I don’t know. I never thought test scores wouldn’t be considered. Of course they are. But I want to believe if you have a student with a high GPA and lots of rigor from a known high school and that student has ECs, essays and recs that are just as good or better than a comparable student with a test score, he would still get admitted - maybe in addition to the other student with the score. I do agree that certain schools have been either doing TO already or are planning to try it now for three years might give a better look at TO apps. Those are likely the schools that are training their AOs to evaluate apps without scores.
Okay, I’m going to add a different angle to this conversation. When I went through the admissions process with my high stats D18 she applied mostly to LACs and it was all about holistic admissions and fit, as well described above by @homerdog and @lookingforward.
My S21, on the other hand, is applying to engineering programs, and while I’m no expert, my impression is they are much more about the numbers – looking at GPA, test scores and perhaps class rank to make a lot of admissions decisions. They seem to care less about you as a person, and more about whether you have the academic chops to do the work b/c engineering is HARD.
When applying to the same university, do we think engineering applicants w/o scores may be more negatively impacted than, for example, humanities applicants w/o scores?
I don’t mean to imply these two candidates are competing against each for admissions. I just mean that the admissions decision making process might be more ‘w/o penalty’ for all ‘no score’ liberal arts students whereas the ‘penalty’ for engineering students in the applicant pool who don’t have a score is higher – they are at greater disadvantage compared to their engineering applicant peers with a score.
As my husband said, “engineering schools are results oriented.” He’s not buying them really being on board with TO.
Realize this might be better as its own separate thread, so I may do that, but welcome thoughts.
@AlmostThere2018
Actually, you are closer to the original intent of the thread than many recent posters.
Yet “engineering is hard, humanities are easy” strikes me as too much of a generalization.
@ArtsyKidDad – no offense intended (Poli sci major here!) Just mean that engineering has pretty high rates of kids not thriving, and I think they don’t want to admit students who won’t succeed – esp. around advanced math. That’s why I wonder if they will really give up the info provided by a test score.
Wondering if anyone has specifically heard AOs talking about engineering and TO landscape?
Difficulty of curriculum is going to feature heavily. A kid taking APCalBC at a school that has a great track record of getting 4-5s on the AP test will have an advantage over someone who isn’t in that league simply because school doesn’t offer such course or have such a track record.
This isn’t new, by the way. A lot of kids take most of their AP courses senior year. Not going to get the test results until college outcomes well done. APs do use that school and AP profile. In disciplined like engineering with an inherent high drop out rate from that major, it’s important to pick kids that have a good chance of surviving the math onslaught. I spoke to an engineering professor about high math SAT1/ACTs vs AP Calc and he said that hands down, those who demonstrated mastery in the advance math courses at schools known to have a rigorous curriculum, do better in the heavy STEM courses at college. Being very math smart on standardized tests doesn’t mean being able to last the marathon of calculus and other advanced math courses. A lot of freshmen drop these majors because they can’t or won’t do the work needed to excel in the core courses.
I’m not an expert, but I’ve had 2 offspring go through the process. My advice: If the test score is not at or above the 75th percentile, I wouldn’t send it to test optional schools. If all the schools on the list have a 75th percentile that is higher than the test score, adjust the list. This advice doesn’t apply to URM’s/legacies etc.
If there is a school that the student really wants to get in, apply ED and send a 50th percentile or greater test score.
I know Purdue held out for a long time before finally announcing that they’d be test flexible. My understanding was that it was a very close vote by the Trustees and the website says they would still prefer applicants to submit scores. IMO, I think it will be detrimental for students who don’t have them.
@momofsenior1 – Interesting. Perhaps a fair metric for applicants to use is “the later they went test optional, the greater the ‘penalty’ for not submitting a score.”
I’m actually not kidding – this might be the best indicator students have during this uncharted admissions cycle.
UNC also seems to be more ‘test preferred’ than ‘test optional,’ based on the language I read.
What about the schools in the 40-60 and beyond ranking category? Of course the top 20 schools can feel confident they will hit their expected numbers. But, in lower ranked schools, if everyone is only sending scores above the 75 percentile, and each kid is applying to more schools than usual (including maybe more reaches) because let’s face it, this year is a crapshoot, then aren’t the colleges going to be concerned about their yield? Don’t they also need to accept a percentage of kids that they believe will actually attend? You can only attend one school afterall. Maybe it will benefit them to accept test optional kids so that lower scores won’t affect their ranking, but they will still fill the spots that especially now they need to fill? Just another way of thinking. Plus I have 2 kids that have had their tests canceled 3 times so it’s wishful thinking. And it’s my first post so be kind!
@AlmostThere2018 I think you may be on to something. Quite a few on our list also required a Math II subject test in past years and that was canceled in June for my S and I’m sure will be missing for many applicants.
All of my podcasters have been very quiet lately except that one UCLA interview you mentioned before. She speculated more would go test blind, but I doubt that. Colleges don’t want less information to consider.
Well, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that most schools will accept more kids than normal. They can’t risk not having enough kids accept their offer and I bet ED applicants will be down this year. It’s also going to depend on how many kids send scores to x school. If a school a little lower than 30-ranking gets half of their applicants with no score, I’m sure they’ll take some of those kids. That will be an interesting stat - I wonder if we will ever see how many kids applied TO to each college.
As for engineering, I agree that it’s more of a numbers game. Maybe if ACT/SAT is on the cusp but AP scores are good, that helps. I’d like to believe that colleges will look at the school profile and see how kids at D’s school do on APs and ACT/SAT because they score super high and, if she’s in the top ten percent with weighted GPA but can’t get a test, they will hopefully assume that she would have tested well.
If you are applying for a top math heavy program, are you disadvantaged if your are unable to participate in the AMC/AIME process? Similar concern just a smaller population.
@nmcmom21 – To submit or not to submit, THAT is the question. (Sorry!) Aggregated, scores nationwide will be lower this year b/c of fewer tests attempted. I do agree with that. As a result, I see two plausible outcomes:
-
If only students with high scores (above 50th percentile? above 75th percentile?) submit, the average score an AO sees might be similar to years past BUT they will see fewer applicants with scores, period.
-
If students with “lower” (less than 50th percentile?) scores go ahead and submit b/c under the circumstances it was the best they could do (limited access to testing), then the overall score range for a school will likely be lower than previous years, while at the same time there are more students in the applicant pool who actually have a score.
So, it feels a bit like the Prisoner’s dilemma – decisions other applicants make on submitting or not influences any particular applicant. Does their score look reasonable b/c a fair number of lower than normal test scores were submitted or does their score look low b/c only high scores were submitted? Students, collectively, have no idea what decision other students will make.
And, of course, there’s a whole other set of students with no scores so there’s no decision to make, unfort.
(And, yes, I know applicants are a lot more than their test score. But this thread is about whether to submit during the new TO environment.)
@bouders Why doesn’t the advice apply to URM?
We were informed that my D’s SAT location on 8/29 canceled. The closest available is South Bend, IN, 100 miles away, plus a different time zone so we’d have to stay in a hotel or leave home before 5 am. Oh, the choices…
That’s cancellation number 7 but I don’t see anything lucky about it…
I should add that people with high scores are sitting pretty this cycle!
@ArtsyKidDad – I’m sorry about the cancellation!
I don’t know if
[quote=“AlmostThere2018, post:56, topic:2100615”]
I should add that people with high scores are sitting pretty
I don’t know about that. There are many many excellent students whose test scores pretty much eliminate them from having much of a chance at the most selective schools. Every year, for decades, for scores, parents’ and students’ dreams are dashed when sterling students take those tests. Happened with my brother. His girls were honor students, way up there in grades and taking tough courses. 1200 range SATs really dashed their chances at the colleges that were on their lists. Concerted test prep brought up scores maybe another hundred. I see this each year.
Now, just dont submit those number. A lot of those kids become real contenders. And I mean A LOT, because there are a heckuva lot more kids with 1200-1400 SAT scores than there are those with +1450. (I’m being loose with my parameters here).
For every applicant who is a serious contender, lower chances for those with the test score AND the rest of the package. That’s the way it goes. So, it’s not a wholesale bonanza for those who score well in those tests. They are going to have kids with phenomenal applications be scrutinized and considered that may not have made it through initial screening due to test scores.
Its just one data point, but I spoke to an admissions counselor at a top 25 large public university today who indicated that while a high test score could help an applicant, no score or a low score would not hurt as the no/low test score would be disregarded and they would simply look at GPA, rank and rigor. That follows the thinking of an earlier poster about two piles of applicant reviews. Start with those applicants with tests. Those with high scores and otherwise strong applications get admitted. Those with low scores and otherwise good applications go into the pile to be evaluated with those applicants with no scores with admissions decisions based on the rest of the application. Wishful thinking maybe (I also agree with the earlier poster that its tough to “unsee” a low test score), but in these unprecedented times its a framework for the AO to follow.
Don’t assume adcoms have to have direct experience with TO to get it. They spend most of the year keeping up with trends and realities. Reviewing kids year in/year out brings great familiarity with what kids CAN do. And who’s doing it, who’s got the rigor/stats but otherwise leans back.
@homerdog is pretty spot on. Love it.
Yes, those schools chose those panelists. Or you’ll find a description of what a student rep or essayist does- it’s not just major and some project or honors. How else are they part of both the college community and the one beyond the gates? You look for the sorts of student programs the college invests in. (Well beyond jr year abroad sorts.) You can learn a lot.
For the next tier, let’s say AU, it’s more than some blind, blanket, “Show them the love.”
When a college is remote, like Midd or all women, Wellesley, of course they also look for types suited. That needs, “Show, not just tell.” Does the hs record show you expanded, took in the sort of challenges outside academics that that college values?
A sad example is all the great hs kids interested in poli sci. Don’t we all know it’s an election year? And yet, how few ever got involved in the real world. You don’t need a big role, fine to be a grunt. With rare exceptions, this is so not about getting some award. (The sorts of honors that make an adcom sit up aren’t aimed at our middle and upper class kids.)
If fall tests get shut down, I will agree with you. However, if they run, I think the opposite could end up being true. Test prep, in the absence of other options this summer, was, sadly, a #1 summer activity, maybe #2 if you want to count actually finding a seat at a test site. Also, given how colleges have gone test optional and given how difficult it is to find a seat at a test site, it is possible that the students persisting in finding a spot are the ones who either expect to do well or who have invested too much time or money into the prep to walk away. Students who don’t have much hope or expectation of getting a reasonably or relatively high score have little incentive to bother.