Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For class of 2028 enrolled students score submission
Williams,35% SAT, 15% ACT
Amherst 39% SAT, 22% ACT

They may want to go back to test required, but that's a little jump from these numbers. Hard to say.

Williams 25th percentile now is 1500, back when tests were required it was 1430. Amherst 25th percentile is now 1500, back when tests were required it was 1410.

They will remain TO because they want the flexibility. Amherst was 21% FGLI this year, 35% recruited athletes. Test required doesn't allow them to build the classes they want. Everyone knows if you're unhooked and not an institutional priority, you need to submit the scores though.

Wait so 56% of Amherst's class is either FGLI or recruited athlete?? This just confirms it's absolutely pointless to apply ED to any of the top LACs. Nearly all the spots are taken by recruit athlete/FGLI.

Also, I think it builds a lot of divisions in the student population: social class and sports teams.

plenty of athletes are FGLI. plenty are rich, but just saying you can't add those number together. you see this on every team.

I will give you a high low of only 10% of recruited athletes first gen. Regardless, because there is athlete attrition every year, the recruited freshman class has to be higher than the overall athlete percentage.

Anonymous wrote:The main problem with TO is that it discouraged applicants from less-advantaged backgrounds from submitting test scores that would have provided an additional positive signal of their academic abilities. So many FGLI URM kids apply with TO ending up having much reduced chance of admission. Test required allows FGLI URM kids submit their 1400 score, which, opposite to many kids thought, it's a great score in their context, even for WASP.

By staying TO, rich kids with resources benefit the most, they often seek out undersubscribed majors and doign fancy ECs to impress the AOs. They do not deserve the seats as much as the FGLI URM kids, but under TO, AOs have no choice but admitting rich kids.

Well, PPs above believe TO only benefits applicants that are institutional priorities (URM, FGLI, Athletes, etc) and that if you are a ORM or Majority upper middle/upper class student then you must submit test scores. Which one is it? I think you’re both wrong. (Kids don’t apply to LACs by major, btw) I think the main way that privileged kids disproportionately get into SLACs is through athletics. To reach the level of a recruitable athlete in the NESCAC, for example, takes a significant financial commitment. But even those kids have to submit a score in prereads and meet a certain threshold or they will not pass, TO or not. Moreover, most of not all of the top 20ish SLACs participate in Questbridge and admit many students from “less-advantaged “ backgrounds. Plenty of pathways for kids whi didn’t “found” their own non profits.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For class of 2028 enrolled students score submission
Williams,35% SAT, 15% ACT
Amherst 39% SAT, 22% ACT

They may want to go back to test required, but that's a little jump from these numbers. Hard to say.

Williams 25th percentile now is 1500, back when tests were required it was 1430. Amherst 25th percentile is now 1500, back when tests were required it was 1410.

They will remain TO because they want the flexibility. Amherst was 21% FGLI this year, 35% recruited athletes. Test required doesn't allow them to build the classes they want. Everyone knows if you're unhooked and not an institutional priority, you need to submit the scores though.

Wait so 56% of Amherst's class is either FGLI or recruited athlete?? This just confirms it's absolutely pointless to apply ED to any of the top LACs. Nearly all the spots are taken by recruit athlete/FGLI.




Also, I think it builds a lot of divisions in the student population: social class and sports teams.

plenty of athletes are FGLI. plenty are rich, but just saying you can't add those number together. you see this on every team.

That was not our impression after visiting Amherst. Most of those sports require considerable resources in HS to get to a level of D3 recruitment. I'm sure there is some overlap, just don't think a whole lot.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For class of 2028 enrolled students score submission
Williams,35% SAT, 15% ACT
Amherst 39% SAT, 22% ACT

They may want to go back to test required, but that's a little jump from these numbers. Hard to say.

Williams 25th percentile now is 1500, back when tests were required it was 1430. Amherst 25th percentile is now 1500, back when tests were required it was 1410.

They will remain TO because they want the flexibility. Amherst was 21% FGLI this year, 35% recruited athletes. Test required doesn't allow them to build the classes they want. Everyone knows if you're unhooked and not an institutional priority, you need to submit the scores though.

Wait so 56% of Amherst's class is either FGLI or recruited athlete?? This just confirms it's absolutely pointless to apply ED to any of the top LACs. Nearly all the spots are taken by recruit athlete/FGLI.

Also, I think it builds a lot of divisions in the student population: social class and sports teams.

plenty of athletes are FGLI. plenty are rich, but just saying you can't add those number together. you see this on every team.

There's plenty of FGLI who are athletes on D1 teams with full rides, less so at LACs which are generally D3 schools where it's majority comprised of privileged kids.

Yes, this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For class of 2028 enrolled students score submission
Williams,35% SAT, 15% ACT
Amherst 39% SAT, 22% ACT

They may want to go back to test required, but that's a little jump from these numbers. Hard to say.

Williams 25th percentile now is 1500, back when tests were required it was 1430. Amherst 25th percentile is now 1500, back when tests were required it was 1410.

They will remain TO because they want the flexibility. Amherst was 21% FGLI this year, 35% recruited athletes. Test required doesn't allow them to build the classes they want. Everyone knows if you're unhooked and not an institutional priority, you need to submit the scores though.

Wait so 56% of Amherst's class is either FGLI or recruited athlete?? This just confirms it's absolutely pointless to apply ED to any of the top LACs. Nearly all the spots are taken by recruit athlete/FGLI.

Also, I think it builds a lot of divisions in the student population: social class and sports teams.

plenty of athletes are FGLI. plenty are rich, but just saying you can't add those number together. you see this on every team.

There's plenty of FGLI who are athletes on D1 teams with full rides, less so at LACs which are generally D3 schools where it's majority comprised of privileged kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For class of 2028 enrolled students score submission
Williams,35% SAT, 15% ACT
Amherst 39% SAT, 22% ACT

They may want to go back to test required, but that's a little jump from these numbers. Hard to say.

Williams 25th percentile now is 1500, back when tests were required it was 1430. Amherst 25th percentile is now 1500, back when tests were required it was 1410.

They will remain TO because they want the flexibility. Amherst was 21% FGLI this year, 35% recruited athletes. Test required doesn't allow them to build the classes they want. Everyone knows if you're unhooked and not an institutional priority, you need to submit the scores though.

Wait so 56% of Amherst's class is either FGLI or recruited athlete?? This just confirms it's absolutely pointless to apply ED to any of the top LACs. Nearly all the spots are taken by recruit athlete/FGLI.

Also, I think it builds a lot of divisions in the student population: social class and sports teams.

All of that is correct. Plus there is the issue of geographic diversity (40+ states, a number of countries represented in the class). Very few spots left for unhooked kids. The one kid I know who got in ED had perfect stats.

Anonymous wrote:I suspect Williams and Amherst would like to require testing but don’t want to mess w their rankings.

Williams will not be losing their rankings #1 among LACs regardless if their standardized tests go down a smidge. They are far ahead of the pack and have been consistently for years.

However, if they do move back to test required the other top LACs will follow their lead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For class of 2028 enrolled students score submission
Williams,35% SAT, 15% ACT
Amherst 39% SAT, 22% ACT

They may want to go back to test required, but that's a little jump from these numbers. Hard to say.

Williams 25th percentile now is 1500, back when tests were required it was 1430. Amherst 25th percentile is now 1500, back when tests were required it was 1410.

They will remain TO because they want the flexibility. Amherst was 21% FGLI this year, 35% recruited athletes. Test required doesn't allow them to build the classes they want. Everyone knows if you're unhooked and not an institutional priority, you need to submit the scores though.

Wait so 56% of Amherst's class is either FGLI or recruited athlete?? This just confirms it's absolutely pointless to apply ED to any of the top LACs. Nearly all the spots are taken by recruit athlete/FGLI.




Also, I think it builds a lot of divisions in the student population: social class and sports teams.

plenty of athletes are FGLI. plenty are rich, but just saying you can't add those number together. you see this on every team.

That was not our impression after visiting Amherst. Most of those sports require considerable resources in HS to get to a level of D3 recruitment. I'm sure there is some overlap, just don't think a whole lot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For class of 2028 enrolled students score submission
Williams,35% SAT, 15% ACT
Amherst 39% SAT, 22% ACT

They may want to go back to test required, but that's a little jump from these numbers. Hard to say.

Williams 25th percentile now is 1500, back when tests were required it was 1430. Amherst 25th percentile is now 1500, back when tests were required it was 1410.

They will remain TO because they want the flexibility. Amherst was 21% FGLI this year, 35% recruited athletes. Test required doesn't allow them to build the classes they want. Everyone knows if you're unhooked and not an institutional priority, you need to submit the scores though.

Wait so 56% of Amherst's class is either FGLI or recruited athlete?? This just confirms it's absolutely pointless to apply ED to any of the top LACs. Nearly all the spots are taken by recruit athlete/FGLI.

Also, I think it builds a lot of divisions in the student population: social class and sports teams.

plenty of athletes are FGLI. plenty are rich, but just saying you can't add those number together. you see this on every team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect Williams and Amherst would like to require testing but don’t want to mess w their rankings.

I bet they don’t. How has it hurt them? How did it help them before?

1. a lot of highly selective colleges dont actually want a zillion apps. this is why there's a trend of not releasing admissions rate. it's a bad look politically, it puts qualified people from applying, it's a burden to the college

2. they risk letting in kids who can't do the work. faculty almost always wants to go back to testing for a reason

I think maybe 10 highly selective schools don’t want a zillion apps. The brands that kids like to take flyers on. Very small group. And this risk of “kids who can’t do the work” is such a spurious argument. First off, even when some schools produce data saying TO kids don’t perform as well, they are usually a few tenths of GPA points lower. Not flunking out. Second, if a school was committed to TO and spent the time reviewing admissions result. How kids performed over time, and perfecting TO practices they could totally do it. Bowdoin doesn’t seem to have a problem with retention/graduation rates. These are just straw man arguments from people who think test scores should pretty much be outcome determinative.

agree, but also agree that includes Williams and Amherst

also, the data seems mixed. Bowdoin found one thing. Dartmouth found another. MIT found another.

The main problem with TO is that it discouraged applicants from less-advantaged backgrounds from submitting test scores that would have provided an additional positive signal of their academic abilities. So many FGLI URM kids apply with TO ending up having much reduced chance of admission. Test required allows FGLI URM kids submit their 1400 score, which, opposite to many kids thought, it's a great score in their context, even for WASP.

By staying TO, rich kids with resources benefit the most, they often seek out undersubscribed majors and doign fancy ECs to impress the AOs. They do not deserve the seats as much as the FGLI URM kids, but under TO, AOs have no choice but admitting rich kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For class of 2028 enrolled students score submission
Williams,35% SAT, 15% ACT
Amherst 39% SAT, 22% ACT

They may want to go back to test required, but that's a little jump from these numbers. Hard to say.

Williams 25th percentile now is 1500, back when tests were required it was 1430. Amherst 25th percentile is now 1500, back when tests were required it was 1410.

They will remain TO because they want the flexibility. Amherst was 21% FGLI this year, 35% recruited athletes. Test required doesn't allow them to build the classes they want. Everyone knows if you're unhooked and not an institutional priority, you need to submit the scores though.

Wait so 56% of Amherst's class is either FGLI or recruited athlete?? This just confirms it's absolutely pointless to apply ED to any of the top LACs. Nearly all the spots are taken by recruit athlete/FGLI.

Also, I think it builds a lot of divisions in the student population: social class and sports teams.

Anonymous wrote:Test optional is so dumb, and so is the idea of test anxiety and "not testing well." It's multiple choice. You either know the answers or you don't.

Right? Like, have people who get panic attacks tried just not getting them? So dumb.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect Williams and Amherst would like to require testing but don’t want to mess w their rankings.

I bet they don’t. How has it hurt them? How did it help them before?

1. a lot of highly selective colleges dont actually want a zillion apps. this is why there's a trend of not releasing admissions rate. it's a bad look politically, it puts qualified people from applying, it's a burden to the college

2. they risk letting in kids who can't do the work. faculty almost always wants to go back to testing for a reason

I think maybe 10 highly selective schools don’t want a zillion apps. The brands that kids like to take flyers on. Very small group. And this risk of “kids who can’t do the work” is such a spurious argument. First off, even when some schools produce data saying TO kids don’t perform as well, they are usually a few tenths of GPA points lower. Not flunking out. Second, if a school was committed to TO and spent the time reviewing admissions result. How kids performed over time, and perfecting TO practices they could totally do it. Bowdoin doesn’t seem to have a problem with retention/graduation rates. These are just straw man arguments from people who think test scores should pretty much be outcome determinative.

Anonymous wrote:Test optional is so dumb, and so is the idea of test anxiety and "not testing well." It's multiple choice. You either know the answers or you don't.

Noted.