Apps Received for 2006

Parents Forum
41

<p>When discussing Middlebury, it might be good to look back at our discussions of last year:</p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=88189&highlight=Middlebury%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=88189&highlight=Middlebury&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=89521&highlight=Middlebury%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=89521&highlight=Middlebury&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
Yes, but that does not seem to matter much in the US News rankings. Look at Harvey Mudd and Pomona rankings. Pomona has an SAT everage of 1450 that is 80 points higher than Wellesley, 60 points higher than Carleton, and who knows how much higher than Bowdoin's advertised rate. Pomona acceptance rate of 19% is exactly one half of Wellesley's 38%, 10 points better than Carleton, and 5 points better than Bowdoin.</p>

<p>Despite being the most selective LAC and having improved on every statistic possible, Pomona has now dropped two spots in the last two years, Bowdoin that has deteriorated every year since 2003 jumps from 10th to 6th.</p>

<p>At least, the school ranked fourth best LAC is no longer accepting close to 50% of all applicants as it did two years ago, and has remarkably emerged from the abysmal 50%-60% range for their class of top 10% students.</p>

<p>The US News has become an even bigger joke than it ever was, and that is no small feat.</p>

<p>PS Can someone explain what did Middlebury do last year to drop several spots and earn them back this year? Two years ago, Middlebury had one of its best improvements years, but last year numbers did not show much positive and several negative numbers. You ought to wonder about the integrity of those US News computers!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>When I mentioned that Middlebury seems to have spent some time on analyzing their roller coaster ride in 2004-2005-2006, I believe that they must have paid more attention to what happens to schools such as Wellesley that are able to MAXIMIZE their scores with a combination of lower admission selectivity/lower expected graduation rate than to the victims of schools that seek to reward the overall qualifications of their admitted pool. The treatment of Harvey Mudd and Pomona are indicative of the gaping holes in the USNews system. The comparisons between Swarthmore, Wellesley, Bowdoin, and Pomona are no less telling. In so many words, pursuing a higher selectivity is not necessarily the best way to earn a better ranking. </p>

<p>Blatant gamemanship and cronyism are so MUCH more profitable.</p>

42

<p>"CDS as it stands now, by my reading, seems to suffice in its intentions of getting the whole story out there" </p>

<p>Maybe for you, but I like my suggestion better. At a minimum, I would like to the score of the median student, not the median score submitter, on the SAT or ACT or, if possible, both combined in some way.</p>

43

<p>I'm surprised that no one has mentioned that Middlebury received 6187 applications this year (up 18% over last year's total of 5225). For the first time, they also reported the SAT scores of all applicants, regardless of whether test scores were used in admissions. The new dean of admissions just came to Midd from Harvard and is doing things differently. It appears as though it's working.</p>

44

<p>
[quote]
At a minimum, I would like to the score of the median student, not the median score submitter, on the SAT or ACT or, if possible, both combined in some way.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm not following you--may be just my Monday brain. How can you know the score of a student who didn't submit scores? Score submitters are all the school has to work with when it comes to reporting quartiles or means or medians. Did I misunderstand?</p>

45

<p>Let me try again. The problem is that the published statistics don't tell me what I would like to know, which is how good the enrolled class is as measured by this particular statistic. If, say, a college enrolls 1,000 freshmen (to keep the numbers round), give me the 250th best SAT score and 500th and, if possible, the 750th score (counting down from top among all enrolled students). This eliminates the bias in favor of schools that don't get scores from all applicants (and, guess which applicants those are).</p>

<p>One problem is where some good students submit ACT scores. I don't know whether this could be fixed with a conversion table.</p>

46

<p>You wouldn't know "how good the class was" in any case unless the SAT data were corrected for income bias.</p>

47

<p>It's true that I wouldn't learn anything that isn't measured by this statistic, including how many beautiful art portfolios or insightful poems were submitted in lieu of standardized test scores. I didn't say the SAT was perfect or measured every thing that could be measured. But, the median (or 25-75) test scores is relevant to my family in finding a fit. Also, I don't want to be misled (tempted to say defrauded) by statistics calculated on a un-normal base.</p>

48

<p>Eulenspeigel:</p>

<p>According to the Common Data Set instructions, schools are supposed to report SATs for everybody. If they report according to the rules, you will get the info you are looking for (except for midwestern schools where the ACT is popular). In those cases, you would have to look at the ACT scores as well.</p>

49

<p>If you say so and we understand each other, fine. But I thought they reported the 25-75 numbers for those who submit scores, which is not the same thing.</p>

50

<p>Thats what I was trying to say a few posts back....that the instructions tell them to post ALL scores, but they apparently are not. The CDS administrators have also apparently not successfully slapped their hands strong enough to make them comply with the instructions.</p>

51

<p>Still, all scores doesn't satisfy me. I want the score of the 75, 50, 25th percentile enrolled student (to the extent available), computed as if non-submitters had submitted a score of zero (actually, 200 for each test).</p>

52

<p>An admissions officer from Wheaton (a school where the SAT is optional) explained how this whole thing works there:</p>

<p>Even though it is optional to submit the SAT, if a student is admitted the school finds out their SAT scores anyway through the student's final transcript. Therefore, they report this statistic which includes every student who took the SAT (and most students probably did).</p>

53

<p>Most students is good enough for me, if it approaches 90% or, better, 100%. But if it's 60-70%, the statistic becomes worthless or, worse, misleading.</p>

54

<p>Dropping SAT requirement helps! </p>

<p>
[quote]
Inside the Admissions Office</p>

<p>It's the busy season in the Admissions Office. How busy? Well, consider this: 6,187 students have applied to Middlebury for a place in the Class of 2010—an 18 percent increase over last year's applicant pool.</p>

<p>Early Decision I applications were up 19 percent, while Early Decision II applications showed a 16 percent increase. In addition, the College received 24 percent more applications from Hispanic and African American students than it did last year.</p>

<p>Another interesting trend concerned regional interest in Middlebury. Applications from the Mid-Atlantic region were up 20 percent; from the South, 23 percent; from the Midwest, 15 percent; and from the West, nearly 10 percent.

[/quote]
</p>

55

<p>How do the schools which don't require SAT scores report the scores for all admitted students? Where do they get the data? Leaving out those students who never take the SAT (I don't know how many that would be), do they later require the admitted students to provide their scores? Do they access them directly through some relationship with College Board? efg88's answer - that they get these scores from the final transcript - doesn't work for me: some/many/most schools don't post SAT scores on the hs transcript.</p>

<p>Information posted here anecdotally in other threads argues against the notion that schools even have the scores of "non-submitters." One cc parent was told by an SAT-optional school that they recommend against submitting scores if you are lower than previous year's posted SAT median for their school. They only want submissions from students above that number, because it improves how they look in all the rankings. It's gaming the system, but it makes sense to me. IE, it's not in their interest to obtain scores from non-submitters.</p>

<p>I'm curious as to the POV of those who feel they "ought" to provide this data to CDS. and have their "hands slapped" if they do not. If a school doesn't believe SAT scores are important in its admissions process, why should it be required to provide them so others can evaluate them on this basis?</p>

56

<p>I must be a poorer communicator than I thought. Suppose, of 1,000 enrolled students, 600 submitted scores. The top 25% of 1,000 is 250. Tell be the score of the student who submitted the 250th best score. Also, the score of the student who submitted the 500th best score. In this case we have no 750th best score. These are the numbers that are comparable with a school where every applicant submits scores.</p>

57

<p>Sorry, that only confused me more.</p>

<p>If 600 of 1000 enrolled students submitted scores, the appropriate assumption is that the other 400 did not take the tests and had no scores to submit. This may not be correct, but it is the only answer available. (And it <em>might</em> be correct, too.)</p>

58

<p>Guess why they had no submitted scores. In any case, I am not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.</p>

59

<p>UCLA freshman apps: 2005 - 42,103. 2006 - 47,226 --- plus about 13,000 transfer applicants each year...</p>

60

<p>efg, not all high schools have sat scores on student transcripts. Our high school does not do that.</p>