Is it me or are test scores now more important than ever?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone knows TO is mainly to allow schools to admit black students without creating evidence of racial discrimination. It is not complicated and let's not beat about the bush because it's the truth. It has never been about the quirky artsy suburban white girl who doesn't test well. Given that the SATs were already substantially rescored and dumbed down for the same reasons, leading to significant inflation in SATs, it makes it easier for the schools to now consider TO because they also know the rigor levels of the high schools the kids are coming from. Someone with a 3.8 from Sidwell or a strong magnet is going to be looked at differently than a 4.0 from an everyday high school and can likely get away without submitting scores. But the 4.0 from the everyday high school needs the high SAT to stand out.

You must have missed the large swath of UMC whites needing "accommodations," claiming ADHD, etc.

In sheer numbers, whites benefit more from TO. Some top schools have been TO for decades. But, continue to be ignorant.

Even if more white students (since black students tend to be no more than ten percent of the student population) are accepted TO (perhaps as athletes mostly), it can still be true that TO is a technology developed to evade legal scrutiny over racial preferences.

… sorry, not developed (Bowdoin invented it as a hippy dippy thing) but applied broadly by almost every school under the guise of hippy dippy-ness but for the purpose of evading legal scrutiny

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone knows TO is mainly to allow schools to admit black students without creating evidence of racial discrimination. It is not complicated and let's not beat about the bush because it's the truth. It has never been about the quirky artsy suburban white girl who doesn't test well. Given that the SATs were already substantially rescored and dumbed down for the same reasons, leading to significant inflation in SATs, it makes it easier for the schools to now consider TO because they also know the rigor levels of the high schools the kids are coming from. Someone with a 3.8 from Sidwell or a strong magnet is going to be looked at differently than a 4.0 from an everyday high school and can likely get away without submitting scores. But the 4.0 from the everyday high school needs the high SAT to stand out.

You must have missed the large swath of UMC whites needing "accommodations," claiming ADHD, etc.

In sheer numbers, whites benefit more from TO. Some top schools have been TO for decades. But, continue to be ignorant.

Even if more white students (since black students tend to be no more than ten percent of the student population) are accepted TO (perhaps as athletes mostly), it can still be true that TO is a technology developed to evade legal scrutiny over racial preferences.

… sorry, not developed (Bowdoin invented it as a hippy dippy thing) but applied broadly by almost every school under the guise of hippy dippy-ness but for the purpose of evading legal scrutiny

You sound pretty darn hippy dippy yourself. Seriously. Like some kind of 1970s conspiracy theorist.

[Anonymous]

it can still be true that TO is a technology developed to evade legal scrutiny over racial preferences.

Yet the numbers don't support this. For example, using stats up thread, if 40% of the Vandy class was URM, then perhaps this would be an interesting discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

it can still be true that TO is a technology developed to evade legal scrutiny over racial preferences.

Yet the numbers don't support this. For example, using stats up thread, if 40% of the Vandy class was URM, then perhaps this would be an interesting discussion.

But we already determined that the 20 percent of Californians getting in test optional are of all ethnicities. That leaves 20 percent for institutional priorities like first gen, urm, donor cases, athletes and pell eligible, maybe 40 to 50 percent is not urm.

However, still means your dmv middle and upper classs Asians and whites are not benefitting from test optional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

it can still be true that TO is a technology developed to evade legal scrutiny over racial preferences.

Yet the numbers don't support this. For example, using stats up thread, if 40% of the Vandy class was URM, then perhaps this would be an interesting discussion.

The TO trend was sparked by Covid but maintained in my opinion because of the racial equity movement which really gained steam in 2020 post the death of Floyd but this also coincided with the Harvard law suit. In California TO is the order of the day because the state Supreme Court prohibits racial preferences and schools recognize they would not achieve their diversity goals if there was hard data that could be discovered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For colleges that are test optional, no - test scores are not "more important than ever."

Logic.

It’s amazing how many people today accept surface level explanations and don’t consider unintended consequences or ulterior motives.

Parents think they are smarter than the colleges and AOs. Especially when their DC gets deferred or rejected.

If colleges don't want to be test optional they won't state that they are. The highly selective schools have their pick of the students they want to shape the class they want in any given admissions cycle - test optional or not.

A few schools have recently made statements indicating they are test preferred. They are saying it.

Which schools? And where are they saying this?

And obscure podcasts don't count. Where is it on the college's website?

It’s not.

So at our private, I personally know TO applicants who got into:

Vanderbilt
Cornell
Northwestern
Colgate
UofChicago (no surprise)

I’m sure there are others. I have a senior who’s friends with these folks. Don’t know any others.

So many insist that TO is for poor minorities. See above for more proof that even the well-to do apply TO successfully.

That is definitely California. None of the UCs or CalStates even look at test scores. So no one takes them anymore. It's been like for a few years now. But California is such a huge state with lots of very qualified students that it distorts the picture nationally.

People have been observing that Vanderbilt for instance takes nearly 40 percent of their class TO. You can assume at least half of those are from California. A more accurate understanding would be that outside of students applying from California, more than 80 percent of applicants submitted scores. And that strikes me as more intuitively correct. But California is so big that it creates misperceptions at the national level private universities.

Having shepherded two kids through the college application process recently, I have come to believe that the world is only test optional for recruited athletes, UMCs, the offspring of VIPs and major donors, and students from California. If you are applying to any school in the top 80 or so, and don't fall into one of those categories, going TO is a major strike against the applicant.

Where did your 2 kids end up?

Rice and Vanderbilt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

it can still be true that TO is a technology developed to evade legal scrutiny over racial preferences.

Yet the numbers don't support this. For example, using stats up thread, if 40% of the Vandy class was URM, then perhaps this would be an interesting discussion.

But we already determined that the 20 percent of Californians getting in test optional are of all ethnicities. That leaves 20 percent for institutional priorities like first gen, urm, donor cases, athletes and pell eligible, maybe 40 to 50 percent is not urm.

However, still means your dmv middle and upper classs Asians and whites are not benefitting from test optional.

The "but California!" defense isn't working buddy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For colleges that are test optional, no - test scores are not "more important than ever."

Logic.

It’s amazing how many people today accept surface level explanations and don’t consider unintended consequences or ulterior motives.

Parents think they are smarter than the colleges and AOs. Especially when their DC gets deferred or rejected.

If colleges don't want to be test optional they won't state that they are. The highly selective schools have their pick of the students they want to shape the class they want in any given admissions cycle - test optional or not.

A few schools have recently made statements indicating they are test preferred. They are saying it.

Which schools? And where are they saying this?

And obscure podcasts don't count. Where is it on the college's website?

It’s not.

So at our private, I personally know TO applicants who got into:

Vanderbilt
Cornell
Northwestern
Colgate
UofChicago (no surprise)

I’m sure there are others. I have a senior who’s friends with these folks. Don’t know any others.

So many insist that TO is for poor minorities. See above for more proof that even the well-to do apply TO successfully.

That is definitely California. None of the UCs or CalStates even look at test scores. So no one takes them anymore. It's been like for a few years now. But California is such a huge state with lots of very qualified students that it distorts the picture nationally.

People have been observing that Vanderbilt for instance takes nearly 40 percent of their class TO. You can assume at least half of those are from California. A more accurate understanding would be that outside of students applying from California, more than 80 percent of applicants submitted scores. And that strikes me as more intuitively correct. But California is so big that it creates misperceptions at the national level private universities.

Having shepherded two kids through the college application process recently, I have come to believe that the world is only test optional for recruited athletes, UMCs, the offspring of VIPs and major donors, and students from California. If you are applying to any school in the top 80 or so, and don't fall into one of those categories, going TO is a major strike against the applicant.

Your assumption is incorrect. In fall of 2023, 9% of the students were from California. Source: https://www.vanderbilt.edu/dsa/students-data/

No private school would take 20% of the enrolled class from one state (excluding the home state, e.g., Tennessee).

[Anonymous]

The insistence here that certain students must have test scores is being over sold. Our counselor told us test optional means test optional. My white male UMC son went test optional and was accepted to a T10 ED as well as five other colleges rolling or EA, including both public and private schools, several of them offering significant merit aid. Granted he had a strong application but not hooked. I keep seeing this board insist a student like him has to submit scores, and that is wrong, they don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The insistence here that certain students must have test scores is being over sold. Our counselor told us test optional means test optional. My white male UMC son went test optional and was accepted to a T10 ED as well as five other colleges rolling or EA, including both public and private schools, several of them offering significant merit aid. Granted he had a strong application but not hooked. I keep seeing this board insist a student like him has to submit scores, and that is wrong, they don’t.

+1 my friend's daughter, unhooked, white, UMC, top private in NYC, got into Dartmouth ED (this year's cycle).

[Anonymous]

The point isn’t that TO isn’t TO; it’s that if you have a high test score, it helps, perhaps more than ever before.

[Anonymous]

The point isn’t that TO isn’t TO; it’s that if you have a high test score, it helps, perhaps more than ever before.

Yet some posters (or the same 2-3) on this thread continued to repeat TO is only for URM applications (black kids specifically) and athletes, even though we know, based on the numbers, TO is benefiting white and Asian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The point isn’t that TO isn’t TO; it’s that if you have a high test score, it helps, perhaps more than ever before.

Duh....a high test score can't hurt. However, since testing is now lower stakes for admissions and most colleges are test optional (with a few noted selective college exceptions), the "more than ever" part is suspect.

But for those parents who argue that whites and Asian applicants need to submit scores, go for it and stop bellyaching about TO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The insistence here that certain students must have test scores is being over sold. Our counselor told us test optional means test optional. My white male UMC son went test optional and was accepted to a T10 ED as well as five other colleges rolling or EA, including both public and private schools, several of them offering significant merit aid. Granted he had a strong application but not hooked. I keep seeing this board insist a student like him has to submit scores, and that is wrong, they don’t.

+1 my friend's daughter, unhooked, white, UMC, top private in NYC, got into Dartmouth ED (this year's cycle).

There will always be exceptions but the idea is it will be rare. If we looked at Dartmouth’s acceptances this year by race and carved out recruited athletes, I suspect we would see some clear patterns. And the transcript of TO students who get in are likely extremely strong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The point isn’t that TO isn’t TO; it’s that if you have a high test score, it helps, perhaps more than ever before.

Yet some posters (or the same 2-3) on this thread continued to repeat TO is only for URM applications (black kids specifically) and athletes, even though we know, based on the numbers, TO is benefiting white and Asian.

Mostly Californians, but sure.