<p>reflectivemom:</p>
<p>I don’t think the SAT was ever an aptitude test, really. The verbal section always seemed to measure reading comprehension, which included vocabulary. There was the recently discarded analogies testing, which I thought was quite useful, but was also based partly on vocab.</p>
<p>The math section seems to measure both learned math and mathematical reasoning of some sort.</p>
<p>Texashoosier, that’s right. You mentioned your daughter is going to Sewanee. I was just curious after reading your screen name.</p>
<p>dstark, if you think Amherst does not care about SAT scores, you are dead wrong. Read their CAP report to see what they have to wrestle with. SAT scores are only less important for recruited atheletes and those who are truly underprivileged. For the rest, a score of less than 1400 will probably disqualify you automatically. </p>
<p>taxhoosier, the majority of kids out there probably don’t even know where to take a prep course. I certainly would not have wanted my D to take such a course should she had expressed such a desire. There are many kids out there who score in seventh grades better than most seniors, and by the time of PSAT in tenth grade, it is quite clear that they will score well when they take their SAT. I know several kids like this, including my own D and many other posters here.</p>
<p>My kids didn’t take an SAT prep course either. My daughter did retake the SAT after she was dissatisfied with her first score, and realized that she hadn’t prepared adequately for the physical ordeal of it. (She also looked for a more pleasant place to take the test the second time.) Neither had any interest in improving his or her score once he or she had received a score that was in the ballpark for the colleges they liked.</p>
<p>I’ll add that I have some problems with the economic inequality issues of SAT prep courses. But I have been reading recently about how people who believe they can improve their intelligence by study and practice tend to outperform people who believe in innate intelligence over the long run. So maybe it’s pedagogically better to make ALL kids take SAT prep courses. Even the ones who can ace it the first time out without preparation would benefit from being told that they need to prepare.</p>
<p>padad, what are you talking about? I didn’t say Amherst didn’t care about SAT scores.</p>
<p>I provided the link so you can hear from Amherst directly. I didn’t even comment.</p>
<p>RM, check your Private Messages.</p>
<p>No SAT prep class here, either. Standardized tests are his friends. He did pieces of two Blue Book SATs, mainly to make sure he could get through the essay in 25 minutes and to look at some minor stuff (idioms and pronoun agreement) in Writing. Did one full BB test to see how he managed the endurance portion of the SAT (which should be a separate score, IMHO). Total time spent: six to seven hours over a month. Scores are released 3/29. If he’s near his PSAT score, he and we will be happy to move on to more exciting things!</p>
<p>This is definitely a parents forum - it went from “top scholarship vs top school” to SAT scores.</p>
<p>It isn’t really that the classes change the kids’ abilities, it’s that they demystify the test.</p>
<p>My daughter did not take any SAT prep courses, either; she did read the 10 Real SATs and did a practice test from it, but that was it. She did quite well. She also scored highly in middle school (760 on the verbal section as a 7th grader)–with no prep. </p>
<p>reflectivemom: I think those kids (the ones who did well on the SAT-- purely from “natural ability”-- are at all kinds of schools.</p>
<p>I’m curious about this thread, though. I’ve read all the posts here, and while somewhat interesting, hasn’t the topic of this thread been discussed innumerable times on CC? So, just out of curiosity, why was it started again? Not trying to be argumentative, I’m really just curious-- and a bit confused.</p>
<p>Something about trying to read this thread reminds me of Alice at the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party.</p>
<p>
Yeah, really. I was enjoying the original discussion. Now it’s back to the same boring old “discuss SAT scores” stuff. Oh well. The more things change, the more they stay the same.</p>
<p>
Definitely believe this. Every day in every way.</p>
<p>Don’t believe it speaks to the question in the OP. But if someone is thinking that those of us advocating against fine distinctions in SAT scores as a valid measure would go so far as to say there is no “smarter than”, I am not on that bus. (apologies for the run-on sentence, but can’t think of a way to say it. and I’m a <em>high</em> SAT person 
)</p>
<p>Let’s keep this thread on the original topic…</p>
<p>My own two cents: There’s no simple answer to the question posed at the outset. For starters, I’d forget the money part, and compare the experience at the two schools - academics, likely peer group, academic programs of particular interest, ECs of interest, location (sometimes a big factor in overall experience, e.g., NYC), housing arrangements, internship/work opportunities, quality of career help, etc.</p>
<p>Once you have really compared the schools in a detailed manner, then you can weigh the price premium for the more costly one. My point is that prestige is just one factor in the equation, and it shouldn’t be the biggest.</p>
<p>Of course, your own financial circumstances play a big role, too - for some, a $100K premium is manageable. For others, where that debt might translate into student loans, a $100K premium would be a huge burden and something to be avoided if at all possible.</p>
<p>This is a good and mostly civil discussion. I’ll add my own experience, which was fairly atypical for the “CC crowd” but not all that unusual in my world at the time. First, I began my undergrad studies in my thirties, with a family (two young children) and some part-time responsibilities in our small business. I completed an associates degree at a small community college (and needed financial aid even to do that) and then transferred to a small regional state university with a full scholarship. I was at the top of every class I took at the junior college, but with every class, I was more knowledgeble after the course than before it. Maybe I would have learned more, had deeper insight, etc. if that “critical mass” had been larger, but even in a situation where the admission criteria was almost nonexistent, my point is that it was still an enriching experience for me. I didn’t think of myself as smarter than all of my classmates; I just figured that I had the advantage of maturity. </p>
<p>At the state U (not ranked as far as I know, average SATs even to this day are probably in the 800-900/1600 range), I definitely had peers who were smarter than me, although I finished as the top student in both departments of my double major. And at this unknown school, I had dedicated and talented professors, the opportunity to have my original historical research published in a national journal, and (thanks to an amazingly supportive extended family who pitched in to help my husband take care of the kids) spent a semester at one of the top private universities in Mexico at no cost (in fact, my financial aid, scholarships, and research stipends during those years helped support my family, since I lived at home and commuted eighty miles each way to class). </p>
<p>After I finished my undergrad degree, I worked for a couple of years before starting an evening masters program. With no prep, I took the GRE and scored in the high 700s on both the critical reading and quantitative reasoning portions, and I had a perfect score on the other section that used to be part of the test (I don’t remember what it was called, basically verbal logic problems). I mention the test scores only to suggest that, had my life circumstances been different, I probably could have considered much more selective institutions. But I don’t see much point in dwelling in the “what if” question. I had a fine education and was stretched to think beyond my own experience, and I really don’t think I was held back because not everyone of my classmates was an academic wonder. And I have a meaningful and successful career. It’s not particularly high paying, but it is sufficient to meet my family’s needs and put us in a position to offer our daughter some flexibility as she is making her own college choices, which so far range from top-50 LACs to the two major public universities in our home state. We are still waiting on financial aid packages, and money will be one of several final determining factors. I do see potential advantages in some of the schools over others, but they are not so great that I would put our future financial security at risk so that she can attend if the aid package is not sufficient. Although I do feel just a bit anxious during this waiting time, I know my daughter, and even though there are considerable differences between her various choices, I am confident that she can have wonderful opportunities at any one of them.</p>
<p>
Totally agree. I think the uber-scorers on the SATs really must have great aptitude; but there is a body of knowledge tested on these that take it well beyond “aptitude” testing only.</p>
<p>I wonder if what reflectivemom’s kid is drawn to is peers who have what I call “quick minds?” Great for repartee (I don’t mean that pejoratively), fast-moving curricula. Both things I value. It is patience-testing to be in a group who learn slower. However, as my beloved father always said, “Patience is a virtue.” </p>
<p>I think if one seeks the high-SAT peers, the quick minds and quick learners, they are highly highly likely to find pretty much all the other valuable traits in a peer group. There will be creative people among them, great athletes, dedicated musicians, the whole shmeer. I don’t think it is much of a risk to focus on seeking a school with the set of peers reflectiveson seeks.</p>
<p>I do think he will be wise to focus on the very important factors that texashoosier discusses in post #271.</p>
<p>Enjoyed your post ReneeV. Great contribution of how enriching the educational experience can be even in a setting where a student is head-and-shoulders above the majority in score-measured intelligence.</p>
<p>As you said, doesn’t mean you <em>might</em> not have found a setting with your academic peers even more enriching. Who knows? But yours is a very valid answer to the OP question: With hindsight, you do not feel you suffered for the choice; you didn’t find yourself without “smart” peers despite the average SAT scores.</p>
<p>reflectivemom,
I also think that U of C might be a terrific choice for you son. He sounds like mine-gifted, loves to learn, would rather be around fellow students that can keep up with him, etc. A word of caution, and this will also seguay [sp?] back to the original topic: he should be very sure he would go the colleges that offer merit scholarships to him anyway, even if he didn’t get any $$. Our son received a full tuition Trustees Scholarship from his current school, a large -up and coming, top 25 ranked [ if you pay attention to USNR ratings] university, that statistically was at the bottom of his list of colleges based on the Hi[ not average] SAT scores of accepted students. He is now in the process of reapplying to U of C, where he was also accepted, because he just did not find a large enough "critical mass’ of really smart kids who “love to learn for the sake of learning “at his current school. There is a small facebook group at his college called” Keep your Hand Down and Shut up- No one Cares” where he and a small group of like minded students post about the lack of interest in discourse by most students he has so far encountered. Very sad , and if we had not been blinded by the merit $$ offered, entirely preventable, because I felt in my heart that it never was as good a “fit” for him as U of C. He made the choice to go there for a lot of [what we hoped were] good reasons- the programs offered, the encouragement to double major, the merit $$, it was closer to home, great weather, he would know a lot of kids there from his HS [ though he was undoubtedly the smartest of that group], but we forgot the most important factor for students like him: the fit. He wants to be surrounded by students like himself- gifted, quirky, whose reason to go to college is to learn, not just to do time because everyone goes to college these days.
Tarhunt has a point I think about how having a large % of hi sat score students can change the “feel” of a classroom. It certainly rings true for us, based on my son’s experience.</p>
<p>cur, another way to look at the question. What makes kids choose the top money over the top school? I have two brilliant nieces. They chose the money for undergrad over HYP acceptances–on the theory that they would do HYP for grad school. Parents were/are succesful professionals with enough cash to send them anywhere. </p>
<p>One never went to grad school. One got HYP acceptances for med school but chose state med school–albeit a darned good one-- on principal.</p>
<p>Most kids seem to choose the money for a comfort factor but my nieces did it on principal. What do you reckon the percentages are?</p>
<p>*btw…reflectmom could use a thread to herself. Those are some ‘interesting’ viewpoints…</p>
<p>Trying to catch up on this thread is like chasing the string on a runaway kite. The night crew has been working overtime.</p>
<p>On the discussion of SAT, s. didn’t study or take a prep course (took the PSAT in the spirit of the original - that it’s prep for the test.) He took the SAT I twice and ended up with 1420 (old version). It would have looked bad had he done any better than that, since his grades, although generally good, were not perfect.</p>
<p>I wonder if people had these same questions in mind when they chose where to live/what public school to attend. I don’t think you can really separate the college years out. Formal education is cumulative and it’s reasonable, (so says I), to try to ameliorate deficiencies when you’re faced with a choice, like which college to attend. Our public h.s. is wonderfully diverse, by any measure, and the lessons a prior poster says she learned in a minimum wage job are things my kids leave h.s. with. I’m not so concerned that they find out what the real world is like in college, since they haven’t been cocooned in h.s. I do hope they find stimulating intellectual discussions that challenge them, because they haven’t had enough of that. </p>
<p>I think the answer isn’t that far from the surface. Once families realize what they can afford and the offers are in hand, most posters seem willing to leave it to the students - because they’ve already set the limits.</p>