advantage. Or having watched other parents dismiss an upperclassman's admission to a great school by asserting that it must be because the family has a connection to the school/pulled strings, they don't want to think that the same comments will be made about them. So when it's time to make the EA decision, unless they're in love with the legacy school for another reason, they actively look for alternatives and submit an (SC)EA app to a peer institution where they don't have the unfair advantage. If they get in, they still have the option of RD applications to the legacy schools. Or, by that point, they've become invested in (and may clearly prefer) the non-legacy alternative. I don't think this is an optimal aproach to college selection, but I understand where it comes from and the results are hardly tragic when it means that a kid goes to Yale instead of Harvard or MIT instead of Stanford.

I wish my kid had that problem. The merit only basket is brutal. And the logic is flawed. Legacy kids do hold some advantage at peer institutions..

Only to the extent that they end up with better academic credentials of their own as an artifact of heredity and parents' SES. Your kid's "merit" also reflects heredity and parental SES. It's not a pure act of will that makes smart people smart or talented people talented -- luck of the draw in terms of genes and environment is always in the mix as well.

[Anonymous]

Fair or not to most upper and top tier schools they matter quite a bit. I know a few kids whose grades were all over the map normally due to maturity but had stellar scores and got into top schools. Until they do away with them across the board, afraid that they still very much matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[Post New]01/30/2016 06:54 Subject: Re:Candidates for the 2016 Presidential Scholars Program [Up]
Anonymous



Here is the sat accepted data set for MIT:

Distribution of SAT Reasoning Test Scores (Math)

Applicants Admits Admit rate
750-800 8,055 992 12%
700-740 2,460 184 7%
650-690 1,650 56 3%
600-640 781 3 0%
< 600 551 0 0%
Distribution of SAT Reasoning Test Scores (Critical Reading)

Applicants Admits Admit rate
750-800 4,206 613 15%
700-740 3,037 296 10%
650-690 2,578 190 7%
600-640 1,725 91 5%
< 600 1,951 45 2%
Distribution of SAT Reasoning Test Scores (Writing)

Applicants Admits Admit rate
750-800 4,524 649 15%
700-740 2,755 285 10%
650-690 2,669 196 7%
600-640 1,700 81 5%
<600 2,119 24 1%

So as someone posted in the private school forum, for MIT, it looks like about 55% of admits were in the 2350-2400 range.

[Anonymous]

SPin off question about scores -- do the test prep programs make a difference in getting those great scores?

If your child did a test prep class, was it worth it? Which ones? Individual or group?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SPin off question about scores -- do the test prep programs make a difference in getting those great scores?

If your child did a test prep class, was it worth it? Which ones? Individual or group?

Contrary to what most people want to believe, very little:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124278685697537839

http://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2011/08/29/dont_waste_money_on_sat_act_prep_courses_106250.html

http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2014/03/the-sat-test-prep-income-and-race.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anybody else seeing HYPS legacy kids with top stats applying (SC)EA to comparable schools where they aren't legacies precisely because they want the sense that they got in on their own merit? Seen it a couple times now and results are consistent with Harvard's claim (for example) that their YP legacy admission rates/standards are about the same as their H legacy admission rates/standards.

If that is the sole reason a child would choose one school over another, it seems sort of tragic. Don't they have anyone in their lives telling them that they should not be deriving their self worth from Ivy acceptances or rejections? Such hubris too--if they get in, then they'll feel that they deserved their acceptances more than a child with a legacy (or other hook)? Are worried that the brag value will be diminished by the possibility of a legacy rejoinder? I'd be sort of embarrassed for the kid and family, unless the kid had a poor relationship with the legacy parent(s) and decided not to apply early to the school out of spite. That would unfortunate, but very understandable in my view.

It's often a reaction to the school community and being fed up with hearing from classmates that of course they'll get into coveted school because, as a legacy, they have a huge advantage. Or having watched other parents dismiss an upperclassman's admission to a great school by asserting that it must be because the family has a connection to the school/pulled strings, they don't want to think that the same comments will be made about them. So when it's time to make the EA decision, unless they're in love with the legacy school for another reason, they actively look for alternatives and submit an (SC)EA app to a peer institution where they don't have the unfair advantage. If they get in, they still have the option of RD applications to the legacy schools. Or, by that point, they've become invested in (and may clearly prefer) the non-legacy alternative. I don't think this is an optimal aproach to college selection, but I understand where it comes from and the results are hardly tragic when it means that a kid goes to Yale instead of Harvard or MIT instead of Stanford.

I wish my kid had that problem. The merit only basket is brutal. And the logic is flawed. Legacy kids do hold some advantage at peer institutions..

Only to the extent that they end up with better academic credentials of their own as an artifact of heredity and parents' SES. Your kid's "merit" also reflects heredity and parental SES. It's not a pure act of will that makes smart people smart or talented people talented -- luck of the draw in terms of genes and environment is always in the mix as well.

There's another post quoting a Harvard study that indicated their accept rate for YP legacies was equivalent to their own H accept rate. The reality is there is brand recognition for kids born to Ivy parents. Not being in that group, I really don't understand why people don't own it and pretend there isn't a different standard they enjoy. I would tell my kid to appreciate the advantage and run with it if the school is a fit.

[Anonymous]

That doesn't mean that there's some reciprocity agreement among Ivy or HYPS admissions offices to give the progeny of each others' alumns a leg up in admissions. That would defeat the purpose of a legacy preference (development). What it means is that Harvard, under fire for admitting a comparatively high percentage of its own legacies, did a retroactive analysis to see how differently it treated a comparable demographic to whom it DID NOT accord any legacy advantage. It found that the children of YP graduates who got in had comparable credentials to the children of H grads.

[Anonymous]

So they too were admitted under the same standards, i.e.a lower bottom range for credentials.

[Anonymous]

Where's the evidence that there's a lower bottom range for credentials among HYP alumns? H consistently says that its legacy applicant pool has better credentials than its applicant pool as a whole. Not surprising given SES privilege and self-selection.

[Anonymous]

Probably none but in any school group, the kids always know.

[Anonymous]

What are the ACT cutoffs for Presidential recognition? Only 36?

[Anonymous]

Is it the composite ACT or the sum of the four components?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it the composite ACT or the sum of the four components?

Math and Critical Reading scores for the SAT, and the English, Math, Reading and Science scores for the ACT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are the ACT cutoffs for Presidential recognition? Only 36?

there's no cutoff score per se but most kids are close to 36 range.