Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if forced to choose, college professors would rather teach high SAT/low GPA kids than low SAT/ high GPA kids.

I wonder why that is?

Because ...

Based on data compiled across 139 colleges in 2023, these graphs show the percentage of students expected to be in the top 1% of income earners based on their career status at age 25. As you can see, higher standardized test scores (left graph) correlate very well with future economic success; one’s High School GPA (right graph) shows no such correlation, and instead is consistent with a flat, uncorrelated distribution.

Professors themselves are very, very far from being in the top 1% of income earners. Bet a lot of them would prefer the high GPA/low SAT students.

NP no way. that's either grade inflation or just a not great school. You think they really love those kids with an A+ in Calc BC and a 3 on the AP exam. Nope

What about an A in Calc AB, a 4 on the exam, and a 630 on the math portion of the SAT? For a kid who doesn’t ever plan on taking another math course in their life?

Not everyone is an engineering or CS major, but they all have to perform on this same test. Even the Ivies educate artists and musicians and philosophers and all sorts of other multifaceted individuals whose contributions can’t be measured by a standardized test.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if forced to choose, college professors would rather teach high SAT/low GPA kids than low SAT/ high GPA kids.

I wonder why that is?

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

"Students with higher SAT/ACT scores are more likely to have higher college GPAs than their peers with lower scores"

"high school GPA does little to predict academic success in college."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if forced to choose, college professors would rather teach high SAT/low GPA kids than low SAT/ high GPA kids.

I wonder why that is?

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

"Students with higher SAT/ACT scores are more likely to have higher college GPAs than their peers with lower scores"

"high school GPA does little to predict academic success in college."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread seems to have a lot of "perfect GPA/ high rigor" kids who are surprised their kids are scoring in the 1300-1400 range (still a great score)!

I think what this shows is that grading standards at high schools (especially public ones) have become so inflated that GPA is a barely meaningful metric any more. Also demonstrates the folly of test optional policies.

Every high school is different. Every kid is different. Test scores should not be dispositive in the admissions context, but it is undeniably useful to have a single uniform and unbiased metric for all kids in the admissions pool (if only to normalize the wildly different quality and grading standards across high schools).

It's also helpful for students to understand their own strengths and weaknesses.

Another +1

In our school (a top private outside DMV), it’s quite common for a junior to get 1470-1550 in their first try, some after trying in 10th grade and getting 1430+, yet none of these kids has ever experienced a 4.0 in their life. They often have 3.7-3.85 GPAs. And before anyone says they must have tests prep tutors to achieve those high SATs, I can tell you our DCs didn’t and you have to then also ask why couldn’t those same tutors help them get the elusive 4.0.

I think schools that inflate GPAs have shot themselves in the foot because they invite college admissions to question the rigor of their curriculum. And when a school sends in 60 applications same year all with indistinguishable 4.0, top rigor, multiple club leaderships and school awards, the easiest way for admissions officers is to reject all of them.

Last year, 5 kids out of 110 in our school cracked 3.9 for their GPA; they all got into HYPMS, as did some with 3.85-3.89.

So what you’re saying is that greater wealth equates to greater test scores? And this is surprising how exactly?

you're reading comp is failing you. they're saying your test scores are meaningful and those 4.0s are not. half of all US high school grads have a 4.0 now.

Anonymous wrote:I think if forced to choose, college professors would rather teach high SAT/low GPA kids than low SAT/ high GPA kids.

I wonder why that is?

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread seems to have a lot of "perfect GPA/ high rigor" kids who are surprised their kids are scoring in the 1300-1400 range (still a great score)!

I think what this shows is that grading standards at high schools (especially public ones) have become so inflated that GPA is a barely meaningful metric any more. Also demonstrates the folly of test optional policies.

Every high school is different. Every kid is different. Test scores should not be dispositive in the admissions context, but it is undeniably useful to have a single uniform and unbiased metric for all kids in the admissions pool (if only to normalize the wildly different quality and grading standards across high schools).

It's also helpful for students to understand their own strengths and weaknesses.

Another +1

In our school (a top private outside DMV), it’s quite common for a junior to get 1470-1550 in their first try, some after trying in 10th grade and getting 1430+, yet none of these kids has ever experienced a 4.0 in their life. They often have 3.7-3.85 GPAs. And before anyone says they must have tests prep tutors to achieve those high SATs, I can tell you our DCs didn’t and you have to then also ask why couldn’t those same tutors help them get the elusive 4.0.

I think schools that inflate GPAs have shot themselves in the foot because they invite college admissions to question the rigor of their curriculum. And when a school sends in 60 applications same year all with indistinguishable 4.0, top rigor, multiple club leaderships and school awards, the easiest way for admissions officers is to reject all of them.

Last year, 5 kids out of 110 in our school cracked 3.9 for their GPA; they all got into HYPMS, as did some with 3.85-3.89.

So what you’re saying is that greater wealth equates to greater test scores? And this is surprising how exactly?

Yep. My two kids were in private NYC schools. 3.8ish GPAs and 1540 and 1550 test scores. Both at top 10 colleges

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if forced to choose, college professors would rather teach high SAT/low GPA kids than low SAT/ high GPA kids.

I wonder why that is?

Because ...

Based on data compiled across 139 colleges in 2023, these graphs show the percentage of students expected to be in the top 1% of income earners based on their career status at age 25. As you can see, higher standardized test scores (left graph) correlate very well with future economic success; one’s High School GPA (right graph) shows no such correlation, and instead is consistent with a flat, uncorrelated distribution.

Professors themselves are very, very far from being in the top 1% of income earners. Bet a lot of them would prefer the high GPA/low SAT students.

NP no way. that's either grade inflation or just a not great school. You think they really love those kids with an A+ in Calc BC and a 3 on the AP exam. Nope

LOL

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread seems to have a lot of "perfect GPA/ high rigor" kids who are surprised their kids are scoring in the 1300-1400 range (still a great score)!

I think what this shows is that grading standards at high schools (especially public ones) have become so inflated that GPA is a barely meaningful metric any more. Also demonstrates the folly of test optional policies.

Every high school is different. Every kid is different. Test scores should not be dispositive in the admissions context, but it is undeniably useful to have a single uniform and unbiased metric for all kids in the admissions pool (if only to normalize the wildly different quality and grading standards across high schools).

It's also helpful for students to understand their own strengths and weaknesses.

Another +1

In our school (a top private outside DMV), it’s quite common for a junior to get 1470-1550 in their first try, some after trying in 10th grade and getting 1430+, yet none of these kids has ever experienced a 4.0 in their life. They often have 3.7-3.85 GPAs. And before anyone says they must have tests prep tutors to achieve those high SATs, I can tell you our DCs didn’t and you have to then also ask why couldn’t those same tutors help them get the elusive 4.0.

I think schools that inflate GPAs have shot themselves in the foot because they invite college admissions to question the rigor of their curriculum. And when a school sends in 60 applications same year all with indistinguishable 4.0, top rigor, multiple club leaderships and school awards, the easiest way for admissions officers is to reject all of them.

Last year, 5 kids out of 110 in our school cracked 3.9 for their GPA; they all got into HYPMS, as did some with 3.85-3.89.

So what you’re saying is that greater wealth equates to greater test scores? And this is surprising how exactly?

Anonymous wrote:This thread seems to have a lot of "perfect GPA/ high rigor" kids who are surprised their kids are scoring in the 1300-1400 range (still a great score)!

I think what this shows is that grading standards at high schools (especially public ones) have become so inflated that GPA is a barely meaningful metric any more. Also demonstrates the folly of test optional policies.

Every high school is different. Every kid is different. Test scores should not be dispositive in the admissions context, but it is undeniably useful to have a single uniform and unbiased metric for all kids in the admissions pool (if only to normalize the wildly different quality and grading standards across high schools).

It's also helpful for students to understand their own strengths and weaknesses.

Another +1

In our school (a top private outside DMV), it’s quite common for a junior to get 1470-1550 in their first try, some after trying in 10th grade and getting 1430+, yet none of these kids has ever experienced a 4.0 in their life. They often have 3.7-3.85 GPAs. And before anyone says they must have tests prep tutors to achieve those high SATs, I can tell you our DCs didn’t and you have to then also ask why couldn’t those same tutors help them get the elusive 4.0.

I think schools that inflate GPAs have shot themselves in the foot because they invite college admissions to question the rigor of their curriculum. And when a school sends in 60 applications same year all with indistinguishable 4.0, top rigor, multiple club leaderships and school awards, the easiest way for admissions officers is to reject all of them.

Last year, 5 kids out of 110 in our school cracked 3.9 for their GPA; they all got into HYPMS, as did some with 3.85-3.89.

Anonymous wrote:Colleges will soon lower expectations. You can't want test scores and want students to apply when the test is unpredictable. My 1480 kid is in 97 percentile. I love my DS and his name is not test score. Any school that cannot take him can leave him alone. I can't give myself and DS anxiety because of SAT. I will take him out for exceptional performance. This score is exceptional to me. Any school that takes him is the best. Lol

It's 97%. Of course it's exceptional.

Send it in everywhere.

We have to - at the same time - realize there may be 10 or 15 colleges and universities out of 4000+ that really do admit the 99%ers. And that's okay too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if forced to choose, college professors would rather teach high SAT/low GPA kids than low SAT/ high GPA kids.

I wonder why that is?

Because ...

Based on data compiled across 139 colleges in 2023, these graphs show the percentage of students expected to be in the top 1% of income earners based on their career status at age 25. As you can see, higher standardized test scores (left graph) correlate very well with future economic success; one’s High School GPA (right graph) shows no such correlation, and instead is consistent with a flat, uncorrelated distribution.

Professors themselves are very, very far from being in the top 1% of income earners. Bet a lot of them would prefer the high GPA/low SAT students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It seems that the August test was a particularly difficult one. Does this mean that September and October upcoming are likely to be a little easier overall?

I thought they were supposed to adjust the scores to account for the variance in difficulty of the test. Is that not the case?

It is supposed to be the case, though that is more complicated now that different questions have different weights. It shouldn't be the case that some students end up having large point drops (>60 pts) from test to test, with months of prep in between.

Forgot to add, there are examples on reddit of students whose scores dropped.

yes, going back to the beginning of reddit. scores have always dropped.

Colleges will soon lower expectations. You can't want test scores and want students to apply when the test is unpredictable. My 1480 kid is in 97 percentile. I love my DS and his name is not test score. Any school that cannot take him can leave him alone. I can't give myself and DS anxiety because of SAT. I will take him out for exceptional performance. This score is exceptional to me. Any school that takes him is the best. Lol

Anonymous wrote:I think if forced to choose, college professors would rather teach high SAT/low GPA kids than low SAT/ high GPA kids.

I wonder why that is?

Because ...

Based on data compiled across 139 colleges in 2023, these graphs show the percentage of students expected to be in the top 1% of income earners based on their career status at age 25. As you can see, higher standardized test scores (left graph) correlate very well with future economic success; one’s High School GPA (right graph) shows no such correlation, and instead is consistent with a flat, uncorrelated distribution.