Anonymous wrote:Except for a few top names, they will all move in this direction.
Our school CCs have been telling us this is where the wind was blowing for awhile. University leaders and faculty and board want this. Individual AOs were happy with TO because it made their judgment more important and gave them a lot of pride in the art of their job of picking and shaping a class. AOs liked the individual discretion, but other senior admin did not.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Look the reality is that most of our kids and most of us parents hate taking and preparing for this one-day stressful test. But it does add value. I'm happy it's becoming the norm again to mandate testing.
The schools that will use test scores as one criteria for admission already did this for decades pre-covid. So this isn't some big ideological leap. Going TO temporarily was and I think it negatively impacted college admissions process and added to anxiety and hysteria.
If anything, going test required again will bring SAT scores back down to earth. It's really hard to get a combined SAT score north of 1500 so I'll be happy when scores in the 1400's become the new standard for top schools again.
Scor3s will continue to be high due to superscoring. The digital tests are shorter so easier for kids to take multiple times.
The current SAT is too easy. They need to bring back the old test where maybe 1 kid got over a 1500 at many high schools and there was far more differentiation at the top. 1400 was Ivy level, and even a score in the 1000s meant something. But the College Board has been at the forefront of the great failed social experiment in education.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Look the reality is that most of our kids and most of us parents hate taking and preparing for this one-day stressful test. But it does add value. I'm happy it's becoming the norm again to mandate testing.
The schools that will use test scores as one criteria for admission already did this for decades pre-covid. So this isn't some big ideological leap. Going TO temporarily was and I think it negatively impacted college admissions process and added to anxiety and hysteria.
If anything, going test required again will bring SAT scores back down to earth. It's really hard to get a combined SAT score north of 1500 so I'll be happy when scores in the 1400's become the new standard for top schools again.
Scor3s will continue to be high due to superscoring. The digital tests are shorter so easier for kids to take multiple times.
The current SAT is too easy. They need to bring back the old test where maybe 1 kid got over a 1500 at many high schools and there was far more differentiation at the top. 1400 was Ivy level, and even a score in the 1000s meant something. But the College Board has been at the forefront of the great failed social experiment in education.
100% agree. I don’t find the SAT a meaningful measure of anything until it’s actually a rigorous exam.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Look the reality is that most of our kids and most of us parents hate taking and preparing for this one-day stressful test. But it does add value. I'm happy it's becoming the norm again to mandate testing.
The schools that will use test scores as one criteria for admission already did this for decades pre-covid. So this isn't some big ideological leap. Going TO temporarily was and I think it negatively impacted college admissions process and added to anxiety and hysteria.
If anything, going test required again will bring SAT scores back down to earth. It's really hard to get a combined SAT score north of 1500 so I'll be happy when scores in the 1400's become the new standard for top schools again.
Scor3s will continue to be high due to superscoring. The digital tests are shorter so easier for kids to take multiple times.
The current SAT is too easy. They need to bring back the old test where maybe 1 kid got over a 1500 at many high schools and there was far more differentiation at the top. 1400 was Ivy level, and even a score in the 1000s meant something. But the College Board has been at the forefront of the great failed social experiment in education.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Look the reality is that most of our kids and most of us parents hate taking and preparing for this one-day stressful test. But it does add value. I'm happy it's becoming the norm again to mandate testing.
The schools that will use test scores as one criteria for admission already did this for decades pre-covid. So this isn't some big ideological leap. Going TO temporarily was and I think it negatively impacted college admissions process and added to anxiety and hysteria.
If anything, going test required again will bring SAT scores back down to earth. It's really hard to get a combined SAT score north of 1500 so I'll be happy when scores in the 1400's become the new standard for top schools again.
Scor3s will continue to be high due to superscoring. The digital tests are shorter so easier for kids to take multiple times.
The current SAT is too easy. They need to bring back the old test where maybe 1 kid got over a 1500 at many high schools and there was far more differentiation at the top. 1400 was Ivy level, and even a score in the 1000s meant something. But the College Board has been at the forefront of the great failed social experiment in education.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Look the reality is that most of our kids and most of us parents hate taking and preparing for this one-day stressful test. But it does add value. I'm happy it's becoming the norm again to mandate testing.
The schools that will use test scores as one criteria for admission already did this for decades pre-covid. So this isn't some big ideological leap. Going TO temporarily was and I think it negatively impacted college admissions process and added to anxiety and hysteria.
If anything, going test required again will bring SAT scores back down to earth. It's really hard to get a combined SAT score north of 1500 so I'll be happy when scores in the 1400's become the new standard for top schools again.
Scor3s will continue to be high due to superscoring. The digital tests are shorter so easier for kids to take multiple times.
Anonymous wrote:
The University reviewed data from five years of test-optional admissions and “found that academic performance at Princeton was stronger for students who chose to submit test scores than for students who did not,” the announcement said.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Except for a few top names, they will all move in this direction.
Our school CCs have been telling us this is where the wind was blowing for awhile. University leaders and faculty and board want this. Individual AOs were happy with TO because it made their judgment more important and gave them a lot of pride in the art of their job of picking and shaping a class. AOs liked the individual discretion, but other senior admin did not.
Chicago, Columbia, and Vandy will stick to TO.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The digital test is less consistent than the paper one. So yes, multiple retakes are more beneficial than they were only a few years ago. With the paper test, scores went up over time due to an increase in academic skills. With the digital test, that can happen too, or maybe you get a lower score than a year before. There is a lot of luck in what questions you get on test day and either the equating process doesn't seem to be accurately capturing weight/difficulty or the adaptive nature of which section 2 one gets is way off.
This has certainly been our experience. Every test is different, some are harder, some easier.
Anonymous wrote:
The University reviewed data from five years of test-optional admissions and “found that academic performance at Princeton was stronger for students who chose to submit test scores than for students who did not,” the announcement said.
Anonymous wrote:
The University reviewed data from five years of test-optional admissions and “found that academic performance at Princeton was stronger for students who chose to submit test scores than for students who did not,” the announcement said.
Anonymous wrote:If top LACs want to be given the same gravitas and seen as credible places to attract top student communities (similar to Ivies), they will also move to test required like Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Brown etc.
Otherwise, all the poor scoring students with inflated 4.0 GPAs will flock to LACs to hide.
Anonymous wrote:The digital test is less consistent than the paper one. So yes, multiple retakes are more beneficial than they were only a few years ago. With the paper test, scores went up over time due to an increase in academic skills. With the digital test, that can happen too, or maybe you get a lower score than a year before. There is a lot of luck in what questions you get on test day and either the equating process doesn't seem to be accurately capturing weight/difficulty or the adaptive nature of which section 2 one gets is way off.