Reply to Are colleges secretly factoring test scores into decisions for test-optional applicants?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Are colleges secretly factoring test scores into decisions for test-optional applicants?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]But doesn't it also depend on the school?  For example, if you're at a DMV private do you want to be the applicant who has no test score?  That's what I'd be worried about.  [/quote]

My kid went TO and got in everywhere. Most of the schools he applied to have been TO for years. People just need to stop applying to so many reach schools. Do you homework so your kid will have plenty of choices that they actually like. [/quote]

But where [/quote]

Not PP, but my white DC was accepted at Northwestern TO from a DMV private. Sibling attending a Top 20 school also TO (I'm not saying where for anonymity purposes). I'm starting to wonder if all of these anti-TO posts are from the College Board and tutoring companies that have a vested interest in testing. [/quote]

It’s definitely not the CB; I see these sentiments everywhere. I think a lot of parents are having a really hard time understanding what holistic admissions means and why test scores are no more or less important than many other factors an applicant presents. Our generation (parents) were raised to believe that a high SAT/ACT score = objective measure of intelligence, and it’s really hard to convince them that it’s just a three-hour test. Why should that three hour test count for more than a single three-hour AP exam, for example? Why should that three-hour test count for more than a recommendation from a teacher who has observed a kid every day for a year? Why should the absence of that three-hour test matter more than strong rigor/grades + ECs + recs + service?

A strong test score is a single factor that some kids will have and some kids won’t, just as some kids will have strong leadership and some won’t. The combination of factors is what matters. But I really do think parents cannot get past that old conception of the SAT/ACT that we grew up with and see it as somehow more important than other elements. It’s a very widespread belief, as every conversation about it on DCUM makes clear.[/quote]

Except you have Presidents of Ivies, MIT, etc., coming out this year with data saying that Test scores are the single most predictive indicator of success in college.  Collected data over the past 4-5 years.[/quote]

Sure, a few are saying this. And plenty of tippy top schools—e.g. Amherst, Bowdoin, Pomona—are enrolling classes where the majority did not submit test scores. My personal suspicion is that the Ivies are so swamped with applications that they want the SAT/ACT as a sorting mechanism.

Regardless, the predictive power a few Ivy presidents are alluding to is not being seen at far more, equally selective and rigorous schools. Why is that?[/quote]

Bowdoin, like Wake Forest, has been test optional for a few decades.  The California schools tend to take a lot of test optional because of the declining number of students  in CA taking standardized tests due to the California public colleges going test blind.  But at most other schools, the percentage of kids admitted test optional is not greater than the percentage of kids who are institutional priorities.[/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