Naviance problem or incompetent GC?

blueiguana
Fri, 14 Jan 2011 16:59:57 +0000

We pay for transcripts and the system is fairly automated. Even with Naviance, the teachers choose to send their LORs via snail mail and the students are responsible for providing forms, addressed envelopes with postage, etc. Naviance is only as good as the limited information that is presented. Students may retest for SATs in their Sr year, raising their scores, these being the ones that gain entrance. My student’s scores reflect Jr year testing. This isn’t a problem, however the nice green ‘dots’ that will end up on a scattagram showing an admit will reflect the lower scores, giving an inaccurate view to anyone looking for historical data. Will the higher SATs make that much of a difference? I don’t know, but they do not reflect the scores the university used for acceptance.

As previous posters have also stated they tell you nothing about ECs, rigor, rank, etc. It also does not tell you what school within the university the students were accepted to (Engineering, Liberal Arts, Architecture). These can have very different standards. You see a red X in a sea of green dots and wonder what the heck happened. Did their essay stink? Bad recommendation? Depending on the university it could be an Architecture applicant where the available spaces are minimal compared to Liberal Arts, therefore likely to be more competitive. It’s a very two dimensional view of an applicant. A useful tool, yes, but only as a guideline.

There are some notable school districts that are very high ranking nationally that do not use Naviance for a number of reasons, security concerns being one. Their GCs are known for being quite good. These schools are sending transcripts and letters via snail mail. It can be more cumbersome for the students, no doubt, however it is not impacting their success in admissions.