Wouldn’t TO policy make those “near maximum score averages” even higher and a greater barrier?
3 Likes
These are my points.
- If standardized tests are garbage, don’t accept them from anyone.
- If standardized tests have use, have everyone take it and let the AO decide how to utilize the results. As they like to say, it’s just another data point to them- just like the other flawed admissions factors that are universally accepted.
- If a school insists on going TO, that is its prerogative. But don’t deceive me by parroting the line that it’s just a “choice” and we consider it another “data point” when it’s definitely not for certain groups of people. What those other AOs said was misleading, and unsuspecting parents/students are hurting themselves by following their boilerplate recommendation. That is very unfair.
What is wrong with being transparent?
5 Likes
If a college is test optional and submitting scores is not required to apply, then a far smaller portion of students tend to see not having high enough scores as a barrier to applying. Students are less likely to have the general thought process of I need a score of x to be admitted, regardless of what value x is. Regarding Harvard specifically, after going test optional, they stopped reporting score stats on their website including on their admission stats page at Admissions Statistics , further reducing perceived barrier.
That said, I suspect you are referring to a popular forum theory that if a college is test optional, only kids with scores above median submit scores, so the distance between median and maximum gets cut in “half” each class, and scores quickly increase to maximum rail, with only students with maximum score submitting.
In practice this never happens. For example, Bowdoin went test optional in 54 years ago, in 1969. The majority of students in every matriculating class submitted scores, including the current matriculating class of 2026, and average scores have always been well short of perfect. During the period for which Bowdoin only reported scores of submitters (not all students), there was a slow and gradual increase in scores, not unlike similarly selective colleges that required scores.
1 Like
I’ve addressed it repeatedly. Beyond what I’ve said, this seems to be more your concern than mine.
From what I can tell, I think many schools are generally pleased with how TO has expanded the range of desirable students who are applying. That would suggest the answer to your question is ‘No.’
2 Likes
“Never” is a pretty strong word! My guess is that this is going to vary by school. Northeastern, for example, directly advises its applicants not to submit low scores.
3 Likes
I haven’t heard that theory for applications.
Some AOs at TO schools do direct potential applicants to only submit their test score(s) if higher than the previous year’s median test score of enrolled students (or admitted if that data are available).
ETA: I see you edited the part of your post that I quoted
1 Like
I find it interesting that test scores keeping going up for the highly rejective schools, which they proclaim proudly following each admissions cycle. It seems like almost every top 50 school now has a median standardized test score in the 99th percentile. How is that even possible? I know they say it’s selection bias on the part of the applicants to those schools. But selection bias can go both ways, too. Maybe it’s more important than what they are letting on?
Northeastern doesn’t show anything resembling this pattern so far. Instead there was nearly zero change in scores over last year. Specific numbers are below:
1st Year TO (2021) – 25/75th score range of admitted students = 1470 to 1540
2nd Year TO (2022) – 25/75th score range of admitted students = 1470 to 1550
As we all know, a TO policy increases the number of applications from anywhere and from any demographic segment, so that’s not a surprise. We also hear from some students on CC and elsewhere that they struggled with “imposter syndrome”. Would those increased “near maximum score averages” deter students from applying because they don’t want to suffer from “imposter syndrome” in college?
You used the example of Bowdoin, which requires all matriculants to submit scores. But most TO colleges don’t. There’s also the example of NYU, which is in the latter category. Its score range has reportedly increased so much that it becomes incredible.
1 Like
That seems like quite a stretch to me…
1 Like
Thanks! Where are you getting the admitted student score ranges? Are they posted for previous years as well?
(I only have the numbers from each year’s CDS showing enrolled students.)
For many of the highly rejective TO schools we are often only seeing score ranges for the proportion of applicants/admitted/enrolled students who submitted test scores. So the mid 50% range is increasing in many cases because some AOs, GCs, and independent counselors are guiding students to apply TO if their score is below X value (and X can be the 25%ile mark or median, based on the previous year’s results, or whatever).
I don’t think many highly rejective TO schools are ‘proudly proclaiming’ high test scores, especially if they also show what proportion of students applied with and without tests. IMO it’s not impressive if 45% of the class submitted test scores and the mid 50% range is 34-35. Obviously the score range would be lower if they reported test scores for all matriculants.
It seems most people understand the ranges will increase if AOs are saying to send a test score only if it’s at last year’s median (or whatever). But of course all applicants don’t get that message, which might explain the NEU data posted above.
I agree with whoever said above that many schools like TO because it allows them to get more applicants from groups they are looking to increase representation from.
I think I addressed your first two points above. In sum, many schools believe that TO attracts the applicants the schools are trying to attract, whereas Test Required discourages some desirable applicants. It is as simple as that.
I guess this references back to something you mentioned in an earlier post, about what one AO told you?
First, I’m hesitant to draw such broad conclusions based on the words of one AO. At best it might tell us something about that particular schools approach, or perhaps only that AO’s approach. But different schools approach TO differently.
Second, from my perspective I’m not sure any of them of were deceiving you, or providing misleading information. I believe them when they say that it is just another data point. I also believe the one when that AO says they consider the application in the context of the local school, and have a good idea of why certain students at certain schools don’t submit.
I am familiar with some schools of the type the last AO described; well known, and lots of applicants to top schools, and tests available in school. Obviously, when some students submit scores, and others don’t the AO’s have a good idea of why. But so what? Some of these students get admitted to great schools even though they didn’t submit, if the other data points are strong enough.
In other words, TO doesn’t always play out as you are imagining.
- If an applicant has a 1500 and the applicants from the same school all have 1570+, then if the student submits, that’s not going to help the students case and it probably hurts. In a sense it forces the AO’s hand.
- If the student doesn’t submit, then even though the AO’s have a good idea that the student probably didn’t have a 1570, they might be more likely to base the decision on the strength of the rest of the application, which would have to be pretty strong to stand out in that crowd.
- If the student insists, I want you to consider my relatively low score, they AO’s will and the student probably won’t like the result. But if the student says, never mind what you can guess is probably a lower score, I want you to consider all this other stuff, then if the rest is good enough, the AO’s might. Even if they have an inkling that the student didn’t score at 1570+.
That is what treating the score as merely one datapoint does. It allows the applicant to choose what is being considered, and to try to make their case without test scores when test scores aren’t going to help anyway.
2 Likes
Here is another thought to consider. The university is not a monolith. There are various constituents within a university. There are parts of the admissions office that would like to believe (without supporting data) that any kid they admit with any level of preparation can take any major. As an example, at Princeton, the administration would like think that you could start with MAT 103 or something and manage to do a Math major. The Math department doesn’t quite believe that. The Math department believes that perhaps the lowest course you can start with is 215, and ideally 216 if you want to be on track for a Math major. This is just an example, and applies to many majors. In addition, the courses are taught targeting the top 10% of the class within the cohort that chooses to start with 215 or 216. So, in some sense, getting into the university is only half the problem, because the half of the university that has to give you an education is not necessarily in sync with the half of the university that is giving you the admission as to how much accommodation it is willing to offer any incoming kid that is not sufficiently prepared. So buyer beware. You will get some degree in some major (there are always some majors that are more manageable than others) from the university once you come in under-prepared (or well-prepared by someone’s standard) but that degree may not be in the major that you were hoping for in the first place, because the preparation is insufficient.
2 Likes
Hence the humanities degree when the student entered hoping for a STEM degree, and perhaps would have been better off at a lower ranked university where a STEM degree was possible.
@mtmind, the courses listed do not offer the experience with “rigorous proofs” the math department expects in the paragraph you quoted. The sequence listed is a foundation for the proof based courses, which start at math 215 and 216 Of course, since they are sequential, those 6 courses don’t really work in 2 years. And everyone else began at math 215, and thus has at least 4 proof based math courses before entering the department. Such is life. It is a small department. .
3 Likes
If Princeton’s Math department doesn’t quite believe that, then Princeton’s Math department is lying to students regarding the requirements for admission into the department, which happens at the beginning of Junior year.
Mathematics majors are expected to have a background knowledge of calculus in one and several variables and of linear algebra and to have had at least some experience with rigorous proofs and formal mathematical arguments before entering the department. The standard calculus sequence 103-104-203-204 covers the basic background material. Requirements | Math
1 Like
The trends in number of applications you describe do not support this. There are also plenty of people who have reported feeling imposter syndrome at highly selective colleges when they were test required .
Bowdoin doesn’t require all matriculants to submit scores for reporting/stat purposes any more. In any case, my post qualified the Bowdoin comment by saying, “During the period for which Bowdoin only reported scores of submitters…” I chose Bowdoin as an example because it is the college that has been test optional the longest – over 50 years and is highly selective. It’s long enough to confirm whether the theory about scores reaching a maximum rail with very few submitting is occurring.
In contrast, NYU only has 1 year of test optional information available. It’s too soon to confirm whether the described score pattern will occur. It’s true that in the first year of test optional, NYU’s ACT score increased by 1 point over the prior year compared to an average of ~0.5 points in previous recent test required years.
1 Like
What can I say? Life is like that. Nobody tells you the truth, because sometimes people can’t handle the truth.
1 Like
If a school indeed believes in test optional, it should not publish the average test score anymore, and treat it like any other award/EC/AP scores.
Not only the inflated test score is going to backfire, it doesn’t represent the true class.
1 Like
Could be true, but that’s an imperfect analog for several reasons.
-Bowdoin AOs weren’t directly telling students over the last 50+ years to not submit scores if they were below last year’s median.
-Bowdoin also hasn’t regularly published the proportion of applicants and proportion of admitted students who did/did not submit scores so they haven’t had great transparency.
-Not to mention they have 50+ years of performance and outcomes data cut by TO and submitters, and they for unknown reasons won’t make those data public.
-Lastly, it seems that people have generally taken Bowdoin at their word that applicants who don’t submit scores would be on a level playing field with submitters, and that’s not the case with all TO schools today.
1 Like