<p>"My friends are often shocked when I tell them what we learning in math classes back in USSR, and their first comment is usually along the lines of “well, you were good at math, what about the kids who weren’t…” Truthfully, I don’t know, I was too young to notice or care, but I suspect that many kids can actually learn more and at a faster pace than we think, and so most were OK., I certainly was not the only one who did well in those classes. Also, I do remember, that there were kids who did very poorly. They failed, they didn’t get it, but such was life! For better or worse, the curriculum was not geared to the lowest, or even the middle and not everyone was successful. "</p>
<h1>293,</h1>
<p>International classmates along with friends who now TA science/math courses at the Ivies/Ivy-type universities who came from East Asia and parts of Europe have had similar experiences upon arriving on campus and seeing the math, science, and even writing proficiency of most college first-years. They said if they tried to apply to college with the levels those US students exhibited, they wouldn’t have been admitted because they would have flunked their respective national college entrance examinations. </p>
<p>As for what happens to students who don’t measure up to those higher standards, in Taiwan at least…they’d be relegated onto the “vocational track” from the end of junior high onwards per Education Ministry regulations. </p>
<p>A move which severely curtails their chances of successfully passing an already highly competitive exam where around 33% of all examinees fail to score high enough to gain entry to any higher-ed institution.</p>
<p>"Miami… Your granddaughter is bored with physics in the 6th grade? "</p>
<p>-Nope. She is bored with her math, her favorite class. I wish that they have physics in 6th grade just like in other countries. Unfortunately, not. Physics is probably is in the worst shape out of all classes in K - 12. Somebody got an idea that physics could be taught in one year. Impossible!! Huge gap to fill going from HS to college. D. was in prof’s office practically at every office hour. And she had very good Physics teacher in her HS, never had problem with math and had all A’s. If she needed that much help, then everybody needed that too, although there are kids who are shy about it. It is not possible to teach physics in one year, period.</p>
<p>Aren’t there enough examples on CC of kids who clearly were “Johnny Inc” who got rejected from elite schools? Don’t you think that elite schools can figure out by socioeconomics, high school, and range of activities that Johnny Inc clearly had a whole army helping him … and that they like to “cleanse the palate” by also admitting the non-Johnny Incs, who are just bright well-rounded kids who did activities? </p>
<p>Look, using SAT’s as a metaphor for smarts (and I know that’s imperfect, but bear with me) even the top schools have 25%-75% ranges of, say, 30-33 or 31-34. If they wanted only the “smartest,” they could have 25%-75% ranges that are higher than that.</p>
<p>You would hope so. I am sure there are cases not so clean cut. You could manufacture without looking so. Some benefits from that without doubt. It won’t affect truly excellent kids but kids who are excellent but marginal by tipsy top standard may be harmed.</p>
<p>I’m shocked to find out the demographic makeup of the student body in the SF area top high schools, nothing like our school which is representative of the US population. Luckily we don’t have that kind of competition here in the middle of the country. But please don’t assume our students are less competitive, because we have top performers who are at or pass your level. The only difference is our top students are also representative of the general population.</p>
<p>Top colleges can/try to separate true top performers from “Johnny Inc”. If they want prospective students to submit all tests taken, then they want to know how effective a student is. A 36/2400 at one sitting is much better than one with 3-4 or more tries. I guess top schools reject the latter but not the former. With the intensity of EC involvement, top schools should have a better picture of any prospective student.</p>
<p>My worry is, if some on this forum are school teachers/GC who assume all top performers are like those in SF area (“Johnny Inc”), then your LOR could be biased against the true top students. You need to make sure who’s “Johnny Inc” and who’s not.</p>
<p>"A 36/2400 at one sitting is much better than one with 3-4 or more tries. "</p>
<p>How do you seperate out people gaming with multiple takings, and kids who actually had a legitimate reason to test again, like poor sleep for example before the first test? Our DD took the SAT twice, and as it happened on the second time, the room (not at the school she attended) was overheated, and the proctor refused to open the window. She ended up getting lower scores on the second taking.</p>
<p>Seconding lake42ks’s comment, the current situation can be tough on a student who has the demographics, socio-economic class, and accomplishments to be “Johnny, Inc.” but is actual just “John.” As Pizzagirl mentioned in post #303, I suspect that some of the admissions reps may cast a jaundiced eye on “John’s” accomplishments, thinking that they reflect the work of many. I do feel sorry for anyone in that circumstance. It’s a double-whammy: first there’s the difficulty of standing up, against crowd pressure, and then there’s the presumption of a lot of assistance, anyway. </p>
<p>This is a minor issue, though, compared to the problems of students who have been appropriately placed in honors courses, but run into difficulty when the teacher skips over material because other students have pre-gamed it. There really ought to be a set curriculum, and some social pressure not to re-take familiar material. Here (possibly very locally), there is.</p>
<p>“Don’t you think that elite schools can figure out by socioeconomics, high school, and range of activities that Johnny Inc clearly had a whole army helping him .”</p>
<p>So if you have high socioeconomics, and go to certain HS’s, they assume you have an army helping you? What if you have those demographics and you don’t? That would mean if you DO have those demographics, you HAVE to get the whole army, since they will discount your numbers as if you did anyway. </p>
<p>Of the three factors you mentioned the only one really under the student’s or family’s control (assuming they arent going to switch schools to avoid being seen as Johny Inc) is the range of activities. Does one need to pick a range of activities specifically to AVOID being seen as Johny Inc? What if the activities the kid likes happen to match those of Johny Inc? Besides, if there is a range of activities that signal Johny Inc, how long will it before the Johny Incs sniff that out, and adapt accordingly? (given that many Johny Incs hire former ad cons as college coaches, I dont think that is that far fetched)</p>
<p>AdCons trying to psych out Johny Incs is, I suspect, much like the Enterprise fighting the Borg - the adversary is constantly adapting :)</p>
<p>I am sure there are simulated tests that you can take multiple times before taking the real test once. I am not sure if there’s a way to find out if people are set to game the system.</p>
<p>The problem isn’t even if a student got a 36/2400 after 2 or 3 tries; the problem is that, with score choice, you could take the ACT and SAT each a half dozen times and assemble a perfect or near-perfect score from a series of mediocre results. Trouble with math? Get a math tutor and cram only for the math portion. Next month, get a different tutor and cram for another section.</p>
<p>So what will the exceptional student need to do to prove himself more worthy? Score THREE 36’s or 2400’s?</p>
No real opinion on the tutoring business, but there are plenty of ways for exceptional kids to prove themselves worthy. IMO, IPO, Siemens come to mind. Winning or scoring very highly in one of these things is so tough, I don’t believe there are enough tutors around competent to tutor somebody to a winning position in the USAMO, for example.</p>
<p>I also believe truly exceptional students will likely find unique ways to shine. And rise above the “cookie cutter.” Of course, maybe I’m being a little optimistic here.</p>
<p>If students are counting on these standardized tests to do it, they might be in for a shock. I think the top schools like high scores, but they do not seal the deal by any means. THe tests are really just not hard enough to differentiate between top students by themselves.</p>
<p>^I wouldn’t be surprised if it comes to that. We would give up sooner ourselves but what’s wrong with someone trying so hard? Let them be? No? Let them tutor the kid to death to get straight A’s in most advanced courses for four years of high school, perfect scores in SAT’s or ACT’s, and extreme EC’s all taking supreme amount of time to excel. If they want it that badly, I would say let them have it. I’ll go somewhere and build my life.</p>
<p>Many good schools don’t want you to take the SAT more than 3 times because “it’s a waste of your important time”. (UNC-CH refers to this several times in Q&A sessions). </p>
<p>Would not surprise me to see top schools superscoring the 3 lowest test scores, no matter how many times you take the test.</p>
<p>By the way, just as an addendum to my above post. I still believe kids with perfect SAT/ACT scores and close to valedictorian grades will be able to get into some very highly ranked schools (if that’s what they’re looking for). I don’t think a 36 ACT is meaningless. Not many kids get them, especially not in one sitting. I just don’t think it will guarantee admission to any school you want. But that’s probably obvious.</p>
<p>^^This is one reason why several schools are asking for ALL test results. They don’t want to see nine SAT test dates (or professional test takers). Most students take the SAT/ACTs 2-3 times, and possibly swap once for the other test format to see how they do. SAT2s should account for 2 settings max. Total tests would be 6. That, along with GPA, class rank, and course rigor is plenty to assess your academic capabilities. Let’s face it, if you are sick and you KNOW you bombed the exam you have about a day to call CB to cancel the scores. Otherwise, out of several tests they will assume you might have one test better than the other. They will it hold it against you and think you stink.</p>
<p>EXACTLY. My kids have done what interested them in terms of EC’s, and in that process have learned valuable lessons about themselves. If it’s not the president-of-the-student-council and state-soccer-player and rah-rah crap that impresses elite schools, well, then so be it. Life isn’t defined by elite school admission.</p>
<p>A friend of mine who’s a psychologist pointed out that sometimes admissions officers have special concerns about perfect scorers: Sometimes these kids are extreme loners who won’t interact with their peers in college, just study alone in their rooms; sometimes these kids are extreme perfectionists and may become suicide-prone once they arrive in an environment where they can’t always be at the very top of the heap.</p>
<p>So it makes sense that some kids with 36/2400/#1 rankings will get rejected, if their essays and letters of recommendations don’t reflect positive peer interactions and an easy-going style unfazed by setbacks.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I totally agree. Life is a marathon not a 100m race. You can’t sprint it through imo. If you had to sprint to get there you probably have to sprint to stay there and then what? Beat up the wife and kids to make them sprint?</p>