Compared Against Peers - T20 Admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Superscoring is weak. It distorts the purpose of a standardized test.

First admin, how did you do? That’s what should be considered.

And sorry to be the bearer of unpleasant news, but a super scored 34 over 4 administrations has nothing in common with a one-and-done 34 (much less 35 or 36).

You make hair about it. Admissions officers don’t. I say this with certainty. Why are you derailing this thread about test scores again?

My kid got an amazing score. But it won’t make the difference. That’s not what these admissions committees are focused on.

And if there is ranking going on in the high school, it becomes a question of who the college counseling office is favoring in this process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am confused as to why this is more of an issue at private schools. At public schools, dozens of kids apply to the same competitive schools and the chips fall where they may. There isn’t the same level of ownership over the process. Everyone knows they have zero control and they have a “might as well try” attitude.

I think because it is a very rare kid who does perfectly or close to it at the top privates. When a kid has a 3.98 or 4.0 they tend to get in everywhere they apply: Stanford, Princeton, Duke, Rice, Penn, Brown etc.
This was the admissions pattern for this type of kid in 2022 and 2023 at the Big3 school my kids attend.

It's enough of a unicorn that they do incredibly well.

You’re not a unicorn if you apply TO. More like a jackalope.

You’re focused on the wrong thing. If the admissions committees are not crying about this why are you?

Fix what you can. Everything else is beyond your control.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Superscoring is weak. It distorts the purpose of a standardized test.

First admin, how did you do? That’s what should be considered.

And sorry to be the bearer of unpleasant news, but a super scored 34 over 4 administrations has nothing in common with a one-and-done 34 (much less 35 or 36).

You make hair about it. Admissions officers don’t. I say this with certainty. Why are you derailing this thread about test scores again?

My kid got an amazing score. But it won’t make the difference. That’s not what these admissions committees are focused on.

And if there is ranking going on in the high school, it becomes a question of who the college counseling office is favoring in this process.

Posting “amazing” is meaningless without more context for the reader to evaluate.

We all have different standards. A super scored 34 or 35 might be amazing to you. It’s not to me.

But in the same breath, you want to argue that “amazing” as a descriptor for unweighted GPA is restricted to 4.00 only. That seems weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am confused as to why this is more of an issue at private schools. At public schools, dozens of kids apply to the same competitive schools and the chips fall where they may. There isn’t the same level of ownership over the process. Everyone knows they have zero control and they have a “might as well try” attitude.

I think because it is a very rare kid who does perfectly or close to it at the top privates. When a kid has a 3.98 or 4.0 they tend to get in everywhere they apply: Stanford, Princeton, Duke, Rice, Penn, Brown etc.
This was the admissions pattern for this type of kid in 2022 and 2023 at the Big3 school my kids attend.

It's enough of a unicorn that they do incredibly well.

You’re not a unicorn if you apply TO. More like a jackalope.

You’re focused on the wrong thing. If the admissions committees are not crying about this why are you?

Fix what you can. Everything else is beyond your control.

What ARE they crying about? You seem to have insider information!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, friend at top NYC private with top academics did not get into first choice Ivy because there were 2 kids with bigger hooks ahead in line.

My DD from a DMV private had 4 of 4 admitted ED to an Ivy only 1 year after 0 of 3 were admitted. There is no quota or limit per class even in ED.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Superscoring is weak. It distorts the purpose of a standardized test.

First admin, how did you do? That’s what should be considered.

And sorry to be the bearer of unpleasant news, but a super scored 34 over 4 administrations has nothing in common with a one-and-done 34 (much less 35 or 36).

Will colleges notice if a strong score is achieved one administration? My DC got a 35 in August of Junior year (36 math) and did not take it again.

There are a handful of schools that want to see all scores. Georgetown is probably the most prominent. But most don't care. 1500 and 34. Hit it the first time is a big stress reliever. But if the science score is lower on the first try at the ACT and you take it again and improve, it's no big deal. Colleges want the super-score. And 35 is a great score. Would not spend a minute thinking about retaking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am confused as to why this is more of an issue at private schools. At public schools, dozens of kids apply to the same competitive schools and the chips fall where they may. There isn’t the same level of ownership over the process. Everyone knows they have zero control and they have a “might as well try” attitude.

I think because it is a very rare kid who does perfectly or close to it at the top privates. When a kid has a 3.98 or 4.0 they tend to get in everywhere they apply: Stanford, Princeton, Duke, Rice, Penn, Brown etc.
This was the admissions pattern for this type of kid in 2022 and 2023 at the Big3 school my kids attend.

It's enough of a unicorn that they do incredibly well.

Got it, thanks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 1/2 pages through this thread and not a single mention of test scores. Just GPA. Or rank, which is derivative of GPA. A little nod to rigor, which can be very subjective, too. But nothing about test scores.

How embarrassing. What a flawed system, regardless the type of class a college is trying to build through admissions.

Everybody’s got a 34; 35 or 36. That really does not make a difference to admissions officers. Hate to break it to you.

That’s not accurate. And who cares about 34 or 35 if we’re writing off 3.8 and 3.9 GPAs?

Less than 2,500 per year with a composite 1600 or 36 in their first and only administration. That’s your 4.0 unweighted equivalent.

My daughter has a friend who scored 36 in one sitting and was rejected from Princeton, Middlebury, Williams, and Wesleyan and waitlisted at Syracuse last spring. Excellent grades and rigor at a top 5 boarding school in Mass. That made me lose my faith in test scores mattering 😂

If all those schools reached the same decision - it’s not an accident

All those schools. All four of them, all with extremely low acceptance rates across the board. 😂🤣😭

Well I guess you can ignore being waitlisted at Syracuse with its 52% acceptance rate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a great thread - in a few months parents will be freaking because their 1500 plus 4.5 student (or whatever) is shut out of the top 20. Having been through this process a few times at both public and private high schools, it is clear that class rank is the number one indicator of admission all other things being about equal - it's not guaranteed of course, and does not apply for URM or Athletic admissions - but lots of high stats kids are in the top 10 percent of the class, but well below the top 10 candidates in the ranking. You need to have a good grasp of your rank AND your competition to choose ED and RD wisely.

Could not agree more with this. And it doesn’t matter if high school doesn’t rank, colleges can figure it out on their own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, friend at top NYC private with top academics did not get into first choice Ivy because there were 2 kids with bigger hooks ahead in line.

My DD from a DMV private had 4 of 4 admitted ED to an Ivy only 1 year after 0 of 3 were admitted. There is no quota or limit per class even in ED.

Interesting. Can you name the school?!?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a great thread - in a few months parents will be freaking because their 1500 plus 4.5 student (or whatever) is shut out of the top 20. Having been through this process a few times at both public and private high schools, it is clear that class rank is the number one indicator of admission all other things being about equal - it's not guaranteed of course, and does not apply for URM or Athletic admissions - but lots of high stats kids are in the top 10 percent of the class, but well below the top 10 candidates in the ranking. You need to have a good grasp of your rank AND your competition to choose ED and RD wisely.

Could not agree more with this. And it doesn’t matter if high school doesn’t rank, colleges can figure it out on their own.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 1/2 pages through this thread and not a single mention of test scores. Just GPA. Or rank, which is derivative of GPA. A little nod to rigor, which can be very subjective, too. But nothing about test scores.

How embarrassing. What a flawed system, regardless the type of class a college is trying to build through admissions.

Everybody’s got a 34; 35 or 36. That really does not make a difference to admissions officers. Hate to break it to you.

That’s not accurate. And who cares about 34 or 35 if we’re writing off 3.8 and 3.9 GPAs?

Less than 2,500 per year with a composite 1600 or 36 in their first and only administration. That’s your 4.0 unweighted equivalent.

My daughter has a friend who scored 36 in one sitting and was rejected from Princeton, Middlebury, Williams, and Wesleyan and waitlisted at Syracuse last spring. Excellent grades and rigor at a top 5 boarding school in Mass. That made me lose my faith in test scores mattering 😂

If all those schools reached the same decision - it’s not an accident

All those schools. All four of them, all with extremely low acceptance rates across the board. 😂🤣😭

Well I guess you can ignore being waitlisted at Syracuse with its 52% acceptance rate

It was a reply with anecdotal information and they didn’t provide context (exact GPA, unweighted and weighted, number of AP classes, etc.), so I technically ignored all of it. But felt compelled to comment on the lack of surprise re: the four schools that rejected the applicant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 1/2 pages through this thread and not a single mention of test scores. Just GPA. Or rank, which is derivative of GPA. A little nod to rigor, which can be very subjective, too. But nothing about test scores.

How embarrassing. What a flawed system, regardless the type of class a college is trying to build through admissions.

Everybody’s got a 34; 35 or 36. That really does not make a difference to admissions officers. Hate to break it to you.

That’s not accurate. And who cares about 34 or 35 if we’re writing off 3.8 and 3.9 GPAs?

Less than 2,500 per year with a composite 1600 or 36 in their first and only administration. That’s your 4.0 unweighted equivalent.

My daughter has a friend who scored 36 in one sitting and was rejected from Princeton, Middlebury, Williams, and Wesleyan and waitlisted at Syracuse last spring. Excellent grades and rigor at a top 5 boarding school in Mass. That made me lose my faith in test scores mattering 😂

If all those schools reached the same decision - it’s not an accident

All those schools. All four of them, all with extremely low acceptance rates across the board. 😂🤣😭

Well I guess you can ignore being waitlisted at Syracuse with its 52% acceptance rate

It was a reply with anecdotal information and they didn’t provide context (exact GPA, unweighted and weighted, number of AP classes, etc.), so I technically ignored all of it. But felt compelled to comment on the lack of surprise re: the four schools that rejected the applicant.

Well first it’s five schools. Second the schools serve as a proxy for all the context you say is missing. They had all that information and didn’t admit. How much more do you need to know?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 1/2 pages through this thread and not a single mention of test scores. Just GPA. Or rank, which is derivative of GPA. A little nod to rigor, which can be very subjective, too. But nothing about test scores.

How embarrassing. What a flawed system, regardless the type of class a college is trying to build through admissions.

Everybody’s got a 34; 35 or 36. That really does not make a difference to admissions officers. Hate to break it to you.

That’s not accurate. And who cares about 34 or 35 if we’re writing off 3.8 and 3.9 GPAs?

Less than 2,500 per year with a composite 1600 or 36 in their first and only administration. That’s your 4.0 unweighted equivalent.

My daughter has a friend who scored 36 in one sitting and was rejected from Princeton, Middlebury, Williams, and Wesleyan and waitlisted at Syracuse last spring. Excellent grades and rigor at a top 5 boarding school in Mass. That made me lose my faith in test scores mattering 😂

If all those schools reached the same decision - it’s not an accident

All those schools. All four of them, all with extremely low acceptance rates across the board. 😂🤣😭

Well I guess you can ignore being waitlisted at Syracuse with its 52% acceptance rate

It was a reply with anecdotal information and they didn’t provide context (exact GPA, unweighted and weighted, number of AP classes, etc.), so I technically ignored all of it. But felt compelled to comment on the lack of surprise re: the four schools that rejected the applicant.

Well first it’s five schools. Second the schools serve as a proxy for all the context you say is missing. They had all that information and didn’t admit. How much more do you need to know?

Well, no - it was four that rejected (reaching the same conclusion) the candidate. The fifth, Syracuse, waitlisted the candidate. That’s a different conclusion.

I’ll repeat - there is no detail beyond the ACT 36. Excellent grades - what is that? 4.00 unweighted? 3.90? 3.80?

And then nothing to help quantify all of the other parts on the package.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1 1/2 pages through this thread and not a single mention of test scores. Just GPA. Or rank, which is derivative of GPA. A little nod to rigor, which can be very subjective, too. But nothing about test scores.

How embarrassing. What a flawed system, regardless the type of class a college is trying to build through admissions.

Everybody’s got a 34; 35 or 36. That really does not make a difference to admissions officers. Hate to break it to you.

That’s not accurate. And who cares about 34 or 35 if we’re writing off 3.8 and 3.9 GPAs?

Less than 2,500 per year with a composite 1600 or 36 in their first and only administration. That’s your 4.0 unweighted equivalent.

My daughter has a friend who scored 36 in one sitting and was rejected from Princeton, Middlebury, Williams, and Wesleyan and waitlisted at Syracuse last spring. Excellent grades and rigor at a top 5 boarding school in Mass. That made me lose my faith in test scores mattering 😂

If all those schools reached the same decision - it’s not an accident

All those schools. All four of them, all with extremely low acceptance rates across the board. 😂🤣😭

Well I guess you can ignore being waitlisted at Syracuse with its 52% acceptance rate

It was a reply with anecdotal information and they didn’t provide context (exact GPA, unweighted and weighted, number of AP classes, etc.), so I technically ignored all of it. But felt compelled to comment on the lack of surprise re: the four schools that rejected the applicant.

Well first it’s five schools. Second the schools serve as a proxy for all the context you say is missing. They had all that information and didn’t admit. How much more do you need to know?

Well, no - it was four that rejected (reaching the same conclusion) the candidate. The fifth, Syracuse, waitlisted the candidate. That’s a different conclusion.

I’ll repeat - there is no detail beyond the ACT 36. Excellent grades - what is that? 4.00 unweighted? 3.90? 3.80?

And then nothing to help quantify all of the other parts on the package.

Proxy for all the context? No, to use those outcomes as any kind of reliable proxy, we need to know the actual other measurables (beyond the ACT score) to then apply that information to a prospective applicant’s probability of suffering the same fate, or getting an acceptance where the so-called proxy didn’t.

By way of example, if one person’s “excellent grades” are a 3.62 / 3.74 with 2 APs, with essays that are poorly written, and 2-3 meandering ECs, how would that information (undisclosed at this point) serve as a reliable proxy for, say, a 3.76 / 4.38 with 12 APs, well-written essays, and 10 ECs, six of which bore into a particular area of interest that ties into a unified theme?

And what if the former applied for a CS, engineering or math seat and the latter applied for a psychology or biological sciences seat?

So, yeah, context is necessary …