<p>Claudeturpin: “But by making standardized tests optional, these schools are actually increasing, rather than decreasing, the number of factors that are considered in the admissions decision. To argue, as you and FloridaDad do, that reducing reliance on a single variable like standardized tests results in lower admissions standards makes no sense either logically or empirically.”</p>
<p>You didn’t explain how it increases the number of factors considered in admissions. If it does indeed decrease the number of factors considered, then the logical conclusion is that they have lower admission standards because they would be admitting kids with less knowledge of their ability.</p>
<p>The only test optional school my D had experience with was Wake Forest. Rather than just eliminating the SAT or ACT requirement, thus reducing factors considered, they made an interview a requirement. This interview was in-depth, and allowed the interviewer to gain greater knowledge of the student. We were told in the information session, that a student (who was now an admissions counselor) and a professor had done a study to look at the success in college of those with high standardized test scores, and those with high GPAs and rigorous high school curriculum, and the latter was a greater predictor of college success. So I think colleges aren’t going this route just based on opinion or the desire to get more tuition money - there is research to support it. Also, I am a public high school teacher, and the slacker students who can blow away the SAT or ACT but has little motivation in class is almost cliche. I get at least one a year. They will get college admission and even scholarships based on the SAT/ACT, but most crash & burn in college unless they quickly develop self-motivation & discipline. Give me the hard working, goal oriented, self-motivated student any day. It is fantastic when a student is both hardworking and a super SAT taker, but often this is often not the case.</p>
<p>No, the SAT isn’t dying; it’s more important than ever. Schools going “test-optional” can game their reported SAT averages for USNWR. A “test-optional” school will attract some applicants who don’t feel their test scores are an advantage to their application, and the college won’t have to report those lower scores because they won’t receive them. The applicants who feel their scores are an advantage to their self-presentation will keep on reporting them, and the school can publicize those higher scores instead.</p>
<p>Stop kidding yourselves, people. By making a school test-optional, a school can opens up its doors to a lower grade of student willing to pay full tuition, room and board. Its a strategy for driving up acceptance “yields” and driving tuition revenue. The school also benefits from a marketing standpoint because virtually all of those applicants who choose not to submit their test scores are students with low test scores; those who submit test scores tend to have good scores and want them factored into the admissions decision. The result? The school continues to market the high test scores of its students in those simplistic USNews/Princeton Review rankings by simply factoring out those with bad scores. Grade inflation is rampant and if you do poorly on standardized tests its because you just are not that smart. Face up to your shortcomings, understand your strengths and work with the tools you have - but don’t come on forums like this with lame excuses like “I’m a bad test taker”. And certainly don’t put any stock in the phony, self-serving rationalization proposed by these schools as the reason for making tests optional - its simple, they are lowering standards.</p>
<p>Just read this and found some of the posts downright hilarious. Standardized testing putting “International students, cultural minorities, women with global viewpoints and limitless potential” at a disadvantage is simply not true. Anyone with any brains can do decently on a standardized test, and colleges are not only known for accepting applicants like these with subpar scores, they’re notorious for it.</p>
<p>Even within a school, standardized tests help divide those people who spend their lives on their grades and those who can get good grades through sheer intellect. What is so wrong with that?</p>
<p>This idea of discrimination, about how questions are picked in a way that is discriminatory, is foolish. What is it about an Indian, Hispanic, or Black teen that would make him know less than his white counterpart? And, what of women? Am I to believe that there is something fundamentally different between these groups of people that makes some inferior to others when it comes to test-taking? I choose to believe that everyone has an equal shot at every one of these tests, that everyone is inherently similar in their ability to study for a test (which many “poor test takers” do not do, or even worse, do ineffectually) that tests not only cognitive ability, but also the ability of one to learn the rules of the game that is the SAT and also that person’s ability to adapt to a test environment. Does the SAT measure intellect? No; that’s not its job. </p>
<p>Further, insofar as a student’s high school environment is concerned, the idea of an admissions board member at a small liberal arts college (say, Pomona, or Bowdoin) becoming intimately familiar with my moderately-sized high school in Iowa is preposterous. They rely almost entirely on statements from guidance counselors and AP and SAT/ACT scores to (yes, indirectly and with varying amounts of accuracy) to determine the rigor of a courseload. Even in classes with supposed national standards, such as AP classes, the actual performance of teachers in class varies wildly by instructor, and so there is rarely a good method by which admissions officers can compare high schools that are disparate in terms of size, location nationally and socioeconomically, and overall student body aptitude.</p>
<p>They should forget the tests…or, at the very least, scrap it for a new one, since it’s really not the best indicator of intelligence. Maybe require 2 SAT subject tests in lieu of it, like Conn College does? Not the best solution, but a bit better.</p>
<p>You know what else they need to do? Completely drop the race question…such BS.</p>
<p>Saying standardized testing discriminates against international students are simply ludicrous. At the risk of being boastful, I got 2380 on my SAT I. And no, I am not those privileged kids who can afford to go to prep center, nor did I go to an international private school. All I had was a College Board book of old SAT tests.</p>
<p>that1guyy -
For Boston University SAT or ACT <em>IS</em> still required for undergraduate admission. Many of the programs also require Subject Tests too. You were looking at info on <em>transfer students</em>, in which case they have plenty of evidence to prove how well you do on college level courses :-)</p>
<p>According to their website the decisions will be released in mid December. I believe they extended their due date from 11/1 to 11/15 this year so I am not sure if that will affect the decision date or not.</p>
<p>Same with my son, lelisi and mibsprincess… He applied EA to Clark and we’re wondering if the decisions will still be "by mid-December…I hope so!</p>
<p>My daughter was also accepted with a fine scholarship- which is terrific as she didn’t have to submit anything extra, and we have no financial need…!! Gravy!</p>