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

[Anonymous]

And the under resourced kid doing well on a test relative to their circumstances should certainly get credit for it.

That argument does not mean TO makes any sense

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love it when people say test scores are “overrated.” Sure, they are overrated until you want to figure out who can get through an upper level physics class

These schools are generally being dishonest. Why don’t they take everyone scores, even the bad ones from the kids they want to admit and admit them anyway? Dartmouth has it right. These other schools like Swarthmore are just exploiting a system and sending a bad message that is full of inconsistency.

Tell me more about the part of the SAT/ACT that tests physics knowledge? Do you have any evidence that TO students are ill-prepared for physics courses at a school like Swarthmore? Or is it just a supposition you hatched from your own fundament? BTW, only three of the ten strongest (total or per capita) undergraduate feeders to physics PhD programs require tests (including Princeton which is TO for the next couple years): https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs/#physics

For those who pray at the altar of standardized tests, may I suggest looking at elite universities in China, Japan, and Korea. They are exclusively comprised of elite test takers and yet mostly inferior to American universities with holistic admissions. Their elite high school students spend most of their waking hours preparing for college entrance exams like the gaokao, sacrificing all social life, most extracurricular activities, and often their psychological wellbeing. Y'all would love it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Current Swattie parent here. My kid had 4.0 uw GPA and 4.9 w GPA with a 35 ACT. Was deferred ED and accepted RD. Very happy with the diversity, academic rigor, studiousness, and friendliness of the school. It is small, though. I don't think the test scores matter because I think the admissions team is looking to build a diverse class. The FGLI students are a big part of the campus.

+1. Parent of a student another WASP LAC with TO policies. My kid was valedictorian, 35 ACT, 13 APs with strong scores, very strong ECs, admitted to multiple Ivies, etc., etc. The student body is damned impressive as is the community. No complaints about continuing TO policies. (BTW, Swat was my DC's second choice. It's a fantastic school.)

People put way too much emphasis on test scores, which are just one, small part of the criteria that makes an applicant a strong candidate. It just so happens to be a quantifiable one, and so the nuance-challenged among us overly fixate upon it.

I bet the kids who graduate from Swarthmore with physics degrees have really, really high SAT scores. Both math and verbal. It would be interesting to see the numbers. My guess is the test scores are a strong predictor, but okay let’s not put too much emphasis on that little inconvenience.

Perhaps. On the other hand, my DC is a studio art major and still had extremely high stats.

That’s great but does not address the fact that about half the students there are hiding behind TO.

I did not believe you and thought it was hyperbole, but I looked it up. More than half of freshman didn't submit an SAT or ACT score!!!

Believe or not, there are still a LOT of under resourced kids who cannot take tests or have other responsibilities (jobs, care for elderly) that preclude them from preparing for the tests.

The college board makes SAT free for low income students. Also, Khan Academy is completely free. It takes at most a few hours a week for a few weeks to prepare for the SAT. So now all of a sudden underresourced kids can't spare a few hours? This excuse making is nauseating.

The only reason not to submit an SAT score is because you bombed the SAT. Everyone knows this.

Hi Karen, you obviously never experienced what they’re experiencing. When the family partially relies on you for providing food on the table, or granny needs you to take a bath every night when parents are working on their second jobs, Khan academy is not their first priority.

I applaud Swat for doing the right thing by offering half of their seats to under resourced kids, without which they may never have a chance to receive college education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Current Swattie parent here. My kid had 4.0 uw GPA and 4.9 w GPA with a 35 ACT. Was deferred ED and accepted RD. Very happy with the diversity, academic rigor, studiousness, and friendliness of the school. It is small, though. I don't think the test scores matter because I think the admissions team is looking to build a diverse class. The FGLI students are a big part of the campus.

+1. Parent of a student another WASP LAC with TO policies. My kid was valedictorian, 35 ACT, 13 APs with strong scores, very strong ECs, admitted to multiple Ivies, etc., etc. The student body is damned impressive as is the community. No complaints about continuing TO policies. (BTW, Swat was my DC's second choice. It's a fantastic school.)

People put way too much emphasis on test scores, which are just one, small part of the criteria that makes an applicant a strong candidate. It just so happens to be a quantifiable one, and so the nuance-challenged among us overly fixate upon it.

I bet the kids who graduate from Swarthmore with physics degrees have really, really high SAT scores. Both math and verbal. It would be interesting to see the numbers. My guess is the test scores are a strong predictor, but okay let’s not put too much emphasis on that little inconvenience.

Perhaps. On the other hand, my DC is a studio art major and still had extremely high stats.

That’s great but does not address the fact that about half the students there are hiding behind TO.

I did not believe you and thought it was hyperbole, but I looked it up. More than half of freshman didn't submit an SAT or ACT score!!!

Believe or not, there are still a LOT of under resourced kids who cannot take tests or have other responsibilities (jobs, care for elderly) that preclude them from preparing for the tests.

The college board makes SAT free for low income students. Also, Khan Academy is completely free. It takes at most a few hours a week for a few weeks to prepare for the SAT. So now all of a sudden underresourced kids can't spare a few hours? This excuse making is nauseating.

The only reason not to submit an SAT score is because you bombed the SAT. Everyone knows this.

Hi Karen, you obviously never experienced what they’re experiencing. When the family partially relies on you for providing food on the table, or granny needs you to take a bath every night when parents are working on their second jobs, Khan academy is not their first priority.

I applaud Swat for doing the right thing by offering half of their seats to under resourced kids, without which they may never have a chance to receive college education.

Between SNAP benefits, free food at school, I doubt little Jimmy is putting food on the table. Knock it off with this nonsense. We're talking about taking a test offered for free that anyone with half a brain can study for, for free, for a few hours. The excuse making is sad.

[Anonymous]

All a marketing gimmick by SWAT to keep those applications coming in so it doesn't lose selectivity points with USNWR. That is all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Current Swattie parent here. My kid had 4.0 uw GPA and 4.9 w GPA with a 35 ACT. Was deferred ED and accepted RD. Very happy with the diversity, academic rigor, studiousness, and friendliness of the school. It is small, though. I don't think the test scores matter because I think the admissions team is looking to build a diverse class. The FGLI students are a big part of the campus.

+1. Parent of a student another WASP LAC with TO policies. My kid was valedictorian, 35 ACT, 13 APs with strong scores, very strong ECs, admitted to multiple Ivies, etc., etc. The student body is damned impressive as is the community. No complaints about continuing TO policies. (BTW, Swat was my DC's second choice. It's a fantastic school.)

People put way too much emphasis on test scores, which are just one, small part of the criteria that makes an applicant a strong candidate. It just so happens to be a quantifiable one, and so the nuance-challenged among us overly fixate upon it.

I bet the kids who graduate from Swarthmore with physics degrees have really, really high SAT scores. Both math and verbal. It would be interesting to see the numbers. My guess is the test scores are a strong predictor, but okay let’s not put too much emphasis on that little inconvenience.

Perhaps. On the other hand, my DC is a studio art major and still had extremely high stats.

That’s great but does not address the fact that about half the students there are hiding behind TO.

I did not believe you and thought it was hyperbole, but I looked it up. More than half of freshman didn't submit an SAT or ACT score!!!

Believe or not, there are still a LOT of under resourced kids who cannot take tests or have other responsibilities (jobs, care for elderly) that preclude them from preparing for the tests.

The college board makes SAT free for low income students. Also, Khan Academy is completely free. It takes at most a few hours a week for a few weeks to prepare for the SAT. So now all of a sudden underresourced kids can't spare a few hours? This excuse making is nauseating.

The only reason not to submit an SAT score is because you bombed the SAT. Everyone knows this.

My kid didn't submit an SAT score because she aced the ACT and thus never took the SAT. I'd think that someone who prizes standardized tests would understand the logical pitfalls of making sweeping statements based on universal quantifiers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love it when people say test scores are “overrated.” Sure, they are overrated until you want to figure out who can get through an upper level physics class

These schools are generally being dishonest. Why don’t they take everyone scores, even the bad ones from the kids they want to admit and admit them anyway? Dartmouth has it right. These other schools like Swarthmore are just exploiting a system and sending a bad message that is full of inconsistency.

Tell me more about the part of the SAT/ACT that tests physics knowledge? Do you have any evidence that TO students are ill-prepared for physics courses at a school like Swarthmore? Or is it just a supposition you hatched from your own fundament? BTW, only three of the ten strongest (total or per capita) undergraduate feeders to physics PhD programs require tests (including Princeton which is TO for the next couple years): https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs/#physics

For those who pray at the altar of standardized tests, may I suggest looking at elite universities in China, Japan, and Korea. They are exclusively comprised of elite test takers and yet mostly inferior to American universities with holistic admissions. Their elite high school students spend most of their waking hours preparing for college entrance exams like the gaokao, sacrificing all social life, most extracurricular activities, and often their psychological wellbeing. Y'all would love it!

It gives insight into cognitive ability and further the ability to succeed in college. The Dartmouth study supports it. My guess is that the TO kids who would otherwise be in the bottom quartile would struggle in an upper level physics class. I’d bet you a semester’s tuition at Swarthmore that the best physics students there score very high on the SAT relative for the TO kids. My guess is also that you would not take that bet. That’s why these tests are not “overrated”, but rather insightful.

Regardless, why can’t these schools just admit the entire student, test scores and all? What are they afraid of? They can’t stand up to the almighty USNWR? That’s pathetic. Why send a message to a kid that “we love you but only if you don’t reveal how you did on a test.” I’m not suggesting that we operate like China. But I do think these schools should aim to be honest.

[Anonymous]

Small schools like this who recruit for athletics would be dragged down in the ratings more than larger universities that go back to test required, because athletes make up a bigger percentage of the class than at the larger Universities. It's sad, but most parents and kids do care about USNews metrics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Current Swattie parent here. My kid had 4.0 uw GPA and 4.9 w GPA with a 35 ACT. Was deferred ED and accepted RD. Very happy with the diversity, academic rigor, studiousness, and friendliness of the school. It is small, though. I don't think the test scores matter because I think the admissions team is looking to build a diverse class. The FGLI students are a big part of the campus.

+1. Parent of a student another WASP LAC with TO policies. My kid was valedictorian, 35 ACT, 13 APs with strong scores, very strong ECs, admitted to multiple Ivies, etc., etc. The student body is damned impressive as is the community. No complaints about continuing TO policies. (BTW, Swat was my DC's second choice. It's a fantastic school.)

People put way too much emphasis on test scores, which are just one, small part of the criteria that makes an applicant a strong candidate. It just so happens to be a quantifiable one, and so the nuance-challenged among us overly fixate upon it.

I bet the kids who graduate from Swarthmore with physics degrees have really, really high SAT scores. Both math and verbal. It would be interesting to see the numbers. My guess is the test scores are a strong predictor, but okay let’s not put too much emphasis on that little inconvenience.

Perhaps. On the other hand, my DC is a studio art major and still had extremely high stats.

That’s great but does not address the fact that about half the students there are hiding behind TO.

I did not believe you and thought it was hyperbole, but I looked it up. More than half of freshman didn't submit an SAT or ACT score!!!

Believe or not, there are still a LOT of under resourced kids who cannot take tests or have other responsibilities (jobs, care for elderly) that preclude them from preparing for the tests.

The college board makes SAT free for low income students. Also, Khan Academy is completely free. It takes at most a few hours a week for a few weeks to prepare for the SAT. So now all of a sudden underresourced kids can't spare a few hours? This excuse making is nauseating.

The only reason not to submit an SAT score is because you bombed the SAT. Everyone knows this.

My kid didn't submit an SAT score because she aced the ACT and thus never took the SAT. I'd think that someone who prizes standardized tests would understand the logical pitfalls of making sweeping statements based on universal quantifiers.

No offense, but true high scorers will take the SAT to become NMSF. Sorry your daughter couldn't cut it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Current Swattie parent here. My kid had 4.0 uw GPA and 4.9 w GPA with a 35 ACT. Was deferred ED and accepted RD. Very happy with the diversity, academic rigor, studiousness, and friendliness of the school. It is small, though. I don't think the test scores matter because I think the admissions team is looking to build a diverse class. The FGLI students are a big part of the campus.

+1. Parent of a student another WASP LAC with TO policies. My kid was valedictorian, 35 ACT, 13 APs with strong scores, very strong ECs, admitted to multiple Ivies, etc., etc. The student body is damned impressive as is the community. No complaints about continuing TO policies. (BTW, Swat was my DC's second choice. It's a fantastic school.)

People put way too much emphasis on test scores, which are just one, small part of the criteria that makes an applicant a strong candidate. It just so happens to be a quantifiable one, and so the nuance-challenged among us overly fixate upon it.

I bet the kids who graduate from Swarthmore with physics degrees have really, really high SAT scores. Both math and verbal. It would be interesting to see the numbers. My guess is the test scores are a strong predictor, but okay let’s not put too much emphasis on that little inconvenience.

Perhaps. On the other hand, my DC is a studio art major and still had extremely high stats.

That’s great but does not address the fact that about half the students there are hiding behind TO.

I did not believe you and thought it was hyperbole, but I looked it up. More than half of freshman didn't submit an SAT or ACT score!!!

Believe or not, there are still a LOT of under resourced kids who cannot take tests or have other responsibilities (jobs, care for elderly) that preclude them from preparing for the tests.

The college board makes SAT free for low income students. Also, Khan Academy is completely free. It takes at most a few hours a week for a few weeks to prepare for the SAT. So now all of a sudden underresourced kids can't spare a few hours? This excuse making is nauseating.

The only reason not to submit an SAT score is because you bombed the SAT. Everyone knows this.

My kid didn't submit an SAT score because she aced the ACT and thus never took the SAT. I'd think that someone who prizes standardized tests would understand the logical pitfalls of making sweeping statements based on universal quantifiers.

I think when writing that it was clear that SAT and ACT are interchangeable and not exclusive of ACT. Kind of obvious.

[Anonymous]

In order to qualify as a National Merit Finalist, you need a confirming SAT score. Virtually all very high scorers will have taken the SAT. Pretty simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Oh, the hardship your child has gone through! Not lucky enough to have been born poor and Black.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Current Swattie parent here. My kid had 4.0 uw GPA and 4.9 w GPA with a 35 ACT. Was deferred ED and accepted RD. Very happy with the diversity, academic rigor, studiousness, and friendliness of the school. It is small, though. I don't think the test scores matter because I think the admissions team is looking to build a diverse class. The FGLI students are a big part of the campus.

+1. Parent of a student another WASP LAC with TO policies. My kid was valedictorian, 35 ACT, 13 APs with strong scores, very strong ECs, admitted to multiple Ivies, etc., etc. The student body is damned impressive as is the community. No complaints about continuing TO policies. (BTW, Swat was my DC's second choice. It's a fantastic school.)

People put way too much emphasis on test scores, which are just one, small part of the criteria that makes an applicant a strong candidate. It just so happens to be a quantifiable one, and so the nuance-challenged among us overly fixate upon it.

I bet the kids who graduate from Swarthmore with physics degrees have really, really high SAT scores. Both math and verbal. It would be interesting to see the numbers. My guess is the test scores are a strong predictor, but okay let’s not put too much emphasis on that little inconvenience.

Perhaps. On the other hand, my DC is a studio art major and still had extremely high stats.

That’s great but does not address the fact that about half the students there are hiding behind TO.

I did not believe you and thought it was hyperbole, but I looked it up. More than half of freshman didn't submit an SAT or ACT score!!!

Believe or not, there are still a LOT of under resourced kids who cannot take tests or have other responsibilities (jobs, care for elderly) that preclude them from preparing for the tests.

The college board makes SAT free for low income students. Also, Khan Academy is completely free. It takes at most a few hours a week for a few weeks to prepare for the SAT. So now all of a sudden underresourced kids can't spare a few hours? This excuse making is nauseating.

The only reason not to submit an SAT score is because you bombed the SAT. Everyone knows this.

Hi Karen, you obviously never experienced what they’re experiencing. When the family partially relies on you for providing food on the table, or granny needs you to take a bath every night when parents are working on their second jobs, Khan academy is not their first priority.

I applaud Swat for doing the right thing by offering half of their seats to under resourced kids, without which they may never have a chance to receive college education.

Between SNAP benefits, free food at school, I doubt little Jimmy is putting food on the table. Knock it off with this nonsense. We're talking about taking a test offered for free that anyone with half a brain can study for, for free, for a few hours. The excuse making is sad.

They all have 4.0 gpa at their under resourced high schools, they have proved their brain power enough.  If you read the link it says they have only slightly lower gpa at Swat.  Without TO, Swat may have missed all these brilliant students!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And the under resourced kid doing well on a test relative to their circumstances should certainly get credit for it.

That argument does not mean TO makes any sense

+1

Reward the FGLI student who gets a 31 on the ACT instead of admitting kids who are getting 25 and not reporting. There’s a big difference between scores once you get below 32.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the under resourced kid doing well on a test relative to their circumstances should certainly get credit for it.

That argument does not mean TO makes any sense

+1

Reward the FGLI student who gets a 31 on the ACT instead of admitting kids who are getting 25 and not reporting. There’s a big difference between scores once you get below 32.

Yep. Swarthmore and other similarly rejective schools aren’t looking for more data points and transparency though. They are instead encouraging applicants to essentially pick and choose which data they want to present, again encouraging a lack of transparency.