This following doesn’t directly contradict what the dean said, but apparently test scores are correlated with a higher admit rate:
In total, 42 percent of applicants opted to not submit standardized test scores, and 26 percent of the offers were given to students who chose to not submit standardized test scores.
This topic came up in the thread shown below, and it was made clear that Saul Reiser blew his analysis, as those omitted variables were very clearly in the report (further posts should be directed to that thread):
What does Test Optional mean?
These are the guidelines IMO:
If you are from an overrepresented area, or group, and/or competitive HS, the tests are not optional for you, especially for the most elite and most popular schools (Many schools in this group have hinted more and more that they prefer scores, and some are no longer TO).
However, If you are applying to schools that are “buyers”, then even if you are in one of the above categories, test optional probably means truly optional . These schools are more likely to want to “raise” their test score distribution and some actively encourage not submitting.
(quoting Jeff Selingo: “buyers are the have-nots in terms of admissions—although they might provide a superior undergraduate education. Rather than “select” a class, their admissions officers must work hard to recruit students and they must discount tuition through merit aid to fill classroom seats”)
If you are from an underrepresented group or area of the country/world, or you meet an institutional need(FGLI, etc etc), then tests are truly optional at all TO schools. All schools, even the most competitive ones, can use TO to shape the class they want and not worry about score distribution.
Ok! How about this one: Research Finds that High School GPAs Are Stronger Predictors of College Graduation than ACT Scores
The point is, there are a ton of studies saying that GPAs are more predictive, as many as saying the opposite. So to suggest that one perspective is definitively correct is simply not supported by the existence of an abundance of evidence in both directions.
Interesting that all the articles you cited were right when the Covid pandemic began in the US.
Many articles point to grade inflation during the pandemic that has continued post-pandemic. Is GPA still a greater predictor when tens of thousands of kids have a 4.0?
I’m seeing a bit lower (32-34) on the COD of students who applied, so maybe there are a small amount more who are artificially high, but nowhere near the vast majority of colleges are boasting averages in the 30s. And, ACT is unusual for people to submit to Villanova, so it is a very small sample. Even so, it’s not most or even 5% of schools that are trending that high.
Yeah, those averages are higher than UNC and NC State which is surprising.
If you post this to the other thread, I will respond there, as I don’t want to derail this thread.
Oh I do not doubt your statement at all and I think that similar data is found recently at most TO schools. I was simply referencing her instagram podcasts that she posts weekly. In every instance that someone posts a question about TO she routinely states that she doesn’t need results from a 4 hour test to determine admissibility when she has a transcript representing 3 to 3.5 years of coursework.
I think she is overstating the case, but I also do not have years of admissions experience and she does.
I think the issue again is grade inflation.
I had a 2.8 in HS (and was in the 2nd quintile.
Today - maybe a 4.5 
Another problem is the kids know about TO. I have a S24 who spends hours every night on schoolwork. 5 AP’s this year. But at some point during his junior year when I was trying to get him prepped for SAT and ACT he realized he could go TO. I think once that was told to him by someone in some context, he was done with testing. DONE. I hear other families say similar things. I could not get him to take the test another time.
I compare it to when year after year I attended some awful inlaw event with my husband, I went because I felt obligated like many spouses do. One year I was a bit under the weather and he told me I should stay home. I did and it was the best feeling ever, like I was released. Every year since then I cannot make myself go, because I know now it is not “mandatory”.
It’s like that with these kids. For years, students knew it was required and a very important test that would make an impact on college choices. Then the door opened maybe you don’t need to take it. Kids, who were stressed about studying, not to mention actually taking the test, jumped on the idea of it being optional. They felt free from the pressure of having to take a test.
But going TO means we had to make choices. I spent hours combing through data, news releases, CDS, social media posts, and even the college newspapers, looking for insights as to who is really open to a TO student.
I would quibble with your 3rd bulletpoint in that I think there are many instances where a standardized test score, whether sat, act, ap, or other, would be helpful in validating a GPA from an under resourced school or area. Meaning that while TO, coming from a disadvantaged background or under resourced school, your odds of admission increase considerably if you can submit a score that is otherwise competitive at that undergrad school.
That’s funny. Either in this thread or another similar thread created today, someone posted a link to a page from Villanova that stated that the 75th% of their enrollees’ high school UNWEIGHTED gpa was well over 4.2.
I agree with that–that a score in range always helps! If you have the right score great, it helps, but if you don’t and they havent fulfilled that needed bucket then thats ok too, go TO: in other words it is optional for you–not a really a disadvantage if the rest of the app looks ok. Whereas if you are in group 1, you are probably not getting in without submitting a score that is in range, so tests are not optional because it is a significant disadvantage without it.
I tutor students for the SAT/ACT. Work has been picking up a lot this year already compared to ‘20-‘23. Good for me, bad for students.
Clearly the word is out that some very competitive colleges prefer test scores. College Board is capitalizing on that. ACT, not so much, from what I’m seeing out there.
To answer the original question, test optional is, IMO, going back to meaning what it meant prepandemic: for the very most selective schools, optional depends on the student.
This is from another thread - as a sophomore. Grade inflation at it’s finest - unless there are 10,000 in his class. And he’s wanting to take a college course - as a Junior - to impress UF. It’s gotten out of control.
I’m currently rank 79 because my schools ranking system seems off. I have a 4.0 unweighted and 4.74 weighted and have never gotten below an A in any course.
Given that you know that this is meaningless without more information, why post it? Or at least why not explain why it is misleading?
I am wondering if that is a state that does weighting of honors at 5 and AP at 6. Otherwise I don’t see how a midyear junior could have a GPA that high. I don’t think that GPA is even possible at our school. The highest person at ours has a 4.68 or something, and that is with 13 AP classes (a few of which are in process) and pretty much all honors everything else. (Most kids end up with a few non-honors courses because of electives.)
Maybe - but UF and I asked him - uses the +.5 and +1 - so that’s why I asked. He’s a Florida kid.
Usually when someone says 4.0, they mean straight As - but maybe it means straight Bs. Will see how the student responds.
So – maybe indirectly, the ACT/SAT test kids’ memory and, for things they don’t remember, the ability to use logic to either find the solution, or at least eliminate some of the options to come to a “guess” that is between two options instead of four.
Kids A and B took the same or similar courses in high school, had similar test prep, have similar GPAs, same SES, academic support at home, etc. Yet on testing day, somehow Kid A scores a 35 and Kid B scores a 29. I’m betting that memory and the ability to use logic are sometimes responsible for such testing result discrepancies between otherwise equal kids.
