Reply to Harvard will require Test Scores starting next year

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Harvard will require Test Scores starting next year"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Indeed.

Some posters on here were very confident that Yale and Brown and Dartmouth resuming testing requirements were the exceptions.

Pretty clear by now that test optional admits had not very good outcomes. [/quote]

😅😅😅😆 painfully clear [/quote]

Yeahm but again, not for the reasons you want to believe. Take Dartmouth for example: "Yes. For the Classes of 2025, ’26 and ’27, we were optional, and the language for everybody was “Access to testing remains uneven, so include testing or not as your situation allows.” And what started to happen in the third year is we started hearing [b]from [high] school counselors that most of the students in their class had access to testing again, but now the question had shifted to, “Should I or should I not include my scores?[/b]” Which for us was never really the point of the pause. That was a public health stance, not a critique of testing."

Oh and newsflash...a huge reason is that they weren't getting a diverse application pool and class:

" The finding [in the Dartmouth study] that I found most provocative when I first read it was the point that testing expands access.[...]
But as an admission officer for the last 30 years, it’s been striking to see the differences between different high schools and the way education in the United States is not equal as you move from town to town, never mind state to state. So we’re looking at testing as a reflection of that K-12 disequilibrium. We’re not saying it’s not capturing it, but contextually we’re able to say[b], “What does this score tell us about the place where it was generated, the neighborhood where the student is?” How do we use them to meet you where you are?[/b] As you move across this country, this heterogeneous landscape, it starts to mitigate some of the critique that testing favors the wealthy. It does, but only if you define high and low scores in a strict spectrum. [b]In some places, a 1700 is not high[/b]; in some places, it’s lower than the norm. And in other places, it’s remarkably high. And that’s also true for 1200:[b] there are places where that 1200 is unheard-o[/b]f and others where that 1200 would be at the end of the data distribution."

So sorry...your 1600 DC kid may likely still get beat out by a 1300 kid in bumplepoop nowhere.
Them's the breaks, my friend.[/quote]

A kid with a 1200 should not be going to an IVY at all. That’s an embarrassingly low test score for these institutions. They are frankly not smart enough to attend unless they study an easy major. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics