Yasmin

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't most students at top schools score around 650s-750s on SAT I and SATII sections?? Okay we can't be too sure about SAT IIs since its not like you can punch in that info at p r i n c e t o n r e v i e w.com and get it for every single uni....we only have that kind of info available for sat I, but im sure it will be around the same numbers..
I'm guessing the admissions committe would see 3 5's the same way they would see 3 SATII/SATI sectionss in the high 600 to 700 ranges. In the rare occasion that someone who chooses to submit the SAT has 3 750+s (not many applicants can almost-ace all 3 SAT IIs or SATI sections) they may have a small advantage over the applicant with 3 5's.....if it comes down to which one of those two candates they should accept, other factors like essays, ecs, gpa etc. would play the final decision in who gets the seat.
To make things clearer:
650-750 SAT= 5 on AP test
750+ SAT > 5 on AP
Thats just how it makes sense to me.
Okay so everyone with perfect scores out there, I hear you, scores are the strongest part of my own application, but I'm sure we'll still have somewhat of an advantage over ppl with just as strong applications but not as good scores anyway. :-)

b@r!um

True for the SAT I but I think that SAT II scores are higher than that. Many SAT II tests are scored so that you can still get a score of 800 with only 55/65 correct answers. (In contrast, one incorrect answer on the SAT I will ruin a perfect score!) The median SAT II scores (of all test takers) are typically in the 600s and 700s, as opposed to 500 for the SAT I. A 650-750 on the SAT IIs makes you an average test taker, not an outstanding one.

A high SAT I score shows that you are smart. (Wasn't the SAT initially an IQ test in disguise?) High SAT II scores show that you have mastered high school-level material, but high AP scores show that you can master college-level material. For example, I only need pre-calc to get a score of 800 on the SAT II in math but I need calc for the AP exam. In sciences and languages AP exams cover significantly more material than the corresponging SAT II exams. That's why I would always choose high AP scores over high SAT II scores.

Keilexandra

^ But for the same reason, AP scores disproportionately favor the wealthy/middle-class in strong schools and the encouragement to take AP courses.

b@r!um

What's wrong with encouraging students to take AP courses? Elsewhere in the world AP-equivalent courses are the standard high school curriculum. Why should US students stay behind the rest of the world on purpose?

Every standardized test I am aware of disproportionally favors wealthy students in strong schools if that means that these students do better as a group. There are a variety of reasons for why that is the case. Most of these reasons also mean that this group of students is better prepared for college than students with lower test scores. Why should their college applications not reflect that?

Just for the record, neither of my parents went to college and my family makes less than $25,000 a year. I would not consider myself part of an educated or wealthy family. Statistically I am less likely to take AP classes, but I had the same opportunities to take them as everyone else in my school district.

Keilexandra

^ Then you are a statistical anomaly for living in a school district with those opportunities. Would you still consider yourself to have the "same opportunities" if you attended a school that offered no or very few AP courses and thus had to depend entirely on self-study? The technical opportunity is equal, but the de facto opportunity certainly is not.

Of course, I speak from a highly-educated middle-class position, with little authority except anecdotal observations.

tokenadult

This is largely a correct statement, applicable to a variety of countries.

Yasmin

Okay so i guess my theory would only really work when it comes to comparing SAT II subject scores with AP scores in similar subjects...
Anyway, in the grand scheme of things, scores don't really count as much for acceptance as they used to...high school performance, ECs, essays, and recs all play a part in wheather or not a student gets in.
I mean come on you guys, head to the harvard forum...don't you see all the 2100 2200 scorers who got in just cuz they had an all-together wonderful application, as opposed to the 2400 scorers who were heads of 3 clubs but juss didnt seem to be as passionate about anything and moreover, didnt get in??
bottom line: do your best in school, excel at one or two ECs and do your very best at them, try to score very high and if ur a good student who just dosen't do well in standardized tests, policies like these may hep you. If your a student who has good scores, recs, ecs, blah blah blah the whole package...then dont worry, the school will see that, and you'll still have a good chance of getting in...
good luck to you all Bryn mawr/ nyu/ *insert school name here* hopefulss :-)

caterpillar14

I think that most people would agree that standardized testing is not always an accurate portrayal of a student's potential for reasons already stated. Standardized testing is always going to put certain students at a disadvantage. I find the ability to use scores from different tests to be a positive change because it allows the student more flexibility. More options, more chances to put your best foot forward. Hopefully, test flexible and optional policies enable diversify the applicant pool instead of encouraging more competition. I remain personally skeptical of all standardized testing. Unfortunately, there are way too many applicants for a completely unbiased and holistic review.

MissPickwickian

If you choose the ACT, do you have to take the optional writing portion? That would be a major financial issue for me.

Debruns

Each school has their own requirements for that, some say writing, some say either/or. You really have to check.