I definitely think the new SAT is a lot more balanced than the old 2400 with the section with pointless grammar rules and unfavorably short time for the essay being equivalent to math.
I did not do as well as peers because I felt that studying for the test is a boring waste of time especially as a future engineering major that rather be studying circuits or solving problems (and would attend a low tier college anyways for financial and other reasons). If the test actually tested practical real world concepts I would be more inclined to study and do well on it…
They are moving away, but it is informative. What you should do is go to the collegeboard website and look at GPA vs. classrank brackets at elite schools. It is definitely kind of imprecise because less students report it, but I notice a difference in culture at some elite schools (especially outside of the top 10). Some have student bodies that constantly complain and whine about the rigor or claim that there is grade deflation when there really isn’t (go look at some threads, seriously), and some, you rarely hear this claim from students who attend (maybe prospectives will make a thread asking, but responses are usually, “you get out what you put in”). It seems that Schools with high % of top decile GPAs from HS, and a similar amount of 3.75+ (unweighted I am sure) are more prone to whining when things get tough. Basically the more direct the correspondence, the worse it can get. I wondered why students at my school never felt particularly strong about the workload or exam difficulty, and kind of just did the work. Well, the top decile performers based on GPA are a lot more evenly split between 3.5+ and the 3.75+ brackets. Students may be more used to fighting for a grade at the school they attended/being more challenged, so it is unsurprising that students are more content when challenged in the college setting. My school (Emory) also has a surprising amount of STEM (or other) instructors teaching courses similar or higher than the level of instructors at very top tier schools (most of the top 10s) despite its SATs certainly being lower than most top 25-30 schools (and these instructors are revered as opposed to trashed or dreaded). So this is kind of mysterious. The SAT is over-rated when distinguishing between students once scores beyond a certain threshold (like comparing two elite test-takers versus the national average is just hard. Like 1350+ or even 1300+ students…anything beyond this is basically looking for difference in MC test performance and hopefully most exams at an elite university are multiple choice, fill-in-the-blank or True/False. When it is all said and done, an AP/IB test with a better mixture/more even distribution of item types should be more predictive. Hopefully even HS exams given by the instructors are a better distribution than an SAT. The SAT is a nice IQ proxy, but is a different assessment type than used in an ideal college or HS classroom so is kind of misaligned with certain types of educational goals which may include deeper thinking and learning, which it is difficult for MC to test adequately. I believe the MCAT and LSAT are some of the best MC exams). A mixture of the resilience/numb to challenge, AP/IB scores/performances (this makes sense because students choose a major in college and APs are subject specific like…grades), and serious exposure to academic fields of interest (like if a student has conducted research or has done a project in whatever they like while in HS) could be more predictive, but these are things usually not discussed. Usually on chance me threads, it is just GPA, SAT, amount of APs (and maybe the scores, but this section gets little discussion unless the AP/IB load was low), and a laundry list of ECs in scattered/random areas. I tend to look for a trend and see if any of the ECs were more co-curricular in nature or academically/intellectually related just to gauge potential in whatever they claim they want to major in.
@bernie12 I can’t follow what you are saying, especially without any paragraph breaks.
All I know is, we have been to two public high schools. One gave easy A’s - yet the kids are having trouble at selective colleges. The other made kids work very hard, and master complicated problem solving and writing, for the A- grade; and Bs were common even for strong students (C’s for weaker students and encouraged to drop out of Honors). Yet those kids had higher SATs and were far more prepared for college courses - and excelling in top colleges and universities.
We have friends at prestigious prep schools. They work very hard for B’s. Yet they excel in highly selective colleges, because they were well prepared and challenged (some say the college work is easier than what they did in HS). They may be at the 50 percentile at a top prep school; but the 50 percentile student there is more likely a far better student than the 50 percentile at a good suburban HS.
The other thing is - I have friends with “A students” taking only standard classes at the competitive high school…3.9 unweighted but very low SAT/ACT. IMO, the A’s are given out too readily in standard courses. Oh, let’s give an A for these lower expectations, little homework, easy tests, and make the kids “feel good” that they got A’s! I don’t buy it. Those are not real “A students”. That’s why I don’t think rank is apples-to-apples…and SAT/ACT is an equalizer.
@sunnyschool : I am saying the two scenarios you describe have influence on the academic culture and attitudes at selective schools. If students come from high schools where A’s, even in AP/IB were easy (and where super high GPAs directly correspond to super high class-ranks. As in, say all folks 3.9+ unweighted are 10% and 3.75+ are top quarter), they are more likely to struggle or at least whine when things get rough at a selective college. If the college recruits more students from rigorous schools where say a 3.6 or 3.5 unweighted starts the top decile or top quarter, these students are used to seeing lower grades or at least fighting for higher ones. They will complain less when challenged at a selective college, regardless of SAT scores.
I am also saying that AP/IB experience may be more useful as it is a better assessment in terms of the type of items. It looks more like an idea college exam which are usually not almost purely multiple choice, fill-in-the blank, or labeling.
@bernie - good points. I agree. And the more rigorous HS where B’s are common had stellar college placement last year. I do think selective colleges like these kids that are used to true rigor, have “grit” and can accept less-than-perfect-A grades.
The only problem is - that it was at that same HS where the kids in standard classes often are higher in Class Rank, because they have 3.8-4.0 averages from taking easy, standard level classes (still “college prep”). They are benefiting from being at a high quality HS, and having good GPA. But I suppose the colleges can see that they took easy classes, and that in many cases their SAT/ACT will be lower.
I suppose what they should do is look at gaps. A high GPA and a low SAT/ACT should be a red flag especially if AP/IB do not paint a more favorable picture. But at the same time, a low GPA in the context of the school (especially at less competitive schools) should still be a red flag even with high SAT. ’
Also it really depends. If a college or university is known to be difficult because of the volume and level of the GRADED workload, then maybe grades and class rank are a better indicator. If it is a rigorous engineering school, you would want evidence of aptitude in math, problem solving skills, and work ethic, so math SAT (but maybe more so AP/IB calculus or CS) and high GPA may be more valuable (if a very elite engineering school or program, then you may even give a serious edge to those who competed in their discipline of choice and excelled because this means that talent in the field goes far beyond what HS level classroom learning can indicate). At a heavy workload LAC, perhaps GPA and AP/IB scores (and amount taken) may be better as well as evidence of the ability to write very well. At a more standard medium sized or large research university, where tests may be a bigger portion of the grading than other assignments and tests are often basic (because courses, especially at intro. and intermediate levels may use exams with lower level items and may have a lot of multiple choice), then testing ability may be most indicative.
What should not happen is extreme splitting of hairs over students with elite test scores and great GPAs. I think selective schools are aware of this which is why the selection looks random. It is really hard to discriminate between elite applicants by simply looking at those stats. They have to look at the nature of academics at the institution, the students interests, the demographics they want (in terms of talent types, ethnicity, gender, etc) and see how many people fit the profile at the time. To choose the shiniest based on those two metrics may result in lots of fool’s gold so they just choose based on other criteria with the fact in mind that a range of elite level students will be able to do well. They don’t all need to have near perfect GPA and SAT.
if you just “realized” you were in Canada that may signal a larger problem - one that leads to double posting
that aside D18s school stopped reporting class rank. Its not necessary. A kid with a 4.0 unweighted, eight AP 5s and a 1500 is going to be ranked near the top of his class. What number? Does it really matter?
I am trying to help a student with the admissions process this year who has a very solid ACT score but the grades don’t match. This is because he attends one of the better high schools in the state that does NOT have grade inflation. I am worried that it will hurt him though in the admissions process. So while his B+ or so average is a very solid average for this school, I’m worried that he will be competing with kids with better GPA’s and similar scores that are coming from the schools that inflate grades (which seem to be the new norm, as this thread suggests).
Like many, this school also does not rank, not even percentiles. I feel like this can hurt him too because his class standing is probably not that bad because of the grade deflation…but without a rank, the colleges may not pick up on this. And it seems like more and more schools are using GPA and rank more than scores in the decision process.
@collegemomjam You raise a very important issue that I am sure many students who attend highly competitive high schools can relate to. I know this is definitely an issue here in TX where class rank is king. Maybe you should create a seperate thread so that others can see it. I am very interested in the replies.
@ekdad212 I definetly don’t think looking at class rank works universally. At my D’s high school the difference in GPA between the person ranked at #19 and the person ranked at #60 is .001. The school usually has only 1 valedictorian by choice not by students GPA. They actually have to ignore GPA when picking one and the deciding factor is what classes they took. (IE: who took more AP’s follwed by which AP’s were harder, etc)
I believe a lot of colleges know this and look at what school the student is coming from not just test scores and GPA’s. This is why you’ll here some people on these boards say “I don’t get it my kid/ I have a 34 ACT and a 3.9 GPA and I didn’t get in X school but know someone with a 3.3 GPA and lower ACT that did”
Many of the more challenging universities have an admissions person for each region and that person knows how rigorous the schools in their region are or aren’t.
we were talking about this today, my D has two friends with 4.0 averages, good rigor and ecs but lowish standardized test scores (31) our hs is ranked in the top 1% in the country. they were rejected from schools like northeastern, bates, middlebury. While middlebury is a reach for everyone, we were surprised at the outright no from the other schools.
they’re both attending very good schools but in the end, I think it came down colleges discounting gpa and using standardized test scores as a common yardstick.
@quietdesperation you raise a good point. While I think there seems to be a trend for some schools to be shifting away from standardized test scores (for social equality reasons, and I don’t have a problem with that), I think in some ways it’s still the determining factor for certain candidates because so many schools have grade inflation and they have to use some sort of objective data to distinguish all of the kids with straight A’s. What it comes down to is that, in my opinion, if you are an un-hooked applicant, that ACT or SAT score still means A LOT. It might be what puts you over the finish line. Just my two cents.
I personally think that SAT Subject Tests (previously known as the SAT II) and AP Exams should be weighted more heavily in a college application because using the SAT Reasoning Test as the equalizer is extremely ambiguous. How do you test for reasoning at all, especially in a test format?
However, the SAT II and the AP Examinations actually test on legitimate subject material and provides a standard in which students can be compared against. It could also show if a student’s grades were inflated or were a realistic measurement of their abilities. For example, David gets an A in his APUSH class. With this grade, he is confident about taking the AP Exam and the SAT Subject Test. However, he gets a nasty surprise in July when the Collegeboard tells him that he got a 2 and a 580 on the respective tests. In another school, Arthur gets a B in his APUSH class, but on his exams, he receives a 5 and a 770. Although many people have an aversion to standardized testing, I feel that it makes sense to test on specific subject matter in order to see a true comparison. Sadly, colleges now value that A more than the scores, which means that Arthur is going to a community college while David goes to the Ivy League.