The SAT has become a shell of what it once was, and in many ways has lost its purpose. When originally introduced it identified really bright kids no matter where they lived.

Get a 1500 in the 70s and you were a standout, get a 1200 and you were more than ready for any college in America.

But just like the rampant grade inflation the test has been re-baselined to become almost meaningless. Add on the test prep industry and once sought after scores are at the lower end of acceptable.

Some kids do well on standardized tests, some don’t. College is/was the new high school. Too early to tell how changes in loan programs, the potential elimination of the Department of Education and a slow steady decline in population will impact the college landscape over the next decade or two. But those kids with grit, determination, and resilience will find a way to succeed irrespective of their SAT score.

Anonymous wrote:1350 is 90th percentile. Don't think you need to be worried about kids with SATs above 1300 lol.

Really? The test is much easier now. These scores aren't very high for kids that have been on an honors track. My kids school has no homework and with a little prep most kids do this well easily if they've taken Algebra II. A lot of kids don't go to college. It's not the 90th percentile among college students.

My daughter didn’t even submit her SATs because it wasn’t required at her school (Berkeley). She did take the pre-SATs and I believe she scored a 1350 or something.

She just graduated with a degree in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. She also just got a full time offer as a software developer for a FAANG.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously this one brought out the insecure TO lying moms. No, your kid isn't at Stanford, they're at UMBC and struggling. 🙄

Of course these kids are doing well. Schools like Stanford have been graduating sub-1400 athletes and donor-class kids all along. Remember that even under test-mandatory they reported the 25th percentile mark, not the minimum.

What? No. Some student simply don’t test well. They can still succeed in a T30 college. DCUM is so weird.

My son took the SAT once and got a 1230. Attends Franklin and Marshall after applying TO. STEM major. Doing great.

It all depends on the student.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all are just spinning your wheels. There are people who barely broke 1000 on the SAT occupying the same jobs and getting the same salaries as those with higher scores and Ivy League degrees.

The SAT should be abolished altogether. All the practice and tutoring just teaches toward the test, and whether you do well or not has no weight on how well you will do in life or how intelligent you are either. In the end, it all evens out. The race to the top just to be able to signal who has bigger bragging potential is a waste of time. The world has big problems to solve, and if all you care about is a big number that you think determines how well you will do in life, then you have a big reality check coming for you. Most people succeed due to luck, grit, perseverance, how well they marry, family support, being in the right place, right time, etc. not because of a test.

The SAT did a fantastic job in identifying high performing, high aptitude kids languishing in nowheresville. That was before it was dumbed down and rescored to become effectively meaningless. And there was (before all the dumbing down) a big overlap between SAT performance and financial outcome in life. Because higher aptitude people do better. They always have. 20 years ago the college forums were all about how someone with a 1400 SAT score (circa 2000) would have the same life outcome regardless of whether he or she went to Columbia or University of Maryland. But pretending a 1500 SAT scorer today is no smarter or not likely to have a better life outcome than a 1100 scorer is delusional.

It's largely still the same today. Stem heavy colleges such as MIT, Georgia Tech, Harvey Mudd, CMU produce really high income graduates, in some cases higher than Ivy League graduates. The stem heavy colleges or stem-heavy major in other colleges typically require a high test score, e.g., 1500+ or even 1550+. So you see, a high test score might not get you in an Ivy League, but it typically guarantees a high income. The correlation between the two is particularly strong.

Anonymous wrote:You all are just spinning your wheels. There are people who barely broke 1000 on the SAT occupying the same jobs and getting the same salaries as those with higher scores and Ivy League degrees.

The SAT should be abolished altogether. All the practice and tutoring just teaches toward the test, and whether you do well or not has no weight on how well you will do in life or how intelligent you are either. In the end, it all evens out. The race to the top just to be able to signal who has bigger bragging potential is a waste of time. The world has big problems to solve, and if all you care about is a big number that you think determines how well you will do in life, then you have a big reality check coming for you. Most people succeed due to luck, grit, perseverance, how well they marry, family support, being in the right place, right time, etc. not because of a test.

No one is claiming it “determines how well you do in life.”

False argument

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all are just spinning your wheels. There are people who barely broke 1000 on the SAT occupying the same jobs and getting the same salaries as those with higher scores and Ivy League degrees.

The SAT should be abolished altogether. All the practice and tutoring just teaches toward the test, and whether you do well or not has no weight on how well you will do in life or how intelligent you are either. In the end, it all evens out. The race to the top just to be able to signal who has bigger bragging potential is a waste of time. The world has big problems to solve, and if all you care about is a big number that you think determines how well you will do in life, then you have a big reality check coming for you. Most people succeed due to luck, grit, perseverance, how well they marry, family support, being in the right place, right time, etc. not because of a test.

The SAT did a fantastic job in identifying high performing, high aptitude kids languishing in nowheresville. That was before it was dumbed down and rescored to become effectively meaningless. And there was (before all the dumbing down) a big overlap between SAT performance and financial outcome in life. Because higher aptitude people do better. They always have. 20 years ago the college forums were all about how someone with a 1400 SAT score (circa 2000) would have the same life outcome regardless of whether he or she went to Columbia or University of Maryland. But pretending a 1500 SAT scorer today is no smarter or not likely to have a better life outcome than a 1100 scorer is delusional.

The delusion is that a 1500 will always have a better life outcome. It simply has never been true even to this day. Think of your logic and also take a hard look at who lives around your neighborhood and who works at your employer. You’ve all arrived at the same place regardless of your path or SAT score, or Ivy or not that you attended. My upper class NW DC neighborhood has successful people from all walks of life and many are without the pedigree being peddled here. My neighbors both admitted that they essentially bombed on the SAT and yet they live in million dollar mansions and earn hearty six figure salaries. So no, the SAT has no bearing whatsoever about how well your life will turn out. There are so many other life factors that will determine whether your kid will succeed or not.

Agree 1,000 percent. And again, the SAT is not a measure of intelligence either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all are just spinning your wheels. There are people who barely broke 1000 on the SAT occupying the same jobs and getting the same salaries as those with higher scores and Ivy League degrees.

The SAT should be abolished altogether. All the practice and tutoring just teaches toward the test, and whether you do well or not has no weight on how well you will do in life or how intelligent you are either. In the end, it all evens out. The race to the top just to be able to signal who has bigger bragging potential is a waste of time. The world has big problems to solve, and if all you care about is a big number that you think determines how well you will do in life, then you have a big reality check coming for you. Most people succeed due to luck, grit, perseverance, how well they marry, family support, being in the right place, right time, etc. not because of a test.

The SAT did a fantastic job in identifying high performing, high aptitude kids languishing in nowheresville. That was before it was dumbed down and rescored to become effectively meaningless. And there was (before all the dumbing down) a big overlap between SAT performance and financial outcome in life. Because higher aptitude people do better. They always have. 20 years ago the college forums were all about how someone with a 1400 SAT score (circa 2000) would have the same life outcome regardless of whether he or she went to Columbia or University of Maryland. But pretending a 1500 SAT scorer today is no smarter or not likely to have a better life outcome than a 1100 scorer is delusional.

The delusion is that a 1500 will always have a better life outcome. It simply has never been true even to this day. Think of your logic and also take a hard look at who lives around your neighborhood and who works at your employer. You’ve all arrived at the same place regardless of your path or SAT score, or Ivy or not that you attended. My upper class NW DC neighborhood has successful people from all walks of life and many are without the pedigree being peddled here. My neighbors both admitted that they essentially bombed on the SAT and yet they live in million dollar mansions and earn hearty six figure salaries. So no, the SAT has no bearing whatsoever about how well your life will turn out. There are so many other life factors that will determine whether your kid will succeed or not.

Anonymous wrote:You all are just spinning your wheels. There are people who barely broke 1000 on the SAT occupying the same jobs and getting the same salaries as those with higher scores and Ivy League degrees.

The SAT should be abolished altogether. All the practice and tutoring just teaches toward the test, and whether you do well or not has no weight on how well you will do in life or how intelligent you are either. In the end, it all evens out. The race to the top just to be able to signal who has bigger bragging potential is a waste of time. The world has big problems to solve, and if all you care about is a big number that you think determines how well you will do in life, then you have a big reality check coming for you. Most people succeed due to luck, grit, perseverance, how well they marry, family support, being in the right place, right time, etc. not because of a test.

The SAT did a fantastic job in identifying high performing, high aptitude kids languishing in nowheresville. That was before it was dumbed down and rescored to become effectively meaningless. And there was (before all the dumbing down) a big overlap between SAT performance and financial outcome in life. Because higher aptitude people do better. They always have. 20 years ago the college forums were all about how someone with a 1400 SAT score (circa 2000) would have the same life outcome regardless of whether he or she went to Columbia or University of Maryland. But pretending a 1500 SAT scorer today is no smarter or not likely to have a better life outcome than a 1100 scorer is delusional.

You all are just spinning your wheels. There are people who barely broke 1000 on the SAT occupying the same jobs and getting the same salaries as those with higher scores and Ivy League degrees.

The SAT should be abolished altogether. All the practice and tutoring just teaches toward the test, and whether you do well or not has no weight on how well you will do in life or how intelligent you are either. In the end, it all evens out. The race to the top just to be able to signal who has bigger bragging potential is a waste of time. The world has big problems to solve, and if all you care about is a big number that you think determines how well you will do in life, then you have a big reality check coming for you. Most people succeed due to luck, grit, perseverance, how well they marry, family support, being in the right place, right time, etc. not because of a test.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The test doesn't matter" folks are out in force here. As far as I know, the University of Texas is the only school that has released data on the performance of test optional students, and they did not do "fine." There's a reason most top schools have gone back to test required. Performance on standardized tests are still the most accurate predictor of college readiness.

https://news.utexas.edu/2024/03/11/ut-austin-reinstates-standardized-test-scores-in-admissions/

The higher standardized scores translated on average to better collegiate academic performance. Of 9,217 first-year students enrolled in 2023, those who opted in had an estimated average GPA of 0.86 grade points higher during their first fall semester, controlling for a wide range of factors, including high school class rank and GPA. Those same students were estimated to be 55% less likely to have a first semester college GPA of less than 2.0, all else equal.

I wouldn't dispute their data but other demanding schools have had different results. The biggest thing to remember, though, is that TO could encompass a huge range of scores. OP asked about kids below 1400, which can include a lot of kids in the 1200-1400 range. I'm guessing most of those kids are doing well in college. Mine is. But I will concede that TO kids who scored below 1100 may be struggling more at really demanding schools. We just don't have enough data to know the range of possibilities so we go with our personal experience (which is what OP asked about originally).

According to the Texas release linked above:

“Those who opted in had a median SAT score of 1420, compared with a median of 1160 among those who did not.”

So, half of non-submitters were above 1160 (so above roughly 1200).

Do you have links to data on other schools that have better results? As far as I know, Texas is the only school that released data, but I have been following this closely lately.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SAT doesn’t really relate to performance in class. Colleges exams aren’t like the SAT.

There is no better predicter of college grades than standardized test scores.

Grades are so inflated that it stops being meaningful.

San Francisco school district will give F students a C, and give B students an A.

https://www.newsweek.com/san-francisco-public-schools-equity-homework-2078003" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.newsweek.com/san-francisco-public-schools-equity-homework-2078003

They called it off.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SAT doesn’t really relate to performance in class. Colleges exams aren’t like the SAT.

There is no better predicter of college grades than standardized test scores.

Grades are so inflated that it stops being meaningful.

San Francisco school district will give F students a C, and give B students an A.

https://www.newsweek.com/san-francisco-public-schools-equity-homework-2078003" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.newsweek.com/san-francisco-public-schools-equity-homework-2078003

Anonymous wrote:Colleges evaluate students in the context of high school. Not in the context of tens of thousands of applicants.

Test required vs test optional is extremely meaningful for top students in a SINGLE high school.

UPenn for example admits five students from one high school each year. When it’s test optional, 4 out of five admits are dei admits with scores as low as 1300. When it’s test required, low scorers don’t even apply to UPenn, students with 1550 score applied.

Cool story bro.