<p>Ok im not saying that all colleges lie or that most do, but i just wanted to know what others think.</p>
<p>after reading the book, cracking college admissions, I was left stunned by what the book said, it said that most of the statistics provided by colleges about admitted students are not true, median gpa, sat and act test scores are usually inflated by colleges, in order to appear selective.</p>
<p>When i got home i decided to research this topic, the one school which i know best is florida international university, its statistics are:
49% acceptance rate
1050-1200 median sat
22-25 act-median
90%top 25- median
3.6gpa-median</p>
<p>the act and sat scores seem about right but the acceptance rate,gpa and class rank are way off. This year about 25students from my school were accepted to florida international, none of which had a gpa of 3.6, most were not in the top 25, and its a widely known fact that all one most do to get accepted to fiu is fillout an application.yet Us news stated that fiu had one of the lowest acceptance rates in the country, hahahaha what a laugh that gave me. this from the university called spanish U.</p>
<p>so what do you guys think, do alot of colleges just inflate there statistics in order to reduce unwanted applicants, or to appear at the same par as elite colleges?</p>
<p>"inflate" in the sense that maybe they take your best SAT score from different settings, or weighting your GPA a little differently. I doubt they actually cross out a bunch of 3.3 and say they got 3.5s, and then publish that kind of stats, or that they admitted 21.8%, but rounded it to 20% or something.</p>
<p>I had noticed last year that Middlebury reported on the Princeton Review site an avg SAT of 1470 (~40 points higher than Dartmouth & Williams) and this year (despite a slightly lower admit rate and higher enrollment rate) that Middlebury reported an avg SAT of 1349 (within 3 points of Colgate & Colby). Something seems amiss and doesn't seem to add up.</p>
<p>This past year, for the first time, Middlebury reported SAT I scores of all matriculating students, even those who chose not to have their SAT I scores used in evaluating them. In the past, Middlebury reported only the scores of those who chose to submit them.</p>
<p>one of the best way to assess whether a college inflates its numbers is to search for the Common Data Set. If a school publishes its CDS, then its numbers are real. If a college does not publish its CDS, take the numbers with a grain of salt (that means you: UPenn, USC as well as many others).</p>
<p>Thanks, arcadia. That would be a logical explanation of the vast differnece between 2004 & 2005. Any idea what % submit SATs at Midd. That is a huge difference. If it's 50/50, it would be approx 1470 vs 1230. If more than 50% submit SAT, the spread would even be greater.</p>
<p>a college can publish a CDS, & still have ambiguous grades. Middlebury's higher SAT scores are recorded on their CDS, but their revelation on lower SAT scores is reported on web class profile. Bowdoin publishes only the SATs submitted for admissions in their CDS, not all that are eventually submitted for enrolled freshmen as is implied in the CDS instructions. I believe there is ample room for score manipulation regardless of CDS.</p>
<p>since most athletes suck at academics, they might prefer not to include their scores. Also, they don`t include the SAT verbal scores of intl. students.</p>
<p>No, I don't see the problem. I'm not competing with them, I'd like to know the scores of the segment of the population that I am competing against.</p>
<p>I find it very hard to believe that colleges don't include the SAT scores of its atheletes. How is that justifiable? Anyone have any proof to this effect? To me, that is why a non-athelete needs to be significantly above the school's averages to have a chance of being admitted.</p>
<p>i agree with koolcrud, i would much rather see a higher range of SAT scores because athletes were not included, because that will just skew their range lower, i am not an athlete and would like an accurate representation of my chances</p>
<p>I've been through this process once before and I think that the statistics are massaged depending on the school.
I took 2 safety schools that my kid applied to and which are known to be safety schools--we are talking Tier 4. Both have SATS in the upper to mid 600s as their mean SAT which is just not close to the truth. These schools have been for underachievers since I was in HS. I suspect that many schools massage those numbers.
While the common data set is generally valid I wouldn't place all of my bets that it is a true reflection for every school.</p>
<p>here's the standard blurb/instructions in the 2005-2006 CDS regarding submission of SAT/ACT scores:</p>
<p>"C9. Percent and number of first-time, first-year (freshman) students enrolled in fall 2005 who submitted national standardized (SAT/ACT) test scores. Include information for all enrolled, degree-seeking, first-time, first-year (freshman) students who submitted test scores. Do not include partial test scores (e.g., mathematics scores but not verbal for a category of students) or combine other standardized test results (such as TOEFL) in this item. SAT scores should be re-centered scores. The 25th percentile is the score that 25 percent scored at or below; the 75th percentile score is the one that 25 percent scored at or above."</p>
<p>This instruction seems pretty straightforward to me, and no special class of enrolling students (e.g., athletes, international students) is explicitly exempt, by these instructions that is. I do think, however, that some colleges stray from this definition of what scores to include in their CDS stats. Other than the Bowdoin stretch noted above, I have no direct evidence of CDS straying, but it would certainly be easy to do 'cause there are no auditors checking compliance on these self-reports.</p>
<p>Middlebury only submits the SAT I scores to USNews of those matriculated students who submitted their scores for Midd's use in admission evaluation. Midd's website - presumably the same figures used on their Common Data Set - states the SAT I mid-range scores of all matriculants (average 1315), not just those who chose to have the scores used in their admission evaluation. The difference between the two mid-ranges is considerable.</p>
<p>Only 50% of Midd's matriculated students had their SAT I scores <strong>used in the evaluation process</strong> - presumably the top 50%. The USNews picture is misleading if students are comparing Midd with schools who provide USNews with the SAT I scores of all matriculating students.</p>