<p>You guys can believe what you want. </p>
<p>I am only repeating what was told to me. My daughter had already sent in her applications, so each school received their $50--and we're pretty confident her SSAT scores will be high, so there would be no reason for the administrators to be "politically correct" and say Teacher Recommendations are weighted more heavily than SSAT scores, if they did not believe it to be so. And D'yer, the admin guy used this as an example. It didn't seem to be an "imaginary story"--he used this example to prove a point about how much the school values the teacher recommendations over the SSAT scores.</p>
<p>And, I am not talking to "marketing people" when I ask questions about what qualities they look for in a student and what piece of the application do they consider the most important. I met with the Dean of Admissions at 2 schools and the Assistant Dean of Admissions at the other 2 schools. If they don't know the criteria on which they judge applicants, who does?</p>
<p>There's no doubt in my mind that teacher recommendations are more valuable. I've said that all along. I'm saying that they do pay close attention to them only after they've made the first sort, the SSAT sort. Once they've seen from the SSAT scores that an applicant can survive, they don't go back and look further. The SSAT's not useful to differentiate between applicants. It's a blunt instrument. It's the sledgehammer that breaks the stone from the quarry, while the teacher recommendations, etc. are like the chisels that hone the rock into a well-defined object. </p>
<p>Those subjective criteria are why they have teams of admission people on their payrolls. Overall, it's a highly subjective process. But they're not going to waste their time and engage in that complicated process for kids with scores in the 43%ile when they've got a ton of kids vying for scarce spaces that they can draw from who have a demonstrable and objective indicator of success in the form of 80s and 90s. The teacher recommendations are more useful because they differentiate among applicants...the ones they are looking at because the SSAT scores are decent enough.</p>
<p>You're not going to be part of that well-chiseled sculpture if you're in the scrap heap when they take the sledgehammer to the rock face.</p>
<p>D'yer ,</p>
<p>Andover report cards were sent out during winter break. Posted right on the lower left hand corner for parents, instructors and future college admissions to see is the student's SSAT score.</p>
<p>It is the constant that must be balanced with good recs,grades and ECs.</p>
<p>Ceebrown, I think we're about tied in cynicism. I don't think that a desire to prop up SAT scores is behind the push towards Asia, though, as verbal scores are exceedingly hard to raise. I think it reflects the Ivy league's own openness to international candidates, and the perception that other countries are growing in importance.</p>
<p>I have no problem accepting that an admissions rep may give different answers to different people. Speaking to parents at an admissions fair, the objective is to get parents to consider his school. Speaking to parents at an interview, especially if the application has not been completed, the objective is to get the application completed. </p>
<p>An answer such as, "under 65 on the SSAT will not be considered," would cut the number of completed applications drastically. The ratio of accepted would rise, and the perception of exclusivity would be damaged. In addition, there may be interesting hooked applicants scoring under the "cut score," such as rich legacies, URMs, and recruited athletes, whom they really don't want to lose.</p>
<p>When a private admissions counselor (pac?) calls, though, they may get a different answer. The pac wasn't born yesterday; that's why parents hire her. The pac is also a source of future applicants. If a school's admissions rep fails to let her know of problems in her client's application, and the client's rejected, she'll remember it for a long time. She'll tell others at conferences. She won't steer future clients toward the school.</p>
<p>Jennycraig,</p>
<p>Oh, I haven't changed my view since December. I do have a client at Choate with a very low score, but he is an under represented minority student and a nationally ranked athlete. But for the average kid, a low SSAT score is what gets you out of the running at the top schools. But if you are looking at lower tier schools, then I agree with you, the score doesn't matter much and I should have distinguished that. It's like to completely different admissions games out there---the ultra selective schools and the regular ones.</p>
<p>Periwinkle is a "junior member"?</p>
<p>eliormelech: "junior" on this message board. "Ancient" in real life.</p>
<p>@ Periwinkle: 60 posts = Junior Member. But that's "Junior Member" only in quantity...as all 60 of them are excellent posts. Thanks.</p>
<p>@ bluevisla: You wrote
[quote]
It is the constant that must be balanced with good recs,grades and ECs.
[/quote]
and you're right. All the factors are important. I shouldn't have bought into the idea of saying which one is "more important." They are all highly important factors for the job that they do. It's like deciding whether the canvas is more important than the paint. Or, to extend my sculpture analogy, it's like trying to decide whether the sledge that loosens the slab of marble is more important than the fine chisel that carves the last detail.</p>
<p>My real surprise was that the SSAT is not just an admissions tool ,but a measuring stick once the kid is attending class.</p>
<p>If they don't track how students perform on the other end of the admission cycle, they can't use the SSAT data as effectively on the front end. That they make their monitoring transparent to you...well, that's somewhat surprising.</p>
<p>I hope you're making you %ile proud. Represent!</p>
<p>well...the drapes match</p>
<p>I have one problem with your usage of schools matriculated at. I know several students who were accepted at one of your top schools, then went to another due to family, atheletics, etc (eg one boy accepted at Harvard who ended up going to Notre Dame and another accepted at Stanford who went to USC - both to play football)</p>