<p>
</p>
<p>Right, and I don’t think that’s unusual with talent-based admissions. We do the same thing here.</p>
<p>What I do find unusual is the statement made by gabriellah that programs that admit based in part on talent have the same standards for SAT scores that other admitting units do on campus, and that therefore one shouldn’t speculate that a disproportionate number of “low” SAT scores might be from students that were admitted–under very competitive circumstances–to music, art or similar programs. It was my belief that the audition or portfolio mattered quite a bit, and that the competitiveness of the programs was based as much on talent as on academic profile. </p>
<p>When I read that statement by Peabody (thanks for including it), I think we have very good reason to assume that students admitted to talent-based programs might be among those so-called “weaker” students hawkette is counting at top schools (among schools which have such programs). And it would be wrong for a prospective student to assume that somehow those schools are easier than they thought to get into, or that a school with more “weak” students was a lesser school. If the school (or hawkette) is counting its extraordinarily talented music or art or dance students in the freshman class, then that impression would be wrong indeed.</p>