<p>Our girls are five years apart - long enough to make me question whether the same regional reader would still be on the job.</p>
<p>Our D2 is also following the same general path that worked for her big sister. It’s not exactly the same since their ECs, though similar, are not exactly the same. But it’s the same general approach updated with whatever info and tips D1 learned on the “inside.”</p>
<p>best of luck to everyone looking for younger siblings to join their older siblings. We are hoping (praying) that our dtr would like to apply to Harvard and join her older brother. They are quite different, so we’ll see.</p>
<p>Mammall - I’m pulling for your youngster :). Is he/she applying this year?</p>
<p>gadad - thanks so much for the advice. I had PM’d you months ago and thought that I might have overstepped. I feel better now.</p>
<p>Did anyone stay at a hotel they’d like to recommend for Parent’s weekend? We stayed at Cambridge Hampton Inn and even though we had rented a car we ended up taking bus from Lechmere (I think that is how it’s spelled) station due to difficulty of parking around Harvard. But we were using Hilton Honors points and with Hampton at $368/night we are now shopping around. We will not have a car this time so near a station would also be helpful. Thanks!</p>
<p>Try Expedia and Priceline … you can often get some very nice deals.</p>
<p>Has anyone seen the NY Times piece this morning quoting Harvard’s Fitzsimmons (sp?) wanting to get rid of the SAT/ACT in admissions?</p>
<p>I admit I’m biased - the SAT and ACT were a big strength for my daughter - but frankly if Harvard and other highly selective schools go down this road I seriously wonder what the value of a degree from them will come to mean. If the entire admissions decision rests on grades (ridiculously unreliable when comparing kids from different high schools) and so-called “holistic” factors - then I’m just not sure this is all worth it. I suppose the education at Harvard is first-rate. But we are sacrificing hugely to send our daughter there really for two reasons: First, that she be with the most intellectually talented group of college students possible, and Second, that she emerge from college with a degree that the world recognizes signifies that she is highly intelligent as well as an outstanding scholar.</p>
<p>Imperfect as it is, I think the SAT/ACT instrument is the best and most objective measure available to ascertain scholastic talent and achievement. Fitzsimmons seems to be advocating moving to a system whereby each college has its own admissions test. Ridiculous. In this competitive admissions environment, even the conservative applicant will typically apply to around eight schools, especially with Harvard and other institutions getting rid of EA. So that would mean these students would sit for eight different exams? How expensive would applying to these schools become? How would controlled and fair testing environments be achieved?</p>
<p>Here’s my cynical view. I think although there’s posturing going on that this move away from the SAT/ACT is to make things more fair for the disadvantages students, in reality this is about appeasing the very wealthy prep school kids whose parents are discovering that no matter how much they pay, they cannot buy their kids top scores. The article this morning even mentions that on average prep classes only improve scores by 20 to 30 points. </p>
<p>Even more upsetting in my view, is that this commission is recommending that the National Merit Finalist scholarship program no longer be based on performance on the PSAT - in other words no longer a true merit contest.</p>
<p>Honestly, I think I’ll send my second one to electrician school.</p>
<p>Did you read the article properly? Fitzsimmons says that the SAT subject tests are more reliable. Harvard is one of the very few schools that require 3 Subject tests. I did not see any mention of Harvard wanting to get rid of the Subject tests.</p>
<p>If the SAT is no longer going to be required by many colleges, there really is no reason for students to take the PSAT. Scholarships can be awarded on very different bases than a test taken solely for National Merit, and whose criteria for eligibility is not nation-wide but based on residency in different states.</p>
<p>I did read the article thoroughly, Marite, and found the notion of increasing reliance on SAT II subject tests absurd. If the objective is to assist kids in low-performing high schools to gain admission to Harvard, then relying more on subject matter expertise will have the opposite impact. Those tests - and my daughter actually scored straight 800s on the four she took - are enormously influenced by the quality of the high school curriculum. Thus, kids at upper income and private high schools will almost certainly be at an even greater advantage.</p>
<p>The SAT, in contrast to the SAT II subject tests, is a pretty good approximation of an aptitude test. Aside from advanced algebra and geometry, there’s really no prerequisite for scoring well except having developed strong reading and mathematical reasoning skills. </p>
<p>And regarding the NMF competition - the test is identical across states. The criteria for merit money varies across states. This is to ensure that states with very high concentration of upper income and well-educated parents do not have kids that monopolize all the merit money. Actually, this is a pretty good system and one of the few avenues allowing good students to attend good public universities at a discount.</p>
<p>I disagree about the value of PSAT and NMF.</p>
<p>As for the value of Subject Tests, everyone is entitled to his or her opinion.</p>
<p>I actually agree with you about the value of SAT for disadvantaged students. In fact, it was the original intent of the SAT. What it looks like to me is adcoms worried about how much testing there is, especially since the introduction of high stake high school tests and how much frenzy the SAT produces and how it can detract from real learning I have personal experience of that. S1 was in a 10th grade Honors English class with a syllabus that had a decent number of literary works to go through. By January, however, the class was still reading the first book on the list. When I asked why, it turned out that the teacher was preparing the students for the SAT. In 10th grade. And this is ten years ago.</p>
<p>I don’t have easy solutions to propose, and neither, it seems, does the commission.</p>
<p>^ Marite - so glad I can agree with you here. It does bother me that the SAT and to a lesser extent the ACT have little bearing to actual academic content. I guess we are lucky to have our kids at a high school that does not devote any time to prepping for the SAT. But there is quite a lot of attention given in AP classes to the AP exams and the SAT II subject tests. When I compare my D1’s test results to her old friends back in the troubled public system we left, they did extremely well on the SAT but extremely badly on the subject tests and AP exams. In talking to their parents, it was clear they just didn’t have the advantage of chemistry and biology and US history classes with the depth and coverage to prepare them for the exams.</p>
<p>I don’t mean to be too critical of Fitsimmons and Harvard. I really do respect their efforts to broaden recruitment. My D’s roommates are not from privileged backgrounds at all - one is quite disadvantaged (and brilliant). I’ve been critical of the demise of EA but have to admit that they are doing something right.</p>
<p>Perhaps this change in testing will also turn out that way. The SAT has become a lightning rod of public outrage. There is an entrenched conviction that only the rich do well on it despite the fact that study after study proves prep courses don’t really help. Maybe by shifting to a different means of testing schools like Harvard can go on recruiting the brightest kids out there without subjecting themselves to all the criticism.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>mammall:</p>
<p>Without at the moment taking a position one way or the other on the usefulness of the SAT, I don’t believe that, in any event, your apparent conclusion here (that economic class does not bear on SAT performance) follows from what I understand to be your premise (that often costly prep courses result in only modest improvement in score). While any such generalization of course has its limitations and drawbacks, I believe that it’s generally fair to say that children from higher income backgrounds, upon taking the SAT, have usually had available to them a whole lifetime of intellectually enriching opportunities—including, usually, much better funded public schools—that are typically much less available to children from lower rungs on the economic ladder. Put another way (and more succinctly): greater access to test-prep courses would seem to be (by far) the least significant advantage relating to a test-taker’s higher economic class.</p>
<p>^ Epistrophy, I agree totally. Higher income kids get higher scores on the SAT because they grow up in environments with more books, more emphasis on school and better schools. And I also think genes do play some role - higher income parents are rarely completely stupid! Although, not always.</p>
<p>But what then are we to do to promote “fairness”? Take every child at birth and put them in state run institution that provides an exact equal dose of nurturing and enrichment to all? I mean, at some point this whole raging dispute becomes silly. </p>
<p>I don’t have a solution to the fairness question. I do think that the SAT, however, is much more “fair” in terms of giving the disadvantaged the opportunity to lift themselves than Subject Tests, which are very prone to influence through tutoring and expensive k-12 education.</p>
<p>At the risk of stating the obvious, the function of the SAT (or any other standardized test) in admissions depends, of course, on what a college is looking for in the students they admit, both individually and collectively. If at Harvard, for example, they were simply looking for those high school students who scored the highest on “objective” tests, the admissions process would (obviously) be a whole lot simpler - so simple, in fact, that the entire admissions office could be reduced to one person and a computer. But no one seems to suggest doing this, and the hundreds (thousands?) of students with perfect, or near-perfect, test scores that are not admitted each year at Harvard confirms that these tests aren’t determinative in the admissions process, at Harvard or elsewhere.</p>
<p>I don’t think that the issue here is one of “fairness.” That might be the issue in a system where an “objective” test was the determining factor in admissions, and the question was whether to, in effect, compensate students from “disadvantaged” backgrounds by rewarding them with additional points as a sort of handicapping advantage. But that’s not the system we have or the one that anyone seems to want. The issue, instead, seems to be how much weight these test scores should have for admissions purposes if the ultimate question is not how well an individual performed on a standardized test toward the end of her high school career, but rather how well someone might be expected to perform, academically and otherwise, if admitted to Harvard - both during her four years there as an undergraduate and later in life. </p>
<p>Let’s say that you were an admissions officer comparing the applications of two students. One student, from Lake Forest, Illinois, has near-perfect SAT scores, terrific grades, and strong teacher recommendations. But it is difficult to distinguish her application from any number of other applications from students who live in affluent suburbs and have done very well indeed in high school. The other student is from the west side of Chicago, her SAT scores are 100 points lower, she’s toward the top of her class, and her teachers strongly believe, on the basis of her demonstrated energy and creativity and spark, that she has the potential to do really extraordinary things in college (both inside and outside the classroom) and beyond. A strong argument could be made under these circumstances that the latter student should be favored in the admissions process. And this wouldn’t be a matter of “fairness” - not at all. Rather, it would simply be a matter of recognizing that while test scores may tell you something about an applicant, what they tell you may not mean as much at the end of the day as what other things tell you.</p>
<p>^ Epistrophy - my vote would go to the kid in West Chicago in a heartbeat and I would hope any sane admissions officer would agree. I don’t think 100 pts on the SAT should make or break a decision between two candidates where one has managed to stand out and the other not so much. So you see - I’m not the test mad mom that you might think!</p>
<p>My “fairness” concern has to do with trading the SAT reasoning test for college-specific entrance tests or SAT subject tests. The school-specific notion just seems nuts to me - how on earth would it work? How could kids manage to apply to a fair number of schools if they have to in addition to writing essays, soliciting letters but also go sit for different exams for each school they’re applying to? And if the move is to only count the SAT II subject tests or AP exams - I think we would see a test situation that benefits the advantaged far more than we see right now with the reasoning test.</p>
<p>Here’s what I 'd like to see, actually - more essay writing for these colleges that are timed and performed in controlled cirumstances without “editiors” or ghost writers. In the end, I would hope that the applicant’s voice would be the most important part of the application.</p>
<p>I think it would be a mistake to eliminate SAT/ACT as part of the admission package. As it currently stands, although imperfect, standardized tests are the only portion of an package that are “standard” and offer an “independent” verification of the student abililty/performance. At present, there is no other meaningful way in which to evaluate/compare students from different schools.</p>
<p>I think these tests play a very important role for those students applying to colleges from high schools that are unknown or less well known to the college admission counselors. </p>
<p>This doesn’t necessarily mean that a university must or should take the top scores - evidence for that is clear - but it does offer a basis of comparison and trade-off. </p>
<p>Based upon comments I’ve heard from teachers/students - the SAT II’s are the weakest link in the standardized testing process. They offer the least information regarding the ability of the students to handle more advanced work. AP Scores are a better indicator - but not all schools offer AP courses.</p>
<p>reflectivemom pointed out:
“As it currently stands, although imperfect, standardized tests are the only portion of a package that are “standard” and offer an “independent” verification of the student ability/performance. At present, there is no other meaningful way in which to evaluate/compare students from different schools.” I totally agree!</p>
<p>There is already too much nonsense in US College admission system, getting rid off SAT provides an easy way for those with connections to get in. I prefer UK system much better. </p>
<p>I am a nonbeliever of SAT prep classes, I really do not think they help much. The best way to prepare SAT is to buy (or borrow from library) a College Board Real SAT test book and practice them. </p>
<p>Saying SAT benefits the riches is a poor excuse. I would argue GPA also benefits the riches since those who are rich can afford hiring tutors. The same goes as far as College Admission Essay concerns, those who are rich can afford to hire someone to write essay for them. In reality, a large percent of SAT High scorers do not use tutor and do not take SAT prep classes.</p>
<p>Today’s college admission system in US is already too subjective, SAT already does not play major role, why remove it? Removing it only makes admission officers more powerful and helps the rich ones but not poor!</p>
<p>On another note, I visited my non-Freshman D this weekend and was thrilled to discover that she is even HAPPIER this year than last! All the “kinks” seem to have been worked out, she looks fantastic (in a healthy sense) and she has found a happy balance of academic, social and EC life. I’m ecstatic and at peace simultaneously.</p>
<p>^ Glad for you Bay. She sounds just wonderful. My own seems to be that bizarre unexpected combination of nice things at the moment - happy and sharing her life with us. Lots of calls. All very happy calls. I know it won’t last but it’s unexpected and appreciated.</p>
<p>Bay,</p>
<p>that is wonderful news! My son also is doing really well. He had some trouble adjusting at first, but seems to be doing well now. I guess it took time for him to get to know people and it really helped when classes started. Whew!! I am so much more calm now.</p>
<p>My son is living in Matthews. Where is your dtr?</p>
<p>On another note…</p>
<p>Do the boys at Harvard wear long sleeve t-shirts in the winter or sweaters or what? My son is saying that the weather is getting cold pretty fast. Being from California, he only has t-shirts and 2 long sleeve t-shirts. I went to Kohl’s today to see if I could find something warmer, but I just don’t know what to buy. He’s not into nice type of sweaters so my only option is laying t-shirts. Any help would be appreciated.</p>