Thank you for sharing. I am still getting used to the abbreviations. But if Carnegie is Carnegie Mellon, then getting into Carnegie Mellon and Washington U is pretty impressive as well as being deferred at MIT and wait listed at Stanford. So clearly your child’s application was impressive enough to be considered. Since he applied to MIT I’m assuming he went for engineering of some sort? Which brings me to another issue in that if teen does not score as high as teen would like on the SAT, I’ve always wondered whether applying to schools test optional hurts them or not, but your child’s results suggest that it might not hurt teen if things go sideways with his SAT test.
Both are true (more kids and more applications). The current cohort (Gen Z) is the largest generation in American (or world?) history. In the US (and maybe elsewhere), a larger percentage of them are applying to colleges than in previous generations. AND they’re applying to far more colleges (per student) than students in previous generations. The so-called “demographic cliff” – born starting the 2008 recession – is entering high school right about now, but we’re still seeing the waning years of the Gen Z bulge.
2 Likes
That seems to be the opposite of what Mwfan1921, who apparently is an admissions officer, is saying:
“It’s just not that hard to make choices between applicants whether there are test scores or not.”
I’d be curious to see him or her elaborate on that.
You did a formal test prep course? Or maybe a tutor?
None of the above. S24 spent a few hour reviewing from a book on SAT grammar —that’s it. He didn’t do any prep for the math or reading sections beyond taking a practice test.
There are a number of contributing factors including rescoring; increased selectivity; increased prepping; increased taking multiple times, superscore, taking both SAT/ACT and choosing best… ; and test optional becoming more common.
Example median test scores for Yale over time are below:
1976 – 670/690
1980 – 670/690
1985 – 670/690
1990 – 670/710
1995 – 670/720
= New Test / Recentering =
2000 – 730/720
2005 – 750/740
= Added Writing Section =
2010 – 750/750/760
2015 – 760/750/750
= Redesigned, Removed Writing Section =
2020 – 750/760
2023 – 760/780
4 Likes
I was (am?) one year older. At our under-resourced hippie public HS, I was not told that the SAT existed. I learned about the SAT at the public library. The librarian also told me that financial aid existed. She didn’t tell me that test prep was a thing, though.
1 Like
As near as I can tell:
590 → 660 → 700
760 → 770 → 780
For the second conversion, go to the last page of old SAT CR to new SAT reading to see 660 → 35. Looks like those numbers multiplied by 20 give a new SAT reading score.
Regarding test prep… After I went to college, I visited home and noticed that a younger sibling was using a test prep book… I looked through the book and noted that it focused mainly in test taking methods, rather than actual content knowledge (though it did have a list of “SAT words”). Most of the test taking techniques were obvious enough to me that I had used them when I took the SAT. Probably meant that the book would not have helped me much (besides maybe the “SAT words”). But I could see it significantly helping students who did not know or figure out on their own some of the test taking techniques.
My two cents is the biggest change from “back in my day” is the sorts of ECs some of these kids are doing. I think the test scores are not really notably better with adjustments, and grade inflation can be a problem sometimes but competitive college prep high schools typically find a way to provide discrimination within their top tiers of students.
But at the most popular colleges, there are far too many applicants applying with easily good enough academics, and many of those applicants are turning to extraordinary ECs as an alternative way of trying to stand out. And I think this is sometimes consuming their time, energy, and psyche in unhealthy ways.
2 Likes
I did no more than 15 minutes of prep for the SAT, which as trying the sample questions in the booklet with the signup form. I did not get the impression that many other students in my high school (where about a third of graduates went to four year colleges, so not an elite high school) did more than that.
For Achievement tests (later called SAT II then SAT subject tests), prep was merely completion of the associated high school courses (got an 800 and two in the 700s). Same with AP tests (only three, not ten or whatever). No additional test prep beyond the courses. My impression was that this was the norm at the time, but not now.
4 Likes
You are right about the extraordinary ECs. Sometimes I have to force myself to stay away from some of these “chance me” posts because some of the accomplishments of these teenagers are out of this world.
7 Likes
A lot of discussion about test prep. Probably a factor
In addition to not prepping in the 1980s, my buddies and I learned to play “quarters” the night before the SAT (drinking game)
In hind sight, I don’t recommend this prep
7 Likes
He applied to EECS and if a school didn’t have that then it’s EE.
In my sample size of one, this cycle, IVYs were not kind to TO applicants whereas Carnegie Mellon, Wash U and Stanford really did mean test option is really optional.
In our case, S24 did not care at all about the ivys and there was no guarantee if he did study and get a 36 he would get into MIT. In retrospect, when he got deferred and not rejected by MIT, it meant with a higher score he would have gotten in because someone did like the rest of his package to not have rejected him EA.
I could be wrong but I think MIT defers a lot of people so even a high ACT/SAT score may not have made a difference.
2 Likes
I get that. But how many get deferred and not rejected with a sub 30 score? I know of one.
Again. It was his choice and he is at peace with his path.
I graduated in '91 and took it in 89 and 90. I attended a very competitive magnet HS only because I lived locally - not because my parents planned it that way - and was generally clueless on college admissions and testing. In my HS’s magnet program (there were non-magnet kids like me also), the majority of the kids took SAT prep classes and some even had private tutors even back then. The Korean American kids were particularly intense and attended Saturday tutoring classes (Hagwons) on SAT, subject tests, AP prep etc. Back then the SAT tested on vocabulary and many of the kids literally spent the summer writing down word definitions, root words, original language, etc. on note cards to study and memorize words that no one uses in everyday conversations. I think this aspect of the SAT made it a bit harder back in the day even if it’s mostly a useless criteria for admissions.
I didn’t do any of the above and took it 3 times without much prep hoping my score would improve just because. It didn’t. By contrast, a lot of my classmates got great scores (which back then was 1350+ if I recall) and were admitted to the top schools. I think there are some people who are naturally smart and test well who can roll out of bed and achieve very high scores. For most, hard work pays off even on a test that was supposed to test for aptitude instead of hard work.
1 Like
Yes, the vocabulary-based SAT verbal of that era made questions easy if you know the words, difficult if you did not. The “hard” questions were the ones with the more obscure words. Probably they were trying to proxy how much you read, but then there were books of thousands of (claimed) SAT words for test preppers to learn.
2 Likes
Gee I missed all those test preps back in 1968. Got a 780 on verbal and 730 in math. I think that helped me get into a top Ivy since my high school was in the middle of nowhere
As a newbie here, and curiosity piqued me to read this thread through the entirety- I actually am a bit confused, so is it a black box? or is it not? (bec I think I read somewhere they say it’s not “lottery”). Wouldn’t black box admission = lottery? 
I’m an Ivy Leaguer but only for my MBA. Still the GMAT scores of yesterdecades (mine) pale in comparison to today. 
Clearly, while it’s somewhat apples (university SAT) to oranges (Masters GMAT), the factors for higher scores are essentially the same. (compression at the top, not more Ivy League MBA programs, etc)
Also, or in addition, I’m actually shocked for example with a Georgetown University - MBA vs Undergrad Biz program… for undergrad biz = acceptance is as tough as an Ivy. For MBA then (and until now), it’s a “safety” (I did not even apply to that school then). Same with NYU - my safety then…
1 Like