When is the standardized craze gonna hit the LACs?

[Anonymous]

Econ is not STEM, but point taken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Econ is not STEM, but point taken.

Econ is designated as stem at Pomona college. Take that up with them not me.

[Anonymous]

Bowdoin was test optional before the Pandemic and will stay that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For class of 2028 enrolled students score submission
Williams,35% SAT, 15% ACT
Amherst 39% SAT, 22% ACT

They may want to go back to test required, but that's a little jump from these numbers. Hard to say.

Williams 25th percentile now is 1500, back when tests were required it was 1430. Amherst 25th percentile is now 1500, back when tests were required it was 1410.

They will remain TO because they want the flexibility. Amherst was 21% FGLI this year, 35% recruited athletes. Test required doesn't allow them to build the classes they want. Everyone knows if you're unhooked and not an institutional priority, you need to submit the scores though.

So only non-URM, middle and upper class applicants are “required” to submit test scores. That’s quite a double standard! Don’t like Trump but hope he takes a wrecking ball to LACs like he’s doing with the big boys.

You're an idiot, but that is ok you be you. The LACs hold all of the cards against Trump. Unlike the top universities they actually don't need any Federal money. Federal money typically makes up about 3% of the budget at the top LACs. It's nice but not needed.

You're the idiot, and rude-a** f***wad. When the Administration decides to condition an institution's eligibility to participate in the federal student aid programs on their being test required, then you'll see who "holds all the cards." No testing required, ok then, no Pell Grants or federally backed loans for your students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For class of 2028 enrolled students score submission
Williams,35% SAT, 15% ACT
Amherst 39% SAT, 22% ACT

They may want to go back to test required, but that's a little jump from these numbers. Hard to say.

Williams 25th percentile now is 1500, back when tests were required it was 1430. Amherst 25th percentile is now 1500, back when tests were required it was 1410.

They will remain TO because they want the flexibility. Amherst was 21% FGLI this year, 35% recruited athletes. Test required doesn't allow them to build the classes they want. Everyone knows if you're unhooked and not an institutional priority, you need to submit the scores though.

So only non-URM, middle and upper class applicants are “required” to submit test scores. That’s quite a double standard! Don’t like Trump but hope he takes a wrecking ball to LACs like he’s doing with the big boys.

You're an idiot, but that is ok you be you. The LACs hold all of the cards against Trump. Unlike the top universities they actually don't need any Federal money. Federal money typically makes up about 3% of the budget at the top LACs. It's nice but not needed.

You're the idiot, and rude-a** f***wad. When the Administration decides to condition an institution's eligibility to participate in the federal student aid programs on their being test required, then you'll see who "holds all the cards." No testing required, ok then, no Pell Grants or federally backed loans for your students.

What is the connection between test scores and Pell grant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For class of 2028 enrolled students score submission
Williams,35% SAT, 15% ACT
Amherst 39% SAT, 22% ACT

They may want to go back to test required, but that's a little jump from these numbers. Hard to say.

Williams 25th percentile now is 1500, back when tests were required it was 1430. Amherst 25th percentile is now 1500, back when tests were required it was 1410.

They will remain TO because they want the flexibility. Amherst was 21% FGLI this year, 35% recruited athletes. Test required doesn't allow them to build the classes they want. Everyone knows if you're unhooked and not an institutional priority, you need to submit the scores though.

So only non-URM, middle and upper class applicants are “required” to submit test scores. That’s quite a double standard! Don’t like Trump but hope he takes a wrecking ball to LACs like he’s doing with the big boys.

You're an idiot, but that is ok you be you. The LACs hold all of the cards against Trump. Unlike the top universities they actually don't need any Federal money. Federal money typically makes up about 3% of the budget at the top LACs. It's nice but not needed.

You're the idiot, and rude-a** f***wad. When the Administration decides to condition an institution's eligibility to participate in the federal student aid programs on their being test required, then you'll see who "holds all the cards." No testing required, ok then, no Pell Grants or federally backed loans for your students.

Tack stupid on to the idiot moniker. They don't need the Pell money my dear little tool, it is likely less than 1% of their operating budget in the case of the typical T15 SLAC. Most are also moving away from loans ini their financial aid packages.

[Anonymous]

Hey parents please calm down. This is not worth insulting strangers on the internet and calling each other names like stupid and idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey parents please calm down. This is not worth insulting strangers on the internet and calling each other names like stupid and idiot.

yeah act your age, not your shoe size, ladies!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Probably soon. Once Williams or Amherst makes a move, others will quickly go back. I don't see Amherst doing this anytime soon, since they're struggling to get their diversity numbers back up and want to get them higher. I really doubt Pomona or any west coast LAC would make such a move.

100%, though CMC has already began test required.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just genuinely interested in everyone’s thoughts. It’s surprising that Mudd, Swat, and Carleton are still test optional while remaining very rigorous. Also interesting that Williams, Amherst, Pomona haven’t seemed to consider test scores.

College is sink or swim. Professors aren’t changing their classes or materials based on whether students applied TO. You’re just making things up. Some students get admitted places and aren’t cut out for the work, that has always been the case and nothing new (even back in my time at a fairly rigorous public college there were often students dropping out who couldn’t manage things).
I don't think it matters for Mudd. The applicants are almost all in the top percentile for Math. Their selection process is unique due to their size, and they are very careful about who can thrive in their small community and rigorous academic environment.

Then why did Caltech go back to test required?

They literally saw two students do poorly and rushed a decision. It actually really wasn't as well thought out or quantitative as one would assume from caltech.

False. Professors hate TO because they cannot teach to such a wide spectrum of student talent. This is well known.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just genuinely interested in everyone’s thoughts. It’s surprising that Mudd, Swat, and Carleton are still test optional while remaining very rigorous. Also interesting that Williams, Amherst, Pomona haven’t seemed to consider test scores.

I don't think it matters for Mudd. The applicants are almost all in the top percentile for Math. Their selection process is unique due to their size, and they are very careful about who can thrive in their small community and rigorous academic environment.

Then why did Caltech go back to test required?

They literally saw two students do poorly and rushed a decision. It actually really wasn't as well thought out or quantitative as one would assume from caltech.

False. Professors hate TO because they cannot teach to such a wide spectrum of student talent. This is well known.

College is sink or swim. Professors aren’t changing their classes or materials to accommodate certain students. You’re just making things up and trying to pin this on TO. Some students get admitted places and aren’t cut out for the work, that has always been the case and nothing new (even back in my time at a fairly rigorous public college there were often students dropping out who couldn’t manage things).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just genuinely interested in everyone’s thoughts. It’s surprising that Mudd, Swat, and Carleton are still test optional while remaining very rigorous. Also interesting that Williams, Amherst, Pomona haven’t seemed to consider test scores.

I don't think it matters for Mudd. The applicants are almost all in the top percentile for Math. Their selection process is unique due to their size, and they are very careful about who can thrive in their small community and rigorous academic environment.

Then why did Caltech go back to test required?

They literally saw two students do poorly and rushed a decision. It actually really wasn't as well thought out or quantitative as one would assume from caltech.

False. Professors hate TO because they cannot teach to such a wide spectrum of student talent. This is well known.

College is sink or swim. Professors aren’t changing their classes or materials to accommodate certain students. You’re just making things up and trying to pin this on TO. Some students get admitted places and aren’t cut out for the work, that has always been the case and nothing new (even back in my time at a fairly rigorous public college there were often students dropping out who couldn’t manage things).

This is not true at all.

Ivy grad

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just genuinely interested in everyone’s thoughts. It’s surprising that Mudd, Swat, and Carleton are still test optional while remaining very rigorous. Also interesting that Williams, Amherst, Pomona haven’t seemed to consider test scores.

I don't think it matters for Mudd. The applicants are almost all in the top percentile for Math. Their selection process is unique due to their size, and they are very careful about who can thrive in their small community and rigorous academic environment.

Then why did Caltech go back to test required?

They literally saw two students do poorly and rushed a decision. It actually really wasn't as well thought out or quantitative as one would assume from caltech.

False. Professors hate TO because they cannot teach to such a wide spectrum of student talent. This is well known.

College is sink or swim. Professors aren’t changing their classes or materials to accommodate certain students. You’re just making things up and trying to pin this on TO. Some students get admitted places and aren’t cut out for the work, that has always been the case and nothing new (even back in my time at a fairly rigorous public college there were often students dropping out who couldn’t manage things).

This is not true at all.

Ivy grad

Mazel tov—but why does your Ivy grad status make you better equipped to evaluate the PP’s point? Or is this just how you sign all of your posts?

[Anonymous]

[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main problem with TO is that it discouraged applicants from less-advantaged backgrounds from submitting test scores that would have provided an additional positive signal of their academic abilities. So many FGLI URM kids apply with TO ending up having much reduced chance of admission. Test required allows FGLI URM kids submit their 1400 score, which, opposite to many kids thought, it's a great score in their context, even for WASP.

By staying TO, rich kids with resources benefit the most, they often seek out undersubscribed majors and doign fancy ECs to impress the AOs. They do not deserve the seats as much as the FGLI URM kids, but under TO, AOs have no choice but admitting rich kids.

Well, PPs above believe TO only benefits applicants that are institutional priorities (URM, FGLI, Athletes, etc) and that if you are a ORM or Majority upper middle/upper class student then you must submit test scores. Which one is it? I think you’re both wrong. (Kids don’t apply to LACs by major, btw) I think the main way that privileged kids disproportionately get into SLACs is through athletics. To reach the level of a recruitable athlete in the NESCAC, for example, takes a significant financial commitment. But even those kids have to submit a score in prereads and meet a certain threshold or they will not pass, TO or not. Moreover, most of not all of the top 20ish SLACs participate in Questbridge and admit many students from “less-advantaged “ backgrounds. Plenty of pathways for kids whi didn’t “found” their own non profits.

One PP said "plenty of athletes are FG LI" and you said athletes are rich kids. Which one is true?

Regardless, you are wrong on so many levels. WASP currently only have about 8% URM or less, maybe Williams a little bit more. AND these URM are mostly rich private school kids. The real underresourced URM in public schools don't get picked up by WASP. Inner city URM for example is rarely seen in WASP.

Questbridge is far less than enough. WASP do admit 20%+ Questbridge or similar kids, but this is not the norm among T20 LACs. Many LACs pick up far less than that figure. I don't know what is the figure for Bowdoin or Middlebury (doubt it that is high), but if you go down to Washington & Lee level, the percentage is very small.

You mean Black? Definitely way more than 8% URM and Williams has never led WASP in diversity- it’s always been worse.

Swarthmore and Amherst lead in diversity, by quite a bit.

Amherst 2028 is 3% black.

That was a blip. Class of 2029 is diverse, per DC. It’s why admissions expanded FGLI to the highest level ever.

Class of 2027: 18.5% Pell grant recipient, 11% black
Class of 2028: 20% Pell grant recipient, 3% black
Increasing FGLI doesn't immediately mean more URMs. It might sound crazy but there are actually more poor white people in this country and many asian students are poor.

This isn't some blip. Amherst had a drop much more severe than its competition. It's clear that URM students were fully being boosted into the institution and were not actually qualified for admission.

+1, very disappointed with the racism here where poor-> black when there are plenty of well educated poor white students too.

[Anonymous]

It won't. They need to keep the applicants coming.

With the demographic cliff approaching...today's freshmen in HS and younger. They are going to need applicants/students.