I don’t know if it would be relevant for Smarter Balanced to link to the UC report. The UC report is only about the test’s utility for UC admissions, not about how good the test is for its intended purpose.
I think the UC report is interesting to read, BTW, if you are interested in these issues.
Please note that prior to Covid-19 Hamilton was test flexible. Applicants were required to submit some form of standardized test resuls across both verbal and quantitative areas.
I agree with you. But I also know my kids. In no way can they walk into an exam with a few hours of study and come out with 1550+ on the SAT. And if D27 still has her eye set on Stanford, then it’s only my duty as a parent to help her with her goals.
Aren’t Bowdoin and Bates the two that have been TO for a while, and Bowdoin and Wesleyan the ones who require submission upon enrollment? In any event, Bowdoin and Wesleyan have materially lower test ranges in the CDS than they do on their websites and in USNews, presumably because the higher one only includes people who submitted scores with their application and the lower one is from everyone (ie, it includes people who did not submit with their app but sent when enrolling).
And that’s sort of what I’m getting at.
I suppose it doesn’t mean they’re not qualified because that’s up to the school.
But statistically, they are not at the same level - the schools are allowing a freebie - which by the way, pushes up app counts, lowers admit rates, and adds again to their overall reps.
If they haven’t taken a base line practice test, I’d encourage you to suggest that as a first step. If a kid is already scoring above 1500, spending the summer cramming may not budge the score and will sure lead to some angst! (obviously, the test prep industry focused on kids below the median because those are the kids who are most helped by intensive/costly test prep).
Your kid may surprise you with the benchmark score.
The data Dartmouth released suggested test optional was having virtually no impact on admissions among the majority of admits, namely those who came from high SES families/highly resourced high schools. Their suggested explanation is Admissions was getting substitutable data out of the transcripts and such those applicants could provide.
In contrast, test optional was affecting admissions among applicants from lower SES families/underresourced high schools, where Dartmouth felt it could have admitted a few more such students if they had submitted high, but below Dartmouth’s normal range, test scores.
I don’t know if test optional highly selective LACs are seeing the same sort of effect to begin with. But knowing their usual distribution of admits, even if so, test optional is likely not affecting the large majority of their admissions. But maybe they too could admit a few more lower SES/underresourced applicants if they required tests.
That’s the thing. I help D27 with her homework. She writes amazingly well. Math needs a lot of work…
And there are plenty of kids with high test scores who are head over heels in love with Vassar and Bowdoin but have no interest in Harvard & Yale and therefore do not apply there. Not to mention the kids with high test scores who apply to all four schools but get into one or two or zero of the above schools. I can think of several kids in D22 and D24’s classes with high scores who are currently at Bowdoin (actually more than several since it is a popular college at both of their boarding schools) and a handful at Vassar --they are there because they want to be there not because admissions is test optional there.
The median test score at Yale might be higher than the median at Vassar. Actually, I have no idea. I didn’t even realize Vassar was test optional before COVID, but it seems like you are basing your definition of a “high caliber” student by their test scores at which point the statistics are baked into your definition of caliber.
Yeah - I don’t believe Dartmouth - it’s a nice story for them to put out there so they can try to let low SES still apply if you’re borderline.
But I’m not believing it at all.
But that’s me.
There was a whole long thread on that. People believe it. I don’t though.
Some have claimed that one of the reasons Harvard went test required was that if they didn’t, they would be at a disadvantage to Yale in identifying the top talents, as Yale would have more information about applicants than Harvard.
It’s clear schools are playing follow the leader.
I’ll just note again Dartmouth actually published data.
Or they were afraid Dartmouth and Yale and such were going to do what they said and identify more lower SES admits.
I note for context that there has been a new wave of rankings, including the new USNWR methodology, which de facto reward even relatively small percentage differences in lower SES enrollment. Various wealthy colleges have already been competing for such students with more generous aid, including going to no loans offers, targeted outreach, and so on.
So it is pretty plausible they would see a need to compete in this way as well.
Yet the test required schools will be competing in a smaller pool of limited income and/or URM students (those with competitive test scores who choose to apply) than some of their competitors who are working with a larger pool (test optional/test blind who choose to apply). Time will tell how things work out, but I don’t believe some of these schools when they say they want more FGLI students.
Yale stated they want to get to 70% of students receiving financial aid, but when you give need based aid to families making $150K-$200K or so that is far beyond ‘limited income.’
I tell stories at work with data all the time. You can always utilize data to achieve the narrative you want.
But - it’s what I think - as I noted it doesn’t mean I’m right - and you think otherwise - and I can appreciate that too.
First of all Vassar was not test optional prior to Covid; they first went test optional for those applying for the 2020-21 school year. Second, as the mother of a kid with a high test score who applied ED to Vassar I can guarantee there are a lot of very very smart kids there, many of them with high test scores. I have no idea how many of them applied and didn’t get into Harvard or Yale but given that 95 out of every 100 who apply to those schools get rejected I’d say they are in good company. I know you’re not a fan of Vassar - you’ve made that clear with regular snide comments - but I can attest personally to an intellectually curious, high achieving student body that in my experience are just really nice kids as well.
There are some schools (like Princeton) that super score internally but you have to send the entirety of the test. In the case of princeton, they do not allow self reporting. I am sure there is a reason for them wanting the information. Regardless, I can’t believe a 1600 in any form will hurt you.
IMO, for Yale and other super-selectives, the pool of disadvantaged applicants with high test scores is more than enough for them to choose from to satisfy their targets with academically desirable matriculants. Reducing total apps may be a good thing for them as it eliminates the need to process a lot of uncompetitive applicants of all types, including advantaged ones. The 1400+ from an under resourced school will jump out and be easier to target – the diamonds will more clearly shine from a smaller pile than trying to sort through a bunch of gravel.
Agree- thought it was interesting. I might have had different admission outcomes if I hadn’t submitted a score, being that I come from an extremely wealthy area and also didn’t apply for FA.