I don’t know why it is. If you’re poor and can’t get a 1400, you’re going to struggle much more than a rich kid who can’t get a 1400. They’re literally setting up these kids for failure, or, at best, mediocrity that’ll isolate them from their peers. Everyone should be held to the same standard; there are so many low income children who excel academically and deserve a chance over their less talented peers

Anonymous wrote:Almost every school my child applied to says they’re genuinely Test Optional. I believe them.

Let us know how that works out.

Almost every school my child applied to says they’re genuinely Test Optional. I believe them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feeder school, rich privileged kids, school traditionally sent TO kids there, humanities major, one of the ED rounds.

Yes, agree that these kids make up most of the TO pool at the true TO schools. I posted earlier about my TO kid.

- ED (deferred) but also admitted in RD to other T20.
- Feeder private (non-DMV), where most kids submit scores.
- Niche humanities major.
- The "special" was the national awards.

Are you from California? Schools much more willing to accept TO from California since state options are test blind.

No

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feeder school, rich privileged kids, school traditionally sent TO kids there, humanities major, one of the ED rounds.

Yes, agree that these kids make up most of the TO pool at the true TO schools. I posted earlier about my TO kid.

- ED (deferred) but also admitted in RD to other T20.
- Feeder private (non-DMV), where most kids submit scores.
- Niche humanities major.
- The "special" was the national awards.

Are you from California? Schools much more willing to accept TO from California since state options are test blind.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]When schools say they are TO, isn’t that just to leave the door open for students who haven’t had access to test prep and testing opportunities? I’ve always thought it wasn’t really meant for kids in wealthy school districts, even though there is much mention of TO here. I fear that if my lower/average scoring kid from a wealthy area does TO, they just won’t be considered at all. Any real information about this? Thanks[/quote]

By the population of who gets accepted TO based on raw numbers, most are UMC white kids. Vanderbilt is a prime example.

URMs aren't accepted in high percentages at the selective colleges, so obviously lower TO acceptances overall.

Don't believe the TO = URM myth.

[/quote]

Based entirely on your own opinion. Fact— every top school started bragging about “record” enrollment of minorities, low income, and first gen after adoption of test optional.

Most schools outside of the top 60 or 100 don’t care about test scores as long as you can pay the tuition bill.

Anonymous wrote:Feeder school, rich privileged kids, school traditionally sent TO kids there, humanities major, one of the ED rounds.

Yes, agree that these kids make up most of the TO pool at the true TO schools. I posted earlier about my TO kid.

- ED (deferred) but also admitted in RD to other T20.
- Feeder private (non-DMV), where most kids submit scores.
- Niche humanities major.
- The "special" was the national awards.

Anonymous wrote:When schools say they are TO, isn’t that just to leave the door open for students who haven’t had access to test prep and testing opportunities? I’ve always thought it wasn’t really meant for kids in wealthy school districts, even though there is much mention of TO here. I fear that if my lower/average scoring kid from a wealthy area does TO, they just won’t be considered at all. Any real information about this? Thanks

By the population of who gets accepted TO based on raw numbers, most are UMC white kids. Vanderbilt is a prime example.

URMs aren't accepted in high percentages at the selective colleges, so obviously lower TO acceptances overall.

Don't believe the TO = URM myth.