Anonymous wrote:Because until you go through this process with your kid you naively think that you can make sense out of it by comparing stats.

+1. And even if you think you know what to expect from this year, the next year there will be something slightly different that can impact the number of applications, acceptance rate, or yield.

Naviance scattergram at our school doesn’t allow to sort by year, whether TO or not, whether recruited athlete or not (tho I doubt this particular school has had very many at all), whether ED etc.

The scatter also doesn’t reconcile with the number of applicants in the bar graph. So not entirely helpful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do people look at scattergrams? Why do people look at the CDS for stats? Why do people look at 25,50 and 75 percentiles for test scores for admitted students?

You know why.

Because this is actually data. As opposed to a story here. Which even if true is nothing more than one data point. And therefore completely useless in helping figure out what your kid should do.

You are wrong. Scattergrams, cds, percentiles do not give real data. You have no idea which gpa kid was TO or test submitted. scattergrams shows SAT, but not ACT. If you ask a poster what the stats are, you get far more accurate info, likely in a close geographic area to the DMV. If a poster responded saying her kid was admitted at UVA with a 4.2, TO, that’s much more info than you’d get from any other place.

Huh? Scattergrams at our MCPS high school shows test optional now (you can filter - it doesn’t go back five years tho obvs) and has always (as long as I’ve had access anyway) shown ACT scores.

This is not seen in FCPS, no ACT in FCPS, and no dated data.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do people look at scattergrams? Why do people look at the CDS for stats? Why do people look at 25,50 and 75 percentiles for test scores for admitted students?

You know why.

Because this is actually data. As opposed to a story here. Which even if true is nothing more than one data point. And therefore completely useless in helping figure out what your kid should do.

You are wrong. Scattergrams, cds, percentiles do not give real data. You have no idea which gpa kid was TO or test submitted. scattergrams shows SAT, but not ACT. If you ask a poster what the stats are, you get far more accurate info, likely in a close geographic area to the DMV. If a poster responded saying her kid was admitted at UVA with a 4.2, TO, that’s much more info than you’d get from any other place.

Huh? Scattergrams at our MCPS high school shows test optional now (you can filter - it doesn’t go back five years tho obvs) and has always (as long as I’ve had access anyway) shown ACT scores.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do people look at scattergrams? Why do people look at the CDS for stats? Why do people look at 25,50 and 75 percentiles for test scores for admitted students?

You know why.

Because those are the only quantitative data points given. It doesn’t mean they are as paramount as is often assumed.

Wrong. I have heard at Tufts, Gtown, UVA, and Yale that the first stop is the transcript. It is THE most important. YCBK has said it many many times in the podcast. It matters.

This. The Transcript is number 1, and that means what courses taken compared to what is offered at the school, not a count of the total APs. High rigor in all 5 core areas and still a top GPA in the context of the high school gpa scale. Gpa out of context is fairly useless. SAT is not nearly as important as the transcript.

I think we've veered off course here. Maybe OP didn't phrase well initially. No one disputes that GPA is the first stop. But, that doesn't preclude the objection to people asking for stats. Stats are a hurdle, not a fine tuned marker. I think OP was saying that asking stars is useless because anyone in has the stats plus other things!

+1. I’m not OP, but so many of the negative responses use a straw man argument. Yes, of course a 2.9 GPA 1150 applicant is unlikely to make be admitted over a 4.0/1580. But that isn’t the example OP used. They used 4.0/1600 vs 3.6/1450. I think OP’s point is that based on those 2 things alone, we have no idea what a college would prefer because at that point, they’d be looking primarily at other things. E.g., the specific transcript in the context of the high school and class, ECs, recs, character indicia, etc. So the calls on DCUM for “Stats, please” are pretty pointless. Huge numbers of applicants with qualifying “stats” will not get in over many others with lower ones because of these other factors. GPAs just don’t translate. Tests can help calibrate to some degree, but colleges (unlike some on here) know the limitations of standardized tests. So referring to your 3.9/1550 applicant just tells us they are in the ballpark for a rejective college. It doesn’t tell us that that candidate is better than a 3.7/1480 without knowing a lot more.

This is also why it’s important/ determinative to know which high school & who else from hs applying…..
All matters more than pure statistics alone.

Yes those matter, but then those students are measured against students from surrounding schools and region and state..,the pool gets larger & larger. High school peers are only the initial group.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do people look at scattergrams? Why do people look at the CDS for stats? Why do people look at 25,50 and 75 percentiles for test scores for admitted students?

You know why.

Because this is actually data. As opposed to a story here. Which even if true is nothing more than one data point. And therefore completely useless in helping figure out what your kid should do.

You are wrong. Scattergrams, cds, percentiles do not give real data. You have no idea which gpa kid was TO or test submitted. scattergrams shows SAT, but not ACT. If you ask a poster what the stats are, you get far more accurate info, likely in a close geographic area to the DMV. If a poster responded saying her kid was admitted at UVA with a 4.2, TO, that’s much more info than you’d get from any other place.

Interesting. Is that what they teach these days?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do people look at scattergrams? Why do people look at the CDS for stats? Why do people look at 25,50 and 75 percentiles for test scores for admitted students?

You know why.

Because this is actually data. As opposed to a story here. Which even if true is nothing more than one data point. And therefore completely useless in helping figure out what your kid should do.

You are wrong. Scattergrams, cds, percentiles do not give real data. You have no idea which gpa kid was TO or test submitted. scattergrams shows SAT, but not ACT. If you ask a poster what the stats are, you get far more accurate info, likely in a close geographic area to the DMV. If a poster responded saying her kid was admitted at UVA with a 4.2, TO, that’s much more info than you’d get from any other place.

Because in the total crap short that college admissions has become, any anecdote of a 1380 kid getting into T20, gives what every parent wants - HOPE

Anonymous wrote:Why do people look at scattergrams? Why do people look at the CDS for stats? Why do people look at 25,50 and 75 percentiles for test scores for admitted students?

You know why.

Because this is actually data. As opposed to a story here. Which even if true is nothing more than one data point. And therefore completely useless in helping figure out what your kid should do.

Anonymous wrote:

Because until you go through this process with your kid you naively think that you can make sense out of it by comparing stats.

This is 100% correct. I feel sorry for parents still caught in this mindset because it leads to a lot of animosity and heartbreak. Encourage your your kid do their best and use the CDS' to make your list.

Yes! If you go into the process thinking about how to present your best self and use publically available stats to see if you are in range of the school you are interested in, you have a shot.

Knowing what a school seems to be looking for as averages is critically important to know if your application is going to be tossed because you aren't in range. Knowing what the threshold scores of kids from your school were for successful admittance, will give you even better information. But understanding the scores of my kid gives you almost no information about how your kid will do. If she had a 1570 SAT but two B+ along with 12 APs, how does that help you compare to your kid who had no B+, a 1530 and 11 APs? Does the fact that one of these kids played in travel soccer but the other in marching band, but neither had won a math olympiad really help? No it does not.

Tell your kids to put in the effort to take as hard classes as they can. Keep their grades up. Do well on standardized tests. And then after than, write an application that tells the school who he or she is as a person. This will be the best they can do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do people look at scattergrams? Why do people look at the CDS for stats? Why do people look at 25,50 and 75 percentiles for test scores for admitted students?

You know why.

Because those are the only quantitative data points given. It doesn’t mean they are as paramount as is often assumed.

Wrong. I have heard at Tufts, Gtown, UVA, and Yale that the first stop is the transcript. It is THE most important. YCBK has said it many many times in the podcast. It matters.

This. The Transcript is number 1, and that means what courses taken compared to what is offered at the school, not a count of the total APs. High rigor in all 5 core areas and still a top GPA in the context of the high school gpa scale. Gpa out of context is fairly useless. SAT is not nearly as important as the transcript.

I think we've veered off course here. Maybe OP didn't phrase well initially. No one disputes that GPA is the first stop. But, that doesn't preclude the objection to people asking for stats. Stats are a hurdle, not a fine tuned marker. I think OP was saying that asking stars is useless because anyone in has the stats plus other things!

+1. I’m not OP, but so many of the negative responses use a straw man argument. Yes, of course a 2.9 GPA 1150 applicant is unlikely to make be admitted over a 4.0/1580. But that isn’t the example OP used. They used 4.0/1600 vs 3.6/1450. I think OP’s point is that based on those 2 things alone, we have no idea what a college would prefer because at that point, they’d be looking primarily at other things. E.g., the specific transcript in the context of the high school and class, ECs, recs, character indicia, etc. So the calls on DCUM for “Stats, please” are pretty pointless. Huge numbers of applicants with qualifying “stats” will not get in over many others with lower ones because of these other factors. GPAs just don’t translate. Tests can help calibrate to some degree, but colleges (unlike some on here) know the limitations of standardized tests. So referring to your 3.9/1550 applicant just tells us they are in the ballpark for a rejective college. It doesn’t tell us that that candidate is better than a 3.7/1480 without knowing a lot more.

PP here. Agree with thus, but with a modification in the GPA parameters for public school. I do think a 3.6 out of mcps really wouldn't make the cut for top schools (don't want to give kids false hope), maybe 3.8 for some schools, 3.9 for others and dependent on hooks. but other than that, a cut is really all it is when it comes to stats. And SO MANY make the cut. Way more than schools can take. So the qualities that tip the scale that posters so desperately want to know are not the stats they continually ask for!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do people look at scattergrams? Why do people look at the CDS for stats? Why do people look at 25,50 and 75 percentiles for test scores for admitted students?

You know why.

Because those are the only quantitative data points given. It doesn’t mean they are as paramount as is often assumed.

Wrong. I have heard at Tufts, Gtown, UVA, and Yale that the first stop is the transcript. It is THE most important. YCBK has said it many many times in the podcast. It matters.

This. The Transcript is number 1, and that means what courses taken compared to what is offered at the school, not a count of the total APs. High rigor in all 5 core areas and still a top GPA in the context of the high school gpa scale. Gpa out of context is fairly useless. SAT is not nearly as important as the transcript.

I think we've veered off course here. Maybe OP didn't phrase well initially. No one disputes that GPA is the first stop. But, that doesn't preclude the objection to people asking for stats. Stats are a hurdle, not a fine tuned marker. I think OP was saying that asking stars is useless because anyone in has the stats plus other things!

+1. I’m not OP, but so many of the negative responses use a straw man argument. Yes, of course a 2.9 GPA 1150 applicant is unlikely to make be admitted over a 4.0/1580. But that isn’t the example OP used. They used 4.0/1600 vs 3.6/1450. I think OP’s point is that based on those 2 things alone, we have no idea what a college would prefer because at that point, they’d be looking primarily at other things. E.g., the specific transcript in the context of the high school and class, ECs, recs, character indicia, etc. So the calls on DCUM for “Stats, please” are pretty pointless. Huge numbers of applicants with qualifying “stats” will not get in over many others with lower ones because of these other factors. GPAs just don’t translate. Tests can help calibrate to some degree, but colleges (unlike some on here) know the limitations of standardized tests. So referring to your 3.9/1550 applicant just tells us they are in the ballpark for a rejective college. It doesn’t tell us that that candidate is better than a 3.7/1480 without knowing a lot more.

This is also why it’s important/ determinative to know which high school & who else from hs applying…..
All matters more than pure statistics alone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do people look at scattergrams? Why do people look at the CDS for stats? Why do people look at 25,50 and 75 percentiles for test scores for admitted students?

You know why.

Because those are the only quantitative data points given. It doesn’t mean they are as paramount as is often assumed.

Wrong. I have heard at Tufts, Gtown, UVA, and Yale that the first stop is the transcript. It is THE most important. YCBK has said it many many times in the podcast. It matters.

This. The Transcript is number 1, and that means what courses taken compared to what is offered at the school, not a count of the total APs. High rigor in all 5 core areas and still a top GPA in the context of the high school gpa scale. Gpa out of context is fairly useless. SAT is not nearly as important as the transcript.

I think we've veered off course here. Maybe OP didn't phrase well initially. No one disputes that GPA is the first stop. But, that doesn't preclude the objection to people asking for stats. Stats are a hurdle, not a fine tuned marker. I think OP was saying that asking stars is useless because anyone in has the stats plus other things!

+1. I’m not OP, but so many of the negative responses use a straw man argument. Yes, of course a 2.9 GPA 1150 applicant is unlikely to make be admitted over a 4.0/1580. But that isn’t the example OP used. They used 4.0/1600 vs 3.6/1450. I think OP’s point is that based on those 2 things alone, we have no idea what a college would prefer because at that point, they’d be looking primarily at other things. E.g., the specific transcript in the context of the high school and class, ECs, recs, character indicia, etc. So the calls on DCUM for “Stats, please” are pretty pointless. Huge numbers of applicants with qualifying “stats” will not get in over many others with lower ones because of these other factors. GPAs just don’t translate. Tests can help calibrate to some degree, but colleges (unlike some on here) know the limitations of standardized tests. So referring to your 3.9/1550 applicant just tells us they are in the ballpark for a rejective college. It doesn’t tell us that that candidate is better than a 3.7/1480 without knowing a lot more.