Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate further among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

Agree ... so many of these kids test and retest, super score, study and have tutors, specialized college counselors etc. to achieve these stats.

These are bright kids, but universities cannot tell the difference between these kids and the EXCEPTIONALLY bright kids who score in the 1500-1600 first try no prep, ace AP tests with little to no prep, don't have to work that hard for a 4.0+ with max rigor at a top/competitive HS. We have a super high stats kid that read War and Peace on their own as a freshman in HS "for fun"...meanwhile you have T20s offering what basically amounts to remedial literature courses.

Grade inflation is real. TO has really affected the academic quality of students at T20.

lol let me guess. Your kid scored high on their first try on the SAT and so they are "exeptionally" bright. Because we all know that kids that take it more than once aren't. Can't make some of this stuff up.

DP. Surely you understand that there’s a significant difference between a kid who can score a 1600 with no prep and a kid who gets a 1600 after months of prep & multiple retakes and uses a superscore?

The former has demonstrated aptitude and the latter diligence and determination.

Neither is better than the other, but they certainly demonstrate different characteristics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate further among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

Agree ... so many of these kids test and retest, super score, study and have tutors, specialized college counselors etc. to achieve these stats.

These are bright kids, but universities cannot tell the difference between these kids and the EXCEPTIONALLY bright kids who score in the 1500-1600 first try no prep, ace AP tests with little to no prep, don't have to work that hard for a 4.0+ with max rigor at a top/competitive HS. We have a super high stats kid that read War and Peace on their own as a freshman in HS "for fun"...meanwhile you have T20s offering what basically amounts to remedial literature courses.

Grade inflation is real. TO has really affected the academic quality of students at T20.

lol let me guess. Your kid scored high on their first try on the SAT and so they are "exeptionally" bright. Because we all know that kids that take it more than once aren't. Can't make some of this stuff up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate further among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

Agree ... so many of these kids test and retest, super score, study and have tutors, specialized college counselors etc. to achieve these stats.

These are bright kids, but universities cannot tell the difference between these kids and the EXCEPTIONALLY bright kids who score in the 1500-1600 first try no prep, ace AP tests with little to no prep, don't have to work that hard for a 4.0+ with max rigor at a top/competitive HS. We have a super high stats kid that read War and Peace on their own as a freshman in HS "for fun"...meanwhile you have T20s offering what basically amounts to remedial literature courses.

Grade inflation is real. TO has really affected the academic quality of students at T20.

lol let me guess. Your kid scored high on their first try on the SAT and so they are "exeptionally" bright. Because we all know that kids that take it more than once aren't. Can't make some of this stuff up.

We'll never know how the PP's kid would have scored on the vintage SAT, and it's very natural for every parent to think their kid is exceptionally bright. But it is a real problem when tens of thousands of kids are all told they have "high stats" and dream of Harvard based on 1990s or 2000s profiles. Then they and their parents are disappointed or even feel cheated when they don't get accepted to their dream school. This is what creates lot of disappointment and bitterness.

You don't get to make up a game and then complain that you lost. Harvard is a college, not whatever "human merit" competition you pretend it is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate further among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

Agree ... so many of these kids test and retest, super score, study and have tutors, specialized college counselors etc. to achieve these stats.

These are bright kids, but universities cannot tell the difference between these kids and the EXCEPTIONALLY bright kids who score in the 1500-1600 first try no prep, ace AP tests with little to no prep, don't have to work that hard for a 4.0+ with max rigor at a top/competitive HS. We have a super high stats kid that read War and Peace on their own as a freshman in HS "for fun"...meanwhile you have T20s offering what basically amounts to remedial literature courses.

Grade inflation is real. TO has really affected the academic quality of students at T20.

lol let me guess. Your kid scored high on their first try on the SAT and so they are "exeptionally" bright. Because we all know that kids that take it more than once aren't. Can't make some of this stuff up.

DP. Surely you understand that there’s a significant difference between a kid who can score a 1600 with no prep and a kid who gets a 1600 after months of prep & multiple retakes and uses a superscore?

The former has demonstrated aptitude and the latter diligence and determination.

Neither is better than the other, but they certainly demonstrate different characteristics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate further among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

Agree ... so many of these kids test and retest, super score, study and have tutors, specialized college counselors etc. to achieve these stats.

These are bright kids, but universities cannot tell the difference between these kids and the EXCEPTIONALLY bright kids who score in the 1500-1600 first try no prep, ace AP tests with little to no prep, don't have to work that hard for a 4.0+ with max rigor at a top/competitive HS. We have a super high stats kid that read War and Peace on their own as a freshman in HS "for fun"...meanwhile you have T20s offering what basically amounts to remedial literature courses.

Grade inflation is real. TO has really affected the academic quality of students at T20.

lol let me guess. Your kid scored high on their first try on the SAT and so they are "exeptionally" bright. Because we all know that kids that take it more than once aren't. Can't make some of this stuff up.

We'll never know how the PP's kid would have scored on the vintage SAT, and it's very natural for every parent to think their kid is exceptionally bright. But it is a real problem when tens of thousands of kids are all told they have "high stats" and dream of Harvard based on 1990s or 2000s profiles. Then they and their parents are disappointed or even feel cheated when they don't get accepted to their dream school. This is what creates lot of disappointment and bitterness.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate futher among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

20, 30 years ago, there are rare, very rare. Nowadays it's not. So many posters in this thread responded with results of their "high stats kids" says they are not rare.

The posts in this thread would have been rare enough in the mid-90s before the SAT got recentered that they would not be anonymous.

Not only were the scores recentered, the test content itself was redesigned to make the score more responsive to studying, right? I do not remember so many repeat test takers in the 90s. There was only so much you could do to raise the verbal score because there were so many esoteric vocab words and logical analogies. People who nailed the verbal section usually benefitted the most from a lifetime of reading, not a year or two of cramming. In any case, it sure was a lot simpler to figure out a realistic college list when we were applying. Today, with so many high stats kids, the kids are frustrated because they see that Joe got into Harvard with the same SAT score as they did while they only got into their decent local safety school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate further among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

Agree ... so many of these kids test and retest, super score, study and have tutors, specialized college counselors etc. to achieve these stats.

These are bright kids, but universities cannot tell the difference between these kids and the EXCEPTIONALLY bright kids who score in the 1500-1600 first try no prep, ace AP tests with little to no prep, don't have to work that hard for a 4.0+ with max rigor at a top/competitive HS. We have a super high stats kid that read War and Peace on their own as a freshman in HS "for fun"...meanwhile you have T20s offering what basically amounts to remedial literature courses.

Grade inflation is real. TO has really affected the academic quality of students at T20.

lol let me guess. Your kid scored high on their first try on the SAT and so they are "exeptionally" bright. Because we all know that kids that take it more than once aren't. Can't make some of this stuff up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate further among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

Agree ... so many of these kids test and retest, super score, study and have tutors, specialized college counselors etc. to achieve these stats.

These are bright kids, but universities cannot tell the difference between these kids and the EXCEPTIONALLY bright kids who score in the 1500-1600 first try no prep, ace AP tests with little to no prep, don't have to work that hard for a 4.0+ with max rigor at a top/competitive HS. We have a super high stats kid that read War and Peace on their own as a freshman in HS "for fun"...meanwhile you have T20s offering what basically amounts to remedial literature courses.

Grade inflation is real. TO has really affected the academic quality of students at T20.

lol let me guess. Your kid scored high on their first try on the SAT and so they are "exeptionally" bright. Because we all know that kids that take it more than once aren't. Can't make some of this stuff up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate further among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

Agree ... so many of these kids test and retest, super score, study and have tutors, specialized college counselors etc. to achieve these stats.

These are bright kids, but universities cannot tell the difference between these kids and the EXCEPTIONALLY bright kids who score in the 1500-1600 first try no prep, ace AP tests with little to no prep, don't have to work that hard for a 4.0+ with max rigor at a top/competitive HS. We have a super high stats kid that read War and Peace on their own as a freshman in HS "for fun"...meanwhile you have T20s offering what basically amounts to remedial literature courses.

Grade inflation is real. TO has really affected the academic quality of students at T20.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate further among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

Agree ... so many of these kids test and retest, super score, study and have tutors, specialized college counselors etc. to achieve these stats.

These are bright kids, but universities cannot tell the difference between these kids and the EXCEPTIONALLY bright kids who score in the 1500-1600 first try no prep, ace AP tests with little to no prep, don't have to work that hard for a 4.0+ with max rigor at a top/competitive HS. We have a super high stats kid that read War and Peace on their own as a freshman in HS "for fun"...meanwhile you have T20s offering what basically amounts to remedial literature courses.

Grade inflation is real. TO has really affected the academic quality of students at T20.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate further among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate futher among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

20, 30 years ago, there are rare, very rare. Nowadays it's not. So many posters in this thread responded with results of their "high stats kids" says they are not rare.

The posts in this thread would have been rare enough in the mid-90s before the SAT got recentered that they would not be anonymous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate futher among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."

20, 30 years ago, there are rare, very rare. Nowadays it's not. So many posters in this thread responded with results of their "high stats kids" says they are not rare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of our frustration as parents comes from our own outdated understanding of the landscape, which is radically different today. Most of the misunderstanding probably surrounds the idea of "high stats kids" because we are using the metrics and SAT scales from the 90s. It is pretty sobering to realize that an estimated 20,000 students will score at ~1530 or above every year in one sitting (top 1%). With superscoring, that number of students will be even higher. This varies by school type, but I have also seen estimates that nearly 50% of US students will graduate high school with overall averages in the A range.

This! 1530 is the new 1400. 4.0 is the new B. The scary thing is you can't differentiate futher among the ones with 1530+ and 4.0 on numbers. It creates a delusion of "high stats kids."