<p>Smith has been Board optional for years. When visiting schools with an older daughter two years ago, admissions officers (not necessarily at Smith) would concede in private (or at one school, state baldly in the information session) that students should only submit boards if they were in the median or higher. Well, duh. For better or worse, when looking at a school with optional boards, assume that the real median is lower. All women’s colleges have lower scores, simply because half the usual applicant pool is ineligible. There are a number of excellent reasons to attend a women’s college, all of which one might mention in an admissions essay. There is 1 that is rarely mentioned: the opportunity to attend a school which is academically superior to the co-ed schools where the student might be accepted. </p>
<p>While we are bursting bubbles for those using US News to make a decision, note the schools where 50% or more of applicants come from schools that do not provide a class rank. The better the school, the more this will be true. Some high schools are better than others. Some private high schools are highly “selective”, which can mean that all but the lowest 10% of the class will have high boards, and be capable of succeeding at any college in the country (top NYC private schools, St. Grottlesex boarding schools). These schools make very complete transcripts available to college (i.e. the college could compute an approximate class rank), but they do not rank. It isn’t moral reservations that stops these schools from ranking, it is a tacit understanding with colleges that accepting ranked students might make the college look “worse” when they post statistics. </p>
<p>I’d like to think that colleges who don’t require boards are making a statement about boards, but that isn’t what I think. A real statement would be to require the boards, talk about their curricula, faculty, and graduates, and stick to their principles on board scores.</p>