Unless there is a way to balance out how schools grade, far too many schools are very generous with their grading system, the standardized tests is a good way to “validate” a GPA. I know it’s not ideal, but in range it is a component to a students portfolio.
2 Likes
In essence you’ve just described how UK admissions work.
2 Likes
Good for you.
Well, that’s something I haven’t been called before. 
You do realize that there are reasons that elite colleges are sometimes the best fit for certain students, right? Apart from prestige?
4 Likes
“You” may want this, but they - the colleges/universities - seem to think that requiring the test does more harm than good in that it may keep qualified kids from even bothering to apply. I’ll use your own example to explain what I mean . . .
IMO, these kids would rarely if ever even bother to apply. Even if otherwise high performing, kids with 1350 SAT scores would take a look at Columbia’s (to stay on topic) scores and cross it off the list, and Columbia would miss out on the “diamond in the rough.” That’s what these schools are trying to avoid.
Also, if a small number of these kids tried to buck the odds and applied anyway . . . if they were accepted then the same people who are complaining about Test Optional would complain that the kids (namely their kids) with higher test scores should have gotten in over the kids with 1350 SAT scores. Bitterness and resentment would increase among high scoring demographics who don’t want to hear about standard deviations from poorly performing high schools.
And if the schools dared try to seek out and target kids scoring 1350 in low performing schools/regions/demographics to try and find the “diamonds in the rough?” More bitterness and resentment will result, only it will be disguised as sympathy for vulnerable kids who are supposedly being duped into applying even though they aren’t qualified, and scorn for the colleges for harvesting ballots from kids who shouldn’t be considering these schools in the first place.
In short, requiring test scores impacts who applies, and if colleges try to broaden the range of those who apply and are accepted the backlash is inevitable and predictable. There may be tradeoffs, but overall the harm done outweighs the positives.
5 Likes
At least at OUR school, the explanation would be that the AP classes require high grades in the year prior, plus recommendation by that teacher. Students (= parents) can “ask for a review” (= challenge) of the decision for no more than ONE class.
There are a limited number of seats in each AP class, and the idea is that the instructor simply won’t have time to slow down the class for everyone else to catch anyone up. It’s meant to be taken by the best students, who can all follow at the same pace - consequently, it’s assumed anyone will be able to pass, usually better than a 3.
Those who would have scored 1 - 3 are unlikely to have met the entrance criteria for that subject area in the first place.
1 Like
Are you suggesting that one of the reasons an elite college adopts a TO policy is because it wants to hide those “diamonds in the rough” to avoid “bitterness and resentment” from others after it found them?
1 Like
Nope. Just pointing out that even when tests were required, the same parents/posters were still bitter and resentful about how they were used, especially when kids with lower scores were admitted ahead of kids with higher scores.
Going test optional sends a very clear message. While the tests may have some benefit in some situations, the tests aren’t nearly as important to these schools as some here think they should be. Why that is so hard for some parents/posters to accept is another issue entirely.
4 Likes
Indeed! Well, the Anglophilia is right in my username.
I think to some degree, highly-rejective schools will continue to allow applicants to submit test scores if they want to because the pushback if they went test-blind would just be overwhelming. They don’t want to deal with that level of meltdown.
2 Likes
So, what does TO accomplish then?
With regard to these parents/posters who are bitter and resentful about how colleges use (or don’t use) these tests? For those that don’t agree with the educational missions of many of our elite colleges, nothing these colleges do with regard to admissions will likely satisfy them short of upending the educational missions and adopting an entirely different model.
Or are you asking more generally?
Reminder that posts discussing race and admission are not permitted other than the one thread. This is the second time this has been posted on this discussion so posts not adhering will be deleted. Here’s the link to the other thread: http://talk.qa.collegeconfidential.com/t/race-in-college-applications-faq-discussion-14/3627043/438
If you think some parents/posters will always be “bitter and resentful”, whether the colleges are test required or optional, what does TO policy accomplish in that regard? Nothing? Or does it alleviate or aggravate those “bitterness and resentment”?
1 Like
Is that thread still active? The link doesn’t work for me.
Thx.
1 Like
Yes, but you need to be a member of the political forum group. Politics Discussion Group
1 Like
Not sure what you mean “in that regard?” I’m glad that these schools aren’t listening to those who fundamentally disagree with the educational missions of these schools. In my opinion, colleges should shape their admissions policies to serve their educational missions, and I am glad some seem committed to doing so despite the inevitable blowback. Haters gonna hate.
1 Like
I’m interested in the “bitterness and resentment” aspect of your argument, so my question is with respect to that particular aspect.