Just use a standardized test, administered in school that you get only one shot at (with a makeup date for illness). I know I am describing UK A levels, but most countries do this. Test optional is crazy.

NP. Maybe put it in context will make it more clear. “ the majority of SWE there are Indian immigrants” while 40% of US new grads cannot find jobs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teacher bias and favoritism is another issue. A national exam system could avoid the bias and favoritism in grading.

This isn’t India. Thankfully.
- Indian-American mom of 2 in T10

UK, and most of European countries have that national exam.

What makes you think 2 Indians in T10 strengthen your arguments? It does not, the Indian kids in the US can barely compete with Indian immigrant H1B workers. Visit any one of FANNG you will see the majority of SWE there are Indian immigrants.

NP. First off, some students in the US can compete. This argument takes a small subset of individuals uniquely skilled for a small subset of employers in a particular industry. Working for a FAANG is hardly the measure of ability. It just so happens there is a particularly high level of interest in tech from a country 3-4x the size of the US population. You skim of the top X% in India and the same % in the US and there will be ore from India. That's just math

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do know that schools use Slate to auto-recalculate the GPA for only the classes they want, right?


https://technolutions.com/admissions?itemId=ygz90f7yhhcmc2hayamsb4kpvy301e

https://advisortraining.wayne.edu/remote_advising/slate_overview.pdf

Can someone do a deep dive on Slate and how it works, along with visuals? I will post on YCBK reader questions (can others do it as well) - because maybe they'll cover this in a podcast.

It's a big black box, and parents should have more visibility.

+1.

The amount of algorithm number-cooking that goes on in college admissions is vastly underestimated by many, including those who think "holistic" only refers to personal judgment calls by human admission officers reading "in context."

Agree with this. Is there someone on here who knows more about the college algos? This is how this thread (or a new one) could actually be helpful to parents. I want more info on what numbers they are being shown, which help the AO with "holistic" admissions. Saw a visual showing how a school can "Track Majors By Round" - even for schools that don't admit by major.....the more you know.
Now I understand why our private tells the boys interested in business/CS/eng that in the RD round, most chances are slim - and pick that ED/REA choice strategically given the oversubscribed major.
This visual is helpful for me to see just how major comes into play in RD to shape the class?
https://technolutions.com/admissions?itemId=y9pht9rumtfmy43uc36m5eep1zsojj

Enrollment management consulting is a multi-billion dollar industry. Algorithms are proprietary trade secrets.

One piece of that puzzle was College Board's Landscape tool, which was used by nearly all top colleges. College Board decided to end that product this year https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2025/09/05/college-board-ends-tool-share-geographic-context-colleges. It'll be interesting to see how things change. Landscape featured a number of data points aggregated for the customer, including census tract. Some of that was used for yield, some for financial aid balancing in the aggregate, some for both. I have no idea what will happen, but thinking out loud, it would make sense for College Board to simply sell the underlying data to some other mathematical modeling consulting firm, probably someone already in the enrollment management industry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do know that schools use Slate to auto-recalculate the GPA for only the classes they want, right?


https://technolutions.com/admissions?itemId=ygz90f7yhhcmc2hayamsb4kpvy301e

https://advisortraining.wayne.edu/remote_advising/slate_overview.pdf

Can someone do a deep dive on Slate and how it works, along with visuals? I will post on YCBK reader questions (can others do it as well) - because maybe they'll cover this in a podcast.

It's a big black box, and parents should have more visibility.

+1.

The amount of algorithm number-cooking that goes on in college admissions is vastly underestimated by many, including those who think "holistic" only refers to personal judgment calls by human admission officers reading "in context."

Agree with this. Is there someone on here who knows more about the college algos? This is how this thread (or a new one) could actually be helpful to parents. I want more info on what numbers they are being shown, which help the AO with "holistic" admissions. Saw a visual showing how a school can "Track Majors By Round" - even for schools that don't admit by major.....the more you know.
Now I understand why our private tells the boys interested in business/CS/eng that in the RD round, most chances are slim - and pick that ED/REA choice strategically given the oversubscribed major.
This visual is helpful for me to see just how major comes into play in RD to shape the class?
https://technolutions.com/admissions?itemId=y9pht9rumtfmy43uc36m5eep1zsojj

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GPA is becoming less and less meaningful. I do think moving to a number system would help things.

what's the stats now - something like 40% of grads at a 4.0. pretty shameful for average SAT is like 1150

Not only is there a lack of differentiation with all that inflation, but small missteps early in high school can easily knock a good student out of that top 40%.

Then that's a parental failure. You should have been more on top of it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:welcome to life.
things are not standard, nor are they fair.

the sooner you figure that out and move on, the better off your kids will be with coping, dealing and tbh thriving.

I hate this attitude.

The idea that the college board, a corrupt for-profit NFP, is more open to change and improvement than parents are is damning

Not sure where the college board comes into this. The idea that private institutions should have to abide by your priorities rather than their own is what is wrong in this discussion.

I couldn’t agree more. People here are crazy and resentful that they chose a crappy high school. I say this to friends all the time: The most important and consequential decision for college admissions is your high school. If you have options, be much more strategic choosing your high school.

Strategic used to mean a private or feeder school. Now it means typical high school, that offers rigor, but not a ton of high-performing kids. It's hard to be savvy when things keep changing.

What is the problem you are trying to solve?

Are you one of these people who regard knowledge and learning as a commodity where there needs to be a bell curve?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do know that schools use Slate to auto-recalculate the GPA for only the classes they want, right?


https://technolutions.com/admissions?itemId=ygz90f7yhhcmc2hayamsb4kpvy301e

https://advisortraining.wayne.edu/remote_advising/slate_overview.pdf

Can someone do a deep dive on Slate and how it works, along with visuals? I will post on YCBK reader questions (can others do it as well) - because maybe they'll cover this in a podcast.

It's a big black box, and parents should have more visibility.

+1.

The amount of algorithm number-cooking that goes on in college admissions is vastly underestimated by many, including those who think "holistic" only refers to personal judgment calls by human admission officers reading "in context."

Our strong community college system mitigates that late bloomers issue. I know it has its issues but I can’t think of another country where pretty much any adult can sign up for night school to compete high school and college level work around a full time job in such an affordable and flexible way.

Anonymous wrote:GPA is becoming less and less meaningful. I do think moving to a number system would help things.

what's the stats now - something like 40% of grads at a 4.0. pretty shameful for average SAT is like 1150

Not only is there a lack of differentiation with all that inflation, but small missteps early in high school can easily knock a good student out of that top 40%.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teacher bias and favoritism is another issue. A national exam system could avoid the bias and favoritism in grading.

This isn’t India. Thankfully.
- Indian-American mom of 2 in T10

UK, and most of European countries have that national exam.

What makes you think 2 Indians in T10 strengthen your arguments? It does not, the Indian kids in the US can barely compete with Indian immigrant H1B workers. Visit any one of FANNG you will see the majority of SWE there are Indian immigrants.

Anonymous wrote:
I say introduce national subject exams like the British GCSEs that kids take the Summer they are 16 and A- Levels at 18.

The logistics of standardising GPAs for every American high school would be almost impossible but we already have national exams like the SAT IIs and APs. Expanding the infrastructure to include national subject exams for all kids at set ages would be more feasible.

I agree, We kind of already do that, but not uniformly. People self select to take the SSAT at 6th or 8th grade if they want to go to private school, so there is a tiny level of sorting there; then people are tracked for APs or not, so there is a second level of sorting there. But whether it's bringing back the SATIIs or requiring an AP-type exam, the number of tested subjects should be significantly shrunk, or at least limit the ones that "count" for admissions standing - we don't need 29 AP subjects. There are core competencies that every student entering college should be able to demonstrate.

But, I'm not a fan of steering kids too early into non-academic tracks like some countries do, at least not unless we start uniform screening for learning differences and ADHD at a young age so "late bloomers" can get the help they need to develop strategies to mitigate disabilities from the start. Right now it depends too much on a parent or teacher noticing an obvious problem and choosing to do something about it. Too many bright people go undiagnosed and crash in late middle to early high school -- these are the types who often go on to be brilliant PhDs, if parents can afford a diagnosis and they don't get literally side-tracked. Many kids crash and burn even earlier and are incorrectly deemed unteachable.

We also will have to significantly change how we care for and educate our profoundly special needs population. We should have much better options and smoother transitions for their futures than most families currently face. Unfortunately, it's going to be a while before any work can begin.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:welcome to life.
things are not standard, nor are they fair.

the sooner you figure that out and move on, the better off your kids will be with coping, dealing and tbh thriving.

I hate this attitude.

The idea that the college board, a corrupt for-profit NFP, is more open to change and improvement than parents are is damning

Not sure where the college board comes into this. The idea that private institutions should have to abide by your priorities rather than their own is what is wrong in this discussion.

I couldn’t agree more. People here are crazy and resentful that they chose a crappy high school. I say this to friends all the time: The most important and consequential decision for college admissions is your high school. If you have options, be much more strategic choosing your high school.

Anonymous wrote:Agree with this.

I think it would also take pressure off kids. And normalize A- and B+s.

Bring back - and +s by the way.

A classroom where kids just try to get over the 90% line isn't really healthy. an 89 is a good grade. It shouldn't be lumped in with the kids who got a 80. a 90 isn't the same as a 100.

Our private has - and +
Maybe the issue is YOUR high school.