Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want the US to align itself with the rest of the world and only consider academics. Test scores should be a lot more central to the applications than they are now.

Why? You are free to attend college in another country if you want only academic considerations.

Do you have any idea what a laughing stock American universities are abroad? They can't fathom what's going on here with DEI. That's why we sent our kids to Oxbridge.

Ok mom. Go and find a UKUM forum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want the US to align itself with the rest of the world and only consider academics. Test scores should be a lot more central to the applications than they are now.

Why? You are free to attend college in another country if you want only academic considerations.

Do you have any idea what a laughing stock American universities are abroad? They can't fathom what's going on here with DEI. That's why we sent our kids to Oxbridge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think schools are moving back because of the sheer number of applicants. It becomes overwhelming for AOs and the entire system.

I sincerely doubt any university is experiencing a noticeable drop in quality of the student body because of test optional.

The University of Texas analyzed the performance of their incoming classes during the TO period and found that kids who submitted scores had on average a GPA that was .86 higher than the TO kids when all other variables (HS GPA, class rank etc) were corrected for. That’s a huge difference.

That's because the University of Texas auto admits the top performing kids from every high school in the state (used to be top 6%, now it's top 5% from every HS get accepted). 75% of first year admission slots are reserved for auto admit (no test scores needed). The other 25% have an admit rate of 10% (in-state) and 8% (out of state).

Anonymous wrote:I’m glad colleges are moving back toward requiring the testing. With all the ridiculous grade inflation going on, this can be a differentiator. Not a huge fan of the superscore approach because I think that leads to the problem you’ve identified.

yes!!

Anonymous wrote:But people fake disabilities for more time on tests. Nothing is pure.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A standardized test is far better than going by inflated grades and faked extra-curriculars

1000+

+1 And let's not forget essays written by high priced consultants. People hate standardized tests, because unless you go full Aunt Becky and hire someone to try to pretend to be your kid and take the test, it's the only thing that's actually standardized and meritocratic between applicants.

No. People get extra time for bogus reasons. Pay off psych consultants.

But people fake disabilities for more time on tests. Nothing is pure.

... or is NOT subjective are standardized tests that are the same for everyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A standardized test is far better than going by inflated grades and faked extra-curriculars

1000+

+1 And let's not forget essays written by high priced consultants. People hate standardized tests, because unless you go full Aunt Becky and hire someone to try to pretend to be your kid and take the test, it's the only thing that's actually standardized and meritocratic between applicants.

+1 $$$ for consultants to hone the essays. How fair is that? The only thing that can't be fudged or is subjective are standardized tests that are the same for everyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A standardized test is far better than going by inflated grades and faked extra-curriculars

1000+

+1 And let's not forget essays written by high priced consultants. People hate standardized tests, because unless you go full Aunt Becky and hire someone to try to pretend to be your kid and take the test, it's the only thing that's actually standardized and meritocratic between applicants.

All Test Required!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous wrote:A standardized test is far better than going by inflated grades and faked extra-curriculars

THIS!

The private school my child attends does not inflate grades, at all...if you look the school's data for SAT/ACT combined with GPA there are SO may kids with 1400/30+ SAT/ACT and 2.8-3.3 GPAs.

Meanwhile at the school down the street everyone has a 4.0+ and many struggle to break 1100on the SAT. However, some of those students got accepted to T20s TO last year.

Anonymous wrote:I want the US to align itself with the rest of the world and only consider academics. Test scores should be a lot more central to the applications than they are now.

Why? You are free to attend college in another country if you want only academic considerations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want the US to align itself with the rest of the world and only consider academics. Test scores should be a lot more central to the applications than they are now.

Nobody’s stopping you from moving to South Korea or India for their superior high stakes test based education system.

Unless the PP is a citizen of those countries, there is actually something stopping them from moving to those countries.

But, even so, more and more universities here are moving to test required, for a reason.

Yeah, it’s really hard to sort through 60,000 identical applications.

“My kid is good at the test therefore it’s the best measure of talent”, sure thing boss.

NYC suburban public high, every kid in the 1570-1600 band accepted to at least one T30. No exception.
Most accepted by Brown (test required) and/or Cornell. The rest went to other ivy pluses (Penn Chicago) and SWAP (Williams Amherst). The lowest acceptance by NYU/Michigan/UVA, including kids in 85-90/100 grade range (bottom 25 percentile).

This didn't happen