Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all missing the point - it’s for athletic admits

No, it isn't. The Academic Index system always allowed them to admit athletes with lower SAT scores, even under test-required. That's why it hasn't been an impediment for the Ivies that have gone back to requiring tests.

It's for FGLI and URM. Princeton is uniquely focused among the top schools on getting FGLI and URM students, and TO enables them to do so without having to worry about the data showing that the scoring profile of such students is much lower.

If that is an important mission for the school and they are serious about achieving it, good for them. If you are against supporting FGLI or URM students, then Princeton does not seem like a good fit for you.

It’s not good that Princeton is now basically closed to unhooked, very high-achieving white MC and UMC kids with great test scores. It’s why folks like Rufo are going after the school and most of America won’t care if it gets taxed into oblivion.

So, you are assuming that the URMs at Princeton don't have great test scores. My URM child who is an engineering major at Princeton scored 1590 (800 Math) on his SAT and 5s on all of his 15 AP exams. My child took Differential Equations and Linear Algebra and received As from both courses during his senior year of high school. During high school he won national awards in history, science, math, engineering, and music.

All of the URMs that I know at Princeton especially those in STEM are high achieving students. The curriculum at Princeton is rigorous. It is not the type of institution for students who need their hands hold especially for those in engineering, physics, or other STEM related courses. Princeton is not for the weak.

Trust me, no child in my family is afraid of rigor. My oldest attended MIT and Oxford (1600 SAT). My second child attended Standford (1590 SAT). The middle child is at Princeton. My youngest who is currently a junior in high school just scored 1580 on the August SAT. She has her eyes focused on Princeton. I tell you this because my URM children are high achieving. It is pure racism to equate being a minority with low achieving. I pray that Princeton reinstates their SAT requirement for admission so that the achievements of black and brown students are not questioned by racists.

This is why I don't bother on DCUM forum anymore because of the rampant racism and bigotry from individuals like you. I am not going down the rabbit hole with bigots tonight. Nope, I am not going to entertain you while you disparaged minority students. You will not kill or steal my joy. This will be my last post on this topic and this evening. As I settled down this evening and go over my high schooler's AP Physics C Mechanics homework and music for her Mozart Requiem concert this autumn, I will leave you with Dr. Angelou's word of advice.

https://youtu.be/JqOqo50LSZ0?si=YjidjLkhKwfUyefC

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Princeton no longer has a ton of legacies, it’s in that freshman survey.

Where does it say that in the freshman survey? I scrolled through each category

Anonymous wrote:Princeton no longer has a ton of legacies, it’s in that freshman survey.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all missing the point - it’s for athletic admits

No, it isn't. The Academic Index system always allowed them to admit athletes with lower SAT scores, even under test-required. That's why it hasn't been an impediment for the Ivies that have gone back to requiring tests.

It's for FGLI and URM. Princeton is uniquely focused among the top schools on getting FGLI and URM students, and TO enables them to do so without having to worry about the data showing that the scoring profile of such students is much lower.

If that is an important mission for the school and they are serious about achieving it, good for them. If you are against supporting FGLI or URM students, then Princeton does not seem like a good fit for you.

It’s not good that Princeton is now basically closed to unhooked, very high-achieving white MC and UMC kids with great test scores. It’s why folks like Rufo are going after the school and most of America won’t care if it gets taxed into oblivion.

So, you are assuming that the URMs at Princeton don't have great test scores. My URM child who is an engineering major at Princeton scored 1590 (800 Math) on his SAT and 5s on all of his 15 AP exams. My child took Differential Equations and Linear Algebra and received As from both courses during his senior year of high school. During high school he won national awards in history, science, math, engineering, and music.

All of the URMs that I know at Princeton especially those in STEM are high achieving students. The curriculum at Princeton is rigorous. It is not the type of institution for students who need their hands hold especially for those in engineering, physics, or other STEM related courses. Princeton is not for the weak.

Trust me, no child in my family is afraid of rigor. My oldest attended MIT and Oxford (1600 SAT). My second child attended Standford (1590 SAT). The middle child is at Princeton. My youngest who is currently a junior in high school just scored 1580 on the August SAT. She has her eyes focused on Princeton. I tell you this because my URM children are high achieving. It is pure racism to equate being a minority with low achieving. I pray that Princeton reinstates their SAT requirement for admission so that the achievements of black and brown students are not questioned by racists.

This is why I don't bother on DCUM forum anymore because of the rampant racism and bigotry from individuals like you. I am not going down the rabbit hole with bigots tonight. Nope, I am not going to entertain you while you disparaged minority students. You will not kill or steal my joy. This will be my last post on this topic and this evening. As I settled down this evening and go over my high schooler's AP Physics C Mechanics homework and music for her Mozart Requiem concert this autumn, I will leave you with Dr. Angelou's word of advice.

https://youtu.be/JqOqo50LSZ0?si=YjidjLkhKwfUyefC

Holy humblebrag, Batman.

But I think you are making the point. Your kids 100% deserve to be there based on academics (I will assume they have some personality to go with the grades and test scores and don't walk around with the giant chip on their shoulder that you seem to have). Unfortunately, there are too many kids who get in because they checked a box (this is not just a racial thing - applies to football players, etc). These kids are generally far from dumb. But they are often a notch below. So since there is a critical mass of them, it is not unreasonable for someone to see a similar kid and assume that that kid was less qualified because there is a decent probability that they are.

If this priority admission went away or was minimized, the questions about your child's qualifications would go away. Unfortunately for now, your child has to go the extra mile to prove they are who they are.

No. it wouldn’t. History that says otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all missing the point - it’s for athletic admits

No, it isn't. The Academic Index system always allowed them to admit athletes with lower SAT scores, even under test-required. That's why it hasn't been an impediment for the Ivies that have gone back to requiring tests.

It's for FGLI and URM. Princeton is uniquely focused among the top schools on getting FGLI and URM students, and TO enables them to do so without having to worry about the data showing that the scoring profile of such students is much lower.

If that is an important mission for the school and they are serious about achieving it, good for them. If you are against supporting FGLI or URM students, then Princeton does not seem like a good fit for you.

It’s not good that Princeton is now basically closed to unhooked, very high-achieving white MC and UMC kids with great test scores. It’s why folks like Rufo are going after the school and most of America won’t care if it gets taxed into oblivion.

So, you are assuming that the URMs at Princeton don't have great test scores. My URM child who is an engineering major at Princeton scored 1590 (800 Math) on his SAT and 5s on all of his 15 AP exams. My child took Differential Equations and Linear Algebra and received As from both courses during his senior year of high school. During high school he won national awards in history, science, math, engineering, and music.

All of the URMs that I know at Princeton especially those in STEM are high achieving students. The curriculum at Princeton is rigorous. It is not the type of institution for students who need their hands hold especially for those in engineering, physics, or other STEM related courses. Princeton is not for the weak.

Trust me, no child in my family is afraid of rigor. My oldest attended MIT and Oxford (1600 SAT). My second child attended Standford (1590 SAT). The middle child is at Princeton. My youngest who is currently a junior in high school just scored 1580 on the August SAT. She has her eyes focused on Princeton. I tell you this because my URM children are high achieving. It is pure racism to equate being a minority with low achieving. I pray that Princeton reinstates their SAT requirement for admission so that the achievements of black and brown students are not questioned by racists.

This is why I don't bother on DCUM forum anymore because of the rampant racism and bigotry from individuals like you. I am not going down the rabbit hole with bigots tonight. Nope, I am not going to entertain you while you disparaged minority students. You will not kill or steal my joy. This will be my last post on this topic and this evening. As I settled down this evening and go over my high schooler's AP Physics C Mechanics homework and music for her Mozart Requiem concert this autumn, I will leave you with Dr. Angelou's word of advice.

https://youtu.be/JqOqo50LSZ0?si=YjidjLkhKwfUyefC

Holy humblebrag, Batman.

But I think you are making the point. Your kids 100% deserve to be there based on academics (I will assume they have some personality to go with the grades and test scores and don't walk around with the giant chip on their shoulder that you seem to have). Unfortunately, there are too many kids who get in because they checked a box (this is not just a racial thing - applies to football players, etc). These kids are generally far from dumb. But they are often a notch below. So since there is a critical mass of them, it is not unreasonable for someone to see a similar kid and assume that that kid was less qualified because there is a decent probability that they are.

If this priority admission went away or was minimized, the questions about your child's qualifications would go away. Unfortunately for now, your child has to go the extra mile to prove they are who they are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all missing the point - it’s for athletic admits

No, it isn't. The Academic Index system always allowed them to admit athletes with lower SAT scores, even under test-required. That's why it hasn't been an impediment for the Ivies that have gone back to requiring tests.

It's for FGLI and URM. Princeton is uniquely focused among the top schools on getting FGLI and URM students, and TO enables them to do so without having to worry about the data showing that the scoring profile of such students is much lower.

If that is an important mission for the school and they are serious about achieving it, good for them. If you are against supporting FGLI or URM students, then Princeton does not seem like a good fit for you.

It’s not good that Princeton is now basically closed to unhooked, very high-achieving white MC and UMC kids with great test scores. It’s why folks like Rufo are going after the school and most of America won’t care if it gets taxed into oblivion.

So, you are assuming that the URMs at Princeton don't have great test scores. My URM child who is an engineering major at Princeton scored 1590 (800 Math) on his SAT and 5s on all of his 15 AP exams. My child took Differential Equations and Linear Algebra and received As from both courses during his senior year of high school. During high school he won national awards in history, science, math, engineering, and music.

All of the URMs that I know at Princeton especially those in STEM are high achieving students. The curriculum at Princeton is rigorous. It is not the type of institution for students who need their hands hold especially for those in engineering, physics, or other STEM related courses. Princeton is not for the weak.

Trust me, no child in my family is afraid of rigor. My oldest attended MIT and Oxford (1600 SAT). My second child attended Standford (1590 SAT). The middle child is at Princeton. My youngest who is currently a junior in high school just scored 1580 on the August SAT. She has her eyes focused on Princeton. I tell you this because my URM children are high achieving. It is pure racism to equate being a minority with low achieving. I pray that Princeton reinstates their SAT requirement for admission so that the achievements of black and brown students are not questioned by racists.

This is why I don't bother on DCUM forum anymore because of the rampant racism and bigotry from individuals like you. I am not going down the rabbit hole with bigots tonight. Nope, I am not going to entertain you while you disparaged minority students. You will not kill or steal my joy. This will be my last post on this topic and this evening. As I settled down this evening and go over my high schooler's AP Physics C Mechanics homework and music for her Mozart Requiem concert this autumn, I will leave you with Dr. Angelou's word of advice.

https://youtu.be/JqOqo50LSZ0?si=YjidjLkhKwfUyefC

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all missing the point - it’s for athletic admits

No, it isn't. The Academic Index system always allowed them to admit athletes with lower SAT scores, even under test-required. That's why it hasn't been an impediment for the Ivies that have gone back to requiring tests.

It's for FGLI and URM. Princeton is uniquely focused among the top schools on getting FGLI and URM students, and TO enables them to do so without having to worry about the data showing that the scoring profile of such students is much lower.

If that is an important mission for the school and they are serious about achieving it, good for them. If you are against supporting FGLI or URM students, then Princeton does not seem like a good fit for you.

It’s not good that Princeton is now basically closed to unhooked, very high-achieving white MC and UMC kids with great test scores. It’s why folks like Rufo are going after the school and most of America won’t care if it gets taxed into oblivion.

Anonymous wrote:Listened to Dartmouth Dean’s (Lee Coffin) new Admissions Beat today. He had the Princeton Dean of Admissions on - she said TO is actually really TO…but then, seemed to imply if you are engineering, though, the math score may be important?
Double standard for test scores depending on major?

Anyone seemed newsworthy.


“Princeton, advice to your test optional applicants?

Well, the first thing I would say is that when a school says it's test optional, you should believe them and recognize that you're not going to be at a disadvantage if you do not submit testing. I think the challenge with looking at sort of the average or the middle 50 percent, right, is that those are all skewing higher at schools that are still test optional because students who have high testing are the ones who are submitting and that's where that middle 50 percent is drawing from. My advice is, particularly if you are looking at a heavily quantitative major, so our engineers, for example, if you are feeling good about that testing, especially the math testing is something that we would likely want to see.

Some of it boils down to thinking ahead about what you tell us you're interested in, and how you're feeling about those scores, and then really having a conversation with your school counselor.”

From Admissions Beat: Seniors, It’s Time to Pivot from Discovery to Applying!, Sep 9, 2025

Anonymous wrote:Princeton no longer has a ton of legacies, it’s in that freshman survey.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Strange that Princeton is still test optional.

Princeton has a lot of legacy kids. A lot of very wealthy kids. Both have a far higher admit rate than the general population of applicants. Test optional allows a mediocre rich kid can get in more easily, without any pesky being compared to others on a more meritocratic basis.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Princeton is likely going back to test required for fall of 2027 according to their admission presentation, they may be more test preferred this year than previously.

Nope. Princeton's not going back. Princeton loves TO because it makes admissions a black box and serves their goals of more urm/first gen/low income students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all missing the point - it’s for athletic admits

No, it isn't. The Academic Index system always allowed them to admit athletes with lower SAT scores, even under test-required. That's why it hasn't been an impediment for the Ivies that have gone back to requiring tests.

It's for FGLI and URM. Princeton is uniquely focused among the top schools on getting FGLI and URM students, and TO enables them to do so without having to worry about the data showing that the scoring profile of such students is much lower.

If that is an important mission for the school and they are serious about achieving it, good for them. If you are against supporting FGLI or URM students, then Princeton does not seem like a good fit for you.

It’s not good that Princeton is now basically closed to unhooked, very high-achieving white MC and UMC kids with great test scores. It’s why folks like Rufo are going after the school and most of America won’t care if it gets taxed into oblivion.

You throw a tantrum because Princeton wants to ensure they can serve some underprivileged students?

Why find a college that wants to serve your student instead of throwing a tantrum and trying to smack around a college that isn't behaving according to your standards?

It's silly that Princeton has refashioned itself as the City College of New York in suburban New Jersey.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all missing the point - it’s for athletic admits

No, it isn't. The Academic Index system always allowed them to admit athletes with lower SAT scores, even under test-required. That's why it hasn't been an impediment for the Ivies that have gone back to requiring tests.

It's for FGLI and URM. Princeton is uniquely focused among the top schools on getting FGLI and URM students, and TO enables them to do so without having to worry about the data showing that the scoring profile of such students is much lower.

If that is an important mission for the school and they are serious about achieving it, good for them. If you are against supporting FGLI or URM students, then Princeton does not seem like a good fit for you.

It’s not good that Princeton is now basically closed to unhooked, very high-achieving white MC and UMC kids with great test scores. It’s why folks like Rufo are going after the school and most of America won’t care if it gets taxed into oblivion.

You throw a tantrum because Princeton wants to ensure they can serve some underprivileged students?

Why find a college that wants to serve your student instead of throwing a tantrum and trying to smack around a college that isn't behaving according to your standards?

Anonymous wrote:Strange that Princeton is still test optional.