Anonymous wrote:My DS: 3.9 W, 1520 SAT, EC's is that he's been working since he was 15. Well respected NOVA Public High School.

In at VCU, Loyola-Chicago (with merit), SMU (with merit), William & Mary, and NYU.

Didn't get into: Northwestern, Rice, UVA, Tulane, and BU. The latter one surprised us, but oh well. He's happy, we're happy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I took the SATs in the early 90s and with test prep, I just broke 1000. I had a 3.3 GPA at a college prep school. I didn't test well. I now have 2 Master's degrees. My son is the opposite. Very intelligent and tests well but the day to day grades aren't so great."

Just to be keep things comparing apples to apples, there were changes to the SAT in 1994, scores were re-centered in 1995, in 2005 it went to a 2400 point scale and, of course, back to the 1600 point scale in 2016.

The test you took in the early 1990s was quite different from today's test. The prep available in the early 90s was rudimentary compared to today, although I guess if you paid enough there might have been quality prep somewhere.

In addition, every change made it easier to get a higher score in one way or another. Some changes just brought the median up, others dropped parts of the test that students didn't see often, some just made the questions about things that more people were likely to encounter in their day to day lives. That doesn't mean there is a simple relationship that say a 1000 then is a 1200 now but roughly that is the order of magnitude change that should be considered.

So I would say that it is likely that your prepped 1000 from the early 90s supports the idea that if you grew up at the same time as your son, you would have gotten something like a 1200.

Both the differences in SAT from 1990s to now and the amount prep can reliably add to your score are both wildly overblown. Studies not funded by prep places show average 0-40 points gain depending on type and extent of prep. Yes, tests were renormed over time but average scores have stayed very close the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there is a college for everyone but the ability to pay astronomical costs for private schools may be the challenge.

Or the advantage!

Anonymous wrote:Have a junior who is super smart but not very high standardized testing and not saving the world, curing cancer or winning national awards.

Have a similar kid? What are your kids general stats and where did they get accepted/rejected from this year? (general info, not identifying info since folks on DCUM seem to think their kids are stalking this board).

Help a Junior parent out

Anonymous wrote:"I took the SATs in the early 90s and with test prep, I just broke 1000. I had a 3.3 GPA at a college prep school. I didn't test well. I now have 2 Master's degrees. My son is the opposite. Very intelligent and tests well but the day to day grades aren't so great."

Just to be keep things comparing apples to apples, there were changes to the SAT in 1994, scores were re-centered in 1995, in 2005 it went to a 2400 point scale and, of course, back to the 1600 point scale in 2016.

The test you took in the early 1990s was quite different from today's test. The prep available in the early 90s was rudimentary compared to today, although I guess if you paid enough there might have been quality prep somewhere.

In addition, every change made it easier to get a higher score in one way or another. Some changes just brought the median up, others dropped parts of the test that students didn't see often, some just made the questions about things that more people were likely to encounter in their day to day lives. That doesn't mean there is a simple relationship that say a 1000 then is a 1200 now but roughly that is the order of magnitude change that should be considered.

So I would say that it is likely that your prepped 1000 from the early 90s supports the idea that if you grew up at the same time as your son, you would have gotten something like a 1200.

Anonymous wrote:My DS: 3.9 W, 1520 SAT, EC's is that he's been working since he was 15. Well respected NOVA Public High School.

In at VCU, Loyola-Chicago (with merit), SMU (with merit), William & Mary, and NYU.

Didn't get into: Northwestern, Rice, UVA, Tulane, and BU. The latter one surprised us, but oh well. He's happy, we're happy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mine has a 4.0 uw, all honors and AP classes, student government plus other EC clubs, and was terrible at SAT but slightly better at ACT (1190 vs 33).

She’s in at JMU, Penn State, Amherst, Williams, and Boston College.

Was a no at UVA and W&M.

In all fairness, a 33 on the ACT isn't "slightly" better, it's equivalent to a 1460 on the SAT.

Anonymous wrote:My DS: 3.9 W, 1520 SAT, EC's is that he's been working since he was 15. Well respected NOVA Public High School.

In at VCU, Loyola-Chicago (with merit), SMU (with merit), William & Mary, and NYU.

Didn't get into: Northwestern, Rice, UVA, Tulane, and BU. The latter one surprised us, but oh well. He's happy, we're happy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there is a college for everyone but the ability to pay astronomical costs for private schools may be the challenge.

Or the advantage!

Anonymous wrote:Low test scores can be a problem. Ds has a 3.5 uw gpa (4.2 w)and 1500 SAT and was accepted at Villanova, Lehigh, Bucknell, URochester, etc. His best friend has a 3.7 uw (4.2w) and an 1190 SAT and is a URM. He was rejected from a similar spread of schools, and only accepted at a state school with an 80% acceptance rate and Penn State. It doesn’t seem fair.