<p>I've found that retaking the sats really helps. Over the three times I took them theyve gone up each time, from 1840 to 1930 to 2030. Im a little worried schools wont get the January test reults in time, but Im sure you get a lot of scores in this time of year? Also, my scores are very lopsided (790m 620r) and I don't know if this is an advantage or disadvantage.. anything?</p>
<p>i think my matte (no glossy) app had a lot do to with mine as well. I never had big ECs cause my school doesnt offer em and no prep courses, so I was worried about being a competitive pick. I guess I had nothing to worry about :)</p>
<p>Sak and GreatApe,</p>
<p>That's a totally separate subject (though, I'm happy to talk about it). Your questions aren't about contextualizing testing, they're about interpreting testing. And we do a lot of that, too. In fact, context is a big part of the interpretation, but figuring out what your scores actually mean] incorporates how your essays, transcript, and recommendations fit together with those scores.</p>
<p>(GreatApe, by the way, illustrates my point about comfort and exposure to the test really well. Was that on purpose?)</p>
<p>I understand the concept. And don't disagree with it. Problem is my son refused on principle to take a test prep for SATs, subjects tests, ACT. Just took them cold. His reasoning was political--it was unfair to those who couldn't afford the Prep courses etc. (hence his attraction to Tufts and its many opportunities for political involvement) But he's from the Northeast metro NY area and is literally the only one I know who did this. Most of his friends (and he as well) took the SATs in 7th grade as part of JHU CTY, so I understand what you're saying about exposure. Some of his friends probably prepped for that. I do think he would have done better-his scores were fine--if he had prepped. But we left this decision up to him. Tufts will assume he prepped though!</p>
<p>This has been a bit of concern for me as well. As a first generation and sub-poverty level student, I've never been exposed to the SAT, and could NEVER have afforded test-prep. However, I self-studied and got decent scores. (Not tufts caliber, but close.) I worked EXTREMELY hard for the scores I got, and just wanted tufts to (maybe) take that in to consideration. Now that I know that they might, I feel a little bit more at rest.</p>
<p>^As you should.</p>
<p>jeremysjustfine-- same situation here.</p>
<p>When I came to this country, my guidance counselor always told me that as long as I get good grades in school, I would be able to get into a good school. But I didn’t realize that by good school she meant tier2 schools (where most of the students from my school go). In my junior year I was exposed to the SAT and was given the idea that SATs are not as important as people say they are. I talked to my counselor and she sang the same song. But just to see how SATs were like I enrolled into one of those free SAT courses that are offered in my school. Unfortunately, those SAT courses were worse than my state diploma test prep classes( mandatory at my school since most of the students fail to pass that). Most of the time, the teacher didn’t show up and even if they showed up, they gave us bunch of worksheets and never gave us the correct answer. I studied for SAT all by my own and although English was not my native language, I got decent score (Not tufts caliber, not even close either). My parents got their bachelors degree from another country and because of my good grades in school they think I am gonna get into a good school. But when my parents ask me if I am hoping to get into a school like Tufts , I say most likely no. I can’t look at their faces anymore (it hearts) but now that I know that they might take it into consideration, I feel like the sun hasn’t set yet. There might still be a little hope at the end of the day.</p>
<p>And thanks Dan for giving me that hope.</p>
<p>sowmit, if you’re a recent immigrant than you have a perfectly valid reason to not do well on the english sections of the SATs. Colleges understand that and the scores will minimally affect your chances. Do well on the math section and SAT IIs and you’ll be fine.</p>
<p>^ Thanks Detail, I don’t think colleges understand that very often. I got wait listed + rejected from two colleges and the major reason for those was only my SAT (according to the admission office) :(</p>
<p>Hope Tufts understand that a little bit but I am pretty sure I am gonna get rejected.</p>
<p>I come from an affluent Connecticut family and chose to purchase an SAT prep book and study on my own, for a half hour a night for six months. This decision, which many of my friends also made, was not based on money, but on common sense. Why spend time going to a class when the work can be done at home? Close to 2300 on my SAT’s. Are you saying that my scores are not as impressive as they would be if I had studied from the same book in Montana? A ridiculous proposition.</p>
<p>I think his point was that you probably wouldn’t use the book half an hour a day for six months if you were in Montana. Not can’t, but wouldn’t.</p>
<p>^ ^Hence the idea of “contextualizing” the SAT… in the “context” of Montana, what is already a great score anywhere in the US becomes even better in the context of a place that puts little focus on the SAT, strictly because- to use Dan’s example- Montana kid is running uphill, and you’re running on level. So it’s a totally legit proposition.</p>
<p>I understand the concept, but disagree with it. Kids are being accepted on many factors that are not based on their academics - legacy, financial contributions to the school, affirmative action, state of residence, athleticism and probably other factors that I am overlooking. As a New England resident, who only applied to colleges in the northeast, I think that we are the ones who are climbing uphill. Swarthmore is “looking for a piece of the puzzle,” and Wesleyan said they had a stack of applications from New England kids that was well into the hundreds. Not so many from Montana or Arkansas. Now, we are being told that our 8 serious AP classes (standard at my public high school) and great SAT’s are not quite enough, as too many of us from this area want to stay in New England. What a concept - I like my family sometimes. Now, many of us are being waitlisted at great colleges. So, no, I don’t buy into the climbing uphill if you are from someplace else. From what I can see, they are sledding downhill.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They TOLD you why you got rejected? Oh dear me. I don’t think I’d ever want to know any specific reason becuase I might beat myself up about it! </p>
<p>Anyway, I’m no admissions officer (heck, I’m just an average guy trying to get into Tufts!), but I’ve studied the SAT. By that I don’t mean simply the “tricks” or whatever that the books try to purport, but when I was preparing (mostly by taking practice exams over a period of about 9 months), I always took careful note of the exam. </p>
<p>The test basically rewards the ability to “think quickly”. That is, you’re presented with an unfamiliar situation and then in the < 1minute you have to think about it, you are able to synthesize the correct answer. This skill is valuable in that it can determine, to some level, the efficiency of one’s thinking and the ability to cut right to the heart of the problem/question. </p>
<p>This is in stark contrast to school curriculum; for instance, my last AP calculus test had about 8 multi-part questions, all of which were straightforward and highly dependent on one’s knowledge of formulas and previously discussed procedures. Now, this sort of test still requires knowing what to apply, but everything is laid out for you to use (rather than on an SAT geometry problem or something where you need to basically ADD to the information given by reasoning it out). </p>
<p>My point is: the SAT measures a dimension of thinking that just isn’t really captured in school. Sure the SAT uses material USED in school, but by no means is it as straightforward. Does this mean that the SAT should be the only measure? NO! Absolutely not! School transcripts measure one’s ability to work hard over a long period of time in several subjects. Even if you’re super smart, if you don’t put in the effort, you’re going to fail in life. Hard work, however, can compensate for a lack in ability.</p>
<p>About test prep: it’s really just a big money-making scam to try to make kids think they’re learning something. All prep courses do is force kids to take practice tests and review what they got wrong. My parents are financially screwed but they probably could have found a way to pay for a a test preparation course, but instead I prepared myself and did fine. The $15 Blue Book wasn’t that big of a burden ;-)</p>
<p>I’m not sure about this whole “geographic” thing going on here, (i mean, i’m from new england too.)</p>
<p>but in the context of other factors, like family situation,</p>
<p>yes, i could have bought an inexpensive test-prep book. -and i did, but by then i didn’t have all the time in the world to study it, and no one encouraged me to do so. i was under the assumption i couldn’t go to college for my first two years of high school. no one in my extended family had ever been, and with a yearly income of under $12,000, it just wasn’t something i saw as practical. it was never “etched in stone” for me, like some people. on top of that i had the “burden” of constantly moving due to eviction notices, utilities getting shut off because they weren’t paid, etc. worries that are pretty basic. the SAT wasn’t exactly “first priority”. i guess what i’m trying to say is that there’s a difference between a family where you’re expected to go to college, and one that makes it seem like its a pipe-dream that can never be achieved. im not making excuses for myself, just adding my 2 cents. :p</p>
<p>IMO, fair or not, contextualizing the SATs and practicing affirmative action is fine for college education. After all we are a society that strives to give everyone an equal chance to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, of which today a college education is practically a requirement.</p>
<p>I understand that there are many ways to look at these issues. The discussions are constantly evolving, with intelligent and educated people on every side having something to add to the conversation. I agree to disagree with you on these issues.</p>
<p>This process frightens me. It shows the extent in which certain schools attempt to overgeneralize students due to their so-called socio-economic background. The SAT score is a number and should not be treated any differently. Its purpose is for colleges to be able to hold all students to the same standard. If a 1st generation student and the son of the president each take the SAT and score the same, they should not be given different treatment in the admissions process concerning their scores. I believe the SAT would be a pointless test if the score represented a value that was somehow “weighted” by adcoms based on other circumstances.</p>
<p>I think Jeremysjustfine’s post sums it up for me. We live in a zip code and son attends a school where 99% of the kids will go directly to a 4 year college. Perhaps one kid a year takes a PG year. Perhaps one kid every three or four years will do something completely different with no immediate plan to attend college. That is the rare bird indeed. To survive AND thrive in an environment that is simply oblivious to what it takes to get into a selective college and still manage to hold onto the ambition to do so? I would think SAT scores would mean very little. Just getting to the test in some cases would be impressive.</p>
<p>The point: My son, despite a VERY limited overview of tutoring for the english part of the test at least had the understanding that to do well on this test was important. And we, as his loving and supportive parents, made SURE he knew that by telling him so many times!! :)</p>
<p>On a different point, however, what I DON’T like about the SAT is that it punishes risk. I don’t agree that if you choose a wrong answer you should lose more points than you’d earn if you got it right. What if in every other testing situation you’d miss out on earning the additional possible points for a wrong answer PLUS some! Ex: The question is worth two points, but if you get it wrong we’ll subtract 2.25 from your total.</p>
<p>The last time son took the test, it just about killed him, but he didn’t guess an answer even once, even if he could narrow it down to two. Whether he got more right or his previous guessing was always wrong, who knows, but his score went up over 100 points on the writing section alone. Freakish to be sure and in direct opposition to who he is as a student. </p>
<p>Plus… I am not sure it always comes down to how fast you know an answer in life or that you know it at all (and is why the timed aspect of the whole thing is somewhat arbitrary). And too, you have some kids who take the test with extended time and perhaps it only need apply to the verbal portion because they are a gifted math student (for example). They Whiz through the math and then have even that much more remaining time on their hands that it changes the level of the playing field all over the again (directly opposite of it’s intent to level it). It used to be that those tests were flagged five or so years ago. That was deemed prejudicial to the Disabilities Act. It’s a sticky wicket… love that phrase. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t.</p>
<p>I agree with NewEngland8 who writes:</p>
<p>“I understand the concept, but disagree with it. Kids are being accepted on many factors that are not based on their academics - legacy, financial contributions to the school, affirmative action, state of residence, athleticism and probably other factors that I am overlooking…”</p>
<p>Dan in the spirit of “transparency”, please provide answers for the group to the following questions:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Does Tufts segment its students into discrete pools such as URMs, legacies, athletes and by other desirable attributes such as geographic diversity, etc?</p></li>
<li><p>Are the admission standards different at Tufts for each of these segments (i.e. do students compete in different sub-pools)?</p></li>
<li><p>If not, please tell us the median 25-75% SAT/ACT scores for URMs, athletes and legacies by category. </p></li>
<li><p>Please also provide us the median 25-75% SAT/ACT scores for all students not deemed to be an URM, a recruited athlete or a legacy.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>This is the kind of context that would be very important to hear about from you. </p>
<p>As always, thanks for your contribution to the dialogue.</p>