@eh1234 Our Naviance only shows weighted GPA as well. I’ve asked the counselors about that and they say it really is the best way to compare the kids. I see a lot of talk on CC about unweighted but, while it’s very easy for us to calculate S19’s unweighted GPA and it’s on his transcript, I almost never even think about it!
Our Naviance is weighted GPA based too. The data points only show 3 years back, so it’s pretty helpful. I found it to be pretty helpful for son17, but in the end he didn’t get into one of his top choices and he was well within the " good zone".
I do like that you can look at Naviance for the majority of schools and kind of know where your kids stands. You can’t be 100% though, especially with competitive majors like CS, Nursing, etc. at some schools though.
I’m looking forward to some official test scores, because at least at that point you know where the bare minimum/maximum is at this time. it’s hard when you don’t even have a legit PSAT score back.
At our school, the data is self populated, but the guidance counselors really work with the kids to get accurate data posted. They stress that, so I think most kids comply. They have a year end senior meeting where the kids fill it all in and the Gas are right there with them.
Wish ours was a coordinated as yours @RightCoaster . Your “good zone” is our “sweet spot” and it was extremely helpful. Did you find the admissions/rejects surprising for the '17 class? Meaning did you hear it was an unusual year?
thanks for the naviance tip - the new psat was there lucky us!
I hardly ever look at Naviance, so I decided to check it after the last few posts. Hardly updated at all. Only has last year’s PSAT (understandable since this year’s aren’t official yet). But it also doesn’t show the ACT or SAT (she took both this fall). It does show both weighted and unweighted GPA. Which is nice because the actual report card doesn’t show unweighted GPA, only weighted.
Where can I find the scatter plot that people are talking about?
@sunset88 I did not find the admissions too surprising. My son17’s friends all applied to good schools, but not Ivy types, such as BC, Northeastern, Michigan, NYU etc. Most kids got into at least one if not all of their schools on the list. There were a few rejections among them, including my son.
The thing I learned the most is that most of the schools really want high end test scores, to go along with good grades. If you have a great GPA and so so SAT/ACT you are not getting into schools that are receiving tons of applications. Schools like Villanova, Michigan, BC, BU, Tufts etc have tons of candidates applying with stellar stats and don’t need or want kids with low scores- despite what they say. The scores factor into their US News ranking and it does matter.
I also learned it’s very hard for the suburban white kid in MA to be get into the top local schools around Boston, and that merit money is pretty much non existent. However, for these same kids if they applied to schools in other areas of the country they were much more likely to receive some $$, honors college, quick acceptance.
So with son19 I will not waste time applying to any college where his SAT?ACT are considered low, unless he gets recruited for a sport. The biggest take away I got from 2017 was that the schools are swamped with applicants because of the Common App and they are pickier than ever. I don’t see this changing for 2019.
@gusmahler Look up any particular college where you know there will have been applicants from that high school. Click on the admissions tab. Scroll down and that is where the scattergram would be, if the school does them - not all schools arrange their contract with Naviance for the display of that info to students. And, if the sample size is too small, sometimes there will be no scattergram.
Our scattergrams offer the option to switch between weighted and unweighted, though the default is weighted.
Thanks. Looks like they don’t do scattergrams at my school. I am able to see how many were accepted. 132 out of 203 applicants accepted to Texas A&M. 101 out of 187 to UT Austin. Surprisingly low for Baylor, which supposedly has easier standards than either UT or A&M (only 29/63). Very little data for out of state schools, which isn’t surprising. I also wonder how complete this is. Do you need to use Naviance if you’re just filling out the Common App or Apply Texas? If not, then I’d imagine some parents/students might not use it.
At least you all have naviance. our district wont spring for it.
Our school’s naviance shows only unweighted GPA, which isn’t quite as impressive for my kid. It’d be nice…
Kiddo doesn’t know that I know his PSAT scores yet, nor does hubby. I’m not sure that I’m going to tell them before the ACT this weekend. Finding out the scores has made me resolve to double down on forcing the kid to prepare for the test. He really slacked off before taking the PSAT and unfortunately, it shows.
@sdl0625 if you don’t have Naviance at least utilize the Common Data sets available at your schools of interest.
Try to find some schools where your kid exceeds the top 75% range for safeties, and then have a mix of the mid 50% schools. I don’t think too many kids get into any schools under the 25% range unless they have some sort of hook, whether it’s sports, geographical location, URM, etc. I also don’t think I’d want to send my kid to a school where they fall below the 25% range anyways, I’d just find a better fit.
I don’t have Naviance access for S19 yet. What a bliss. No Naviance, no PSAT score. 8-}
Our naviance is the only place I’ve seen my d’s unweighted. I wouldn’t have known what it was without naviance.
@ninakatarina I’m intrigued by the green check marks in the bottom left of the scattergram, and also by the red mark (an X iirc) when it’s the lone mark in the top right in a sea of green.
Talking about DS17 with NEU?
Yes, apply to the schools where no one else from your school/district applies about 2000 miles away.
I always like to say, my younger one benefits from having an older sibling because I learned the “system”. Loved looking at the common data sets for the schools. At times, it can also be an indicator for which schools put a little weight into the individual ACT scores and not just the composite score. You were able to see who moved students from the waitlist and who didn’t. Lots of information on those!
@RightCoaster thank you for your take on '17 admissions. I do agree with your analogy.
If ours had gotten into their “reach” school, I am not sure they would be doing as well (or as happy) as they currently are…it is all in that fit.
Looking at the common data sets for universities and colleges with lower than 30% acceptance rates isn’t as helpful. I’ve asked a number of people if our son being above the 75th percentile for top LACs should make us feel secure about him being admitted. The answer is always no. Having scores in that range is a good thing, but it sounds like his essays and his recommendations might be what AO’s will be considering in order to put his application in the “yes” pile. Maybe he has a better chance than those kids with lower scores and grades but it’s not a slam dunk.
That analysis seems to match our Naviance. For most of the LACs on his list, it seems that about 1/3 of the kids above the CDS’ 75th SAT percentile still get turned down.
I’d like to flesh out this score evaluation some more, how to determine reaches/matches for selective colleges. ( @RightCoaster ?) Colleges in the range of BC, Northeastern, Tufts, Villanova each have slightly different levels of selectivity and obviously Tufts has the lowest acceptance rate in that group. Their SAT middle 50 differ, but oddly, their ACT middle 50 is the same, 31-34 (enrolled, from CDS or the school website) (with the exception being Northeastern 32-34 though I’m not sure where I got that data).
Of course we should want a score at the 75th percentile, but our student may not have achieved that, and if they did, they might also be aiming even higher. For these levels of selectivity, where would an SAT score need to land, in comparison to the middle 50, in order to be a match (or high match/low reach, if that is the best-case scenario due to their low overall acceptance rates)? Is around the middle of the middle 50 enough? Does a score below the middle of the middle 50 (say, 40th percentile) make it a high reach? Is Tufts a reach for all? How about ACT - where would that need to land?
Hypothetically, suppose a student had a 31 and a 1400. The 31 would be at the 25th percentile for all of those schools. The 1400 would be near to the middle of the middle 50 for BC and Villanova, at the 25th percentile for Northeastern, and I don’t have composite data for Tufts but it looks likely to be below 25th percentile based on the section scores I have in my spreadsheet. (And then I go round and round about whether the reported SATs include Old scores inflated via having been concorded to New. Somebody save me.)
Ugh I should really look over my posts before hitting send.
Naviance is the only place I see my d’s weighted. I mistyped and said unweighted. Her unweighted is on every report card.
Seems like D19 and many of her classmates are convinced that college will be easier than HS. Why? Because everyone with older siblings in college is talking about how they only take 3 classes 3 days a week, 2 classes the other two days, and the days aren’t filled with ECs and busywork homework assignments.
But that doesn’t take into account that college work can be much more difficult than HS work. (Especially after freshman year. Seems like freshman year will be covering things she took in HS, just more in depth). And all the ECs she’ll have to do to look good for grad school. (And the partying, but it remains to be seen if D19 will be a partier).
I lived at home during college and worked during weekends. And it was a long time ago. So I can’t accurately say how much free time D19 will have during college. And S06 was a D1 athlete, with his own requirements, so his experience is also far from typical.
@mom2twogirls the green check in the lower left quadrant is usually some sort of hooked applicant that the school really wanted like athlete, first get, URM, $$ donor, etc. The red X in the top right sometimes shows that the school is thinking the student is “using” them as a safety and it’s not really a serious application, which means if they admit the kid and the kid doesn’t enroll it hurts their ranking. Schools don’t like that. Especially if the kid showed zero interest in the school prior to submitting the app. They think the kid with awesome stats will get accepted at a bunch of other places and won’t select their school no matter what. So they rejected them or defer them.
@payn4ward my son17 probably should’ve applied to some reach schools further away from Boston, but he didn’t want to. I think with son19 we’ll let him apply to one school he likes really far away just to see what will happen 
@homerdog, the top LAC’s are tricky because they want certain types of kids AND high test scores. The big universities just seem to want top.scores/gpa’s more. But at the LAC some of them want certain kids that have their way of thinking. A good example of that around here is Tufts. Very hard to get into, and it’s hard to gauge what they want year to year. I think some of the better LACs farther away from the coasts will be easier for your son with good stats to get into. Some place like Kenyon as an example.