Anonymous wrote:
Colleges know that students who have worked their asses off for four years and built stellar portfolio of superior AP scores, near perfect GPA & diverse ECs, ... would have to be nuts to stop themselves from taking SAT/ACT.

"Diverse ECs" isn't a sign of a A-list student.

Anonymous wrote:
Colleges know that students who have worked their asses off for four years and built stellar portfolio of superior AP scores, near perfect GPA & diverse ECs, ... would have to be nuts to stop themselves from taking SAT/ACT.

They also know that you can't even handle the little test. Big anomaly.

They know you aren’t smart, but they will admit you anyway if you fill a need.

Colleges know that students who have worked their asses off for four years and built stellar portfolio of superior AP scores, near perfect GPA & diverse ECs, ... would have to be nuts to stop themselves from taking SAT/ACT.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

I think it’s better to be TO at a private - bc they know the grades mean something….

NP: I know two UMC kids from a private that got into Brown and Dartmouth TO (no hooks).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TO has to be TO, at least for this year, based on the admissions this fall/winter. It has seemed like anything submitted under a 1550 is considered worse than TO, both for admission and for merit awards/honors colleges. My daughter has friends that have gotten in TO to Yale, Brown, Michigan, Vanderbilt, Duke, Northwestern, Bowdoin, and Notre Dame and that’s just off the top of my head. So hard to know how to proceed with a current junior.

And let me guess: most of them are not URMs.

The contrived TO = URM myth is perhaps dispelled in your sample size?

I know both white and URM.

Anonymous wrote:TO has to be TO, at least for this year, based on the admissions this fall/winter. It has seemed like anything submitted under a 1550 is considered worse than TO, both for admission and for merit awards/honors colleges. My daughter has friends that have gotten in TO to Yale, Brown, Michigan, Vanderbilt, Duke, Northwestern, Bowdoin, and Notre Dame and that’s just off the top of my head. So hard to know how to proceed with a current junior.

And let me guess: most of them are not URMs.

The contrived TO = URM myth is perhaps dispelled in your sample size?

Anonymous wrote:That doesn't mean it doesn't give them a negative impression of your general intelligence and educational level, or whatever it is they usually use the test to gauge.

You are reading into something that’s not there.

Anonymous wrote:TO has to be TO, at least for this year, based on the admissions this fall/winter. It has seemed like anything submitted under a 1550 is considered worse than TO, both for admission and for merit awards/honors colleges. My daughter has friends that have gotten in TO to Yale, Brown, Michigan, Vanderbilt, Duke, Northwestern, Bowdoin, and Notre Dame and that’s just off the top of my head. So hard to know how to proceed with a current junior.

Agree. We know TO to Vanderbilt, Yale, Northwestern and Michigan.

Your daughter’s friends have gotten into those schools TO?

Anonymous wrote: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.

I think it’s better to be TO at a private - bc they know the grades mean something….

TO has to be TO, at least for this year, based on the admissions this fall/winter. It has seemed like anything submitted under a 1550 is considered worse than TO, both for admission and for merit awards/honors colleges. My daughter has friends that have gotten in TO to Yale, Brown, Michigan, Vanderbilt, Duke, Northwestern, Bowdoin, and Notre Dame and that’s just off the top of my head. So hard to know how to proceed with a current junior.

That doesn't mean it doesn't give them a negative impression of your general intelligence and educational level, or whatever it is they usually use the test to gauge.

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.

Your College Bound Kid episode 398

https://yourcollegeboundkid.com/2024/01/22/ycbk-398-are-colleges-secretly-factoring-test-scores-into-decisions-for-test-optional-applicants/

The discussion is from 10:00 to 21:30 in the podcast.

They discussed whether colleges impute a low score (eg, sub 25th percentile) to a kid who does not submit a score. They interviewed some directors of admissions. The answer was no, colleges are not doing this. The general logic was that this would create more work for AOs, expose the college to liability, and most importantly, they don't need test scores (even invented ones) to make decisions.

I know there are plenty of people on here who think "TO is not really TO especially for white and Asian kids" but here's a datapoint saying yes, TO is really TO.