<p>Sam Lee, good point about the ACT.</p>
<p>Centre College has one of the highest graduation rates in the nation, last time I checked. It's a second tier LAC.</p>
<p>From collegeboard.com:</p>
<p>Michigan
SAT 1210-1420
ACT 27-31</p>
<p>Northwestern
SAT 1320-1500
ACT 29-33</p>
<p>Wisconsin
SAT 1170-1380
ACT 26-30</p>
<p>UCLA
SAT 1180-1410
ACT 24-30</p>
<p>Now tell me if it makes sense the "true" SAT score should be 50-60 points higher for the publics, considering what their ACT ranges are. I don't think so! Now that I am looking at it, I don't even know if the difference worths 10 points! LOL!</p>
<p>Sam Lee-</p>
<p>Northwestern doesn't superscore SATs. Which, of course, just amplifies your point.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I really have no idea how this is relevant. My point simply was (perhaps you didn't see it) that in a study--yes, an actual study, not "self-serving"--GPA, SAT, and SAT IIs were measured for their accuracy in predicting college success. The SAT came in last place. SAT IIs were slightly more effective, though still pretty ineffective. And GPA, of course, was the most indicative, very accurate in its predictions.</p>
<p>Whether racial diversity has a role in this is irrelevant. It's simply a fact. (Why you had to make an entire point on an aside of mine, I don't know.)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>KyleDavid, it may serve you well to research the background and history of the famous "study" presented by the UC, and pay particular attention to the its inception and the release dates. For what is worth, a "study" that attempts to define the validity of a single element used in holistic admissions missed the larger point ... entirely. When Gaston Caperton flew to California to defend his products, he was well-armed with dozens of studies that demonstrated the effectiveness of the SAT when used properly--which is in addition to GPA and other standardized tests. Of course, we know that the defense was not necessary as the UC's request was confined to the mere addition of a Writing Test. Gaston must have laughed all the way to East Coast, as Atkinson handed him the opportunity to multiply the use of the SAT II Writing Test by a huge factor. Ka-shing! Ka-shing! Thank you, California. </p>
<p>Further, if the UC --and you, of course-- strongy believes in the lack of validity of the SAT and prefers the SAT Subject Tests, why don't they punt the least "valid" and reinforce the other tests? Also, could they not simply rely on what works for them, and focus solely on GPA? </p>
<p>So, why do they plan to abandon the SAT Subject Tests?</p>
<p>arbiter213,</p>
<p>Yea, the comparison with ACT just indicates to me either the whole superscore thing is a myth or the difference is just small. </p>
<p>I think it can be a myth in the sense that even schools say they "superscore" upon evaluating applicants, it doesn't necessarily mean they superscore in their published data.</p>
<p>Conversely, when a school doesn't superscore for publishing data, it doesn't mean they don't superscore when comparing applicants.</p>
<p>Achieving racial diversity is a huge issue for the UCs since the passage of Prop 209. Elimination of the SAT IIs is likely to help build a more diverse applicant pool. Racially diversity is more important for a public university than minimally improving freshman success predictability.</p>
<p>
[quote]
My gut says the correction would be in the neighborhood of 20-30 points per test section -- therefore 50 points on the two section reporting, and 75 points on the three section scoring.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My gut predicts a substantially smaller enrolled class score boost from superscoring, for the reasons already laid out by Sam Lee. Good catch to compare ACT disparities for the same pairing of colleges.</p>
<p>rice can be one</p>
<p>Sam Lee -</p>
<p>The three schools in my Top 30 Selectivity that, along with Northwestern report exactly 31 as the midpoint of 25th and 75th ACT are Stanford (1440), Dartmouth (1450) and Williams (1430), for an average of 1440.</p>
<p>Northwestern shows 1410 SAT with the same ACT. This small sample might suggest that Northwestern's use of single sitting SAT results in an approx. 30 point reduction in reported scoring for the two score aggregate.</p>
<p>Based on this, and until I see other evidence, I'm going to add 30 SAT points to any school that doesn't use superscoring.</p>
<p>Northwestern then gets 1440 instead of 1410.
UC Berkeley gets 1355 instead of 1325.
UCLA gets 1325 instead of 1295.</p>
<p>I wonder what method is used my U Mich, UVA, UNC, and other highly regarded public universities?</p>
<p>a 20/30-pt difference in SAT translates to less than 1 point on ACT. so that's why you can have the same ACT while the SAT differs by 20-30 points. also, northwestern is more reputated in the midwest, so they may overachieve a little on ACT (e.g. they have higher % of students with ACT > 30 than Stanford).</p>
<p>Quick question here.</p>
<p>What is Northwestern's academic standing (academics in general, quality of student body, etc.) compared to the "lower" Ivies. Will a NU still recieve a equal academic experience, and relative pristiege, job opportunities, ect. compared to those students at the "lower ives"</p>
<p>Thank you for the response.</p>
<p>lower Ivies. you mean the non-HYP Ivies?</p>
<p>there ain't anything "low" about those schools.</p>
<p>In terms of academics, it's definitely on par with the lower Ivies. It has many nationally ranked departments across many different fields. The quality of student body is similar (latest SAT average = 1423; 1450 for school of arts and sciences). </p>
<p>As far as relative prestige/job opportunities, look at the following and decide for yourself (business/finance only):
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/427438-please-rank-following-schools-prospective-i-banker.html%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/427438-please-rank-following-schools-prospective-i-banker.html</a>
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/yale-university/440315-yale-vs-harvard-economics.html%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/yale-university/440315-yale-vs-harvard-economics.html</a>
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/business-major/137062-best-undergraduate-economics-program.html%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/business-major/137062-best-undergraduate-economics-program.html</a>
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/321333-nyc-wall-street-recruiting-cc-gives-too-narrow-picture.html%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/321333-nyc-wall-street-recruiting-cc-gives-too-narrow-picture.html</a></p>
<p>
[quote]
there ain't anything "low" about those schools.
[/quote]
Except their admit rates. :D</p>
<p>There really is no such thing as "lower Ivys".</p>
<p>There are the seven small/med Ivys, then Cornell which is different in that it is both larger, and a land grant University, geographically isolated AND the weather completely sucks. Can you say "lake effect snow"?</p>
<p>In my mind, there is HYP, then the other four, then Cornell. NU is probably equivalent in reputation to Cornell in general, and even with the HYP+SM for its graduate business school.</p>
<p>Having written that, it makes no sense to ask about the reputation of a school in general. You must focus your question on the major. Engineering? OK, probably best of all the Ivys. English? not so. etc.</p>
<p>"Low" was a misuse of words. By "low" I meant the non HYP Ivies. Of course non of the Ivies are actually "low." Anyway, is the education quality and student body comparable to the non HYP ivies at Northwestern University?</p>
<p>Yes. The stats and proof has been demonstrated repeatedly on this thread.</p>
<p>extrasauce... an unanswerable quesiton.</p>
<p>The student body is roughly as high testing as those of the non-HYP Ivys.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What is Northwestern's academic standing (academics in general, quality of student body, etc.) compared to the "lower" Ivies. Will a NU still recieve a equal academic experience, and relative pristiege, job opportunities, ect. compared to those students at the "lower ives"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>in chicago, northwestern is THE school to be at for getting recruited into the workforce. in new york, i would imagine ivy league schools would be at a slight advantage to northwestern due to geographic proximity and familiarity. In LA, i would imagine they would be about equal.</p>
<p>in terms of academics, the caliber of students at northwestern is on par with the "lower ivies." (Northwestern's average SAT this year was 1423 for the school, 1450 for CAS.</p>
<p>academic quality is always a difficult thing to quantify, however the general consensus (among academics - see USNews PA score, although this arguably accounts for graduate programs) is that Northwestern's academics are equivalent to those of schools such as columbia, penn, dartmouth, brown etc.</p>