<p>^ I think a lot of the recent movement toward SAT-optional is motivated by a desire to "game" the US News rankings by weeding out lower SAT scores from your entering class, thereby pushing up the reported medians. I</p>
<p>n Bowdoin's case, however, I'm not convinced this is the motivation. They've been SAT-optional for 30 years. I'm not sure there even was a US News ranking 30 years ago--and even if there was, I'm not sure SAT scores were a significant part of it, or that anyone paid much attention. I think Bowdoin just genuinely doesn't place much stock in the scores, but because they're committed to a "holistic" review of applications they say in effect, "If you think your SAT scores tell us something important about you, go ahead and submit them." I actually think that's pretty cool. For other recent converts to SAT-optional, however, I'm skeptical.</p>
<p>read anything about why bowdoin made the policy change thirty years ago, and it was self-serving, but not in the way people think of it as today. they were interested in attracting creative applicants, applicants who would otherwise be discouraged from applying because of low scores. and it worked. there are many successful graduates from bowdoin who would not have gotten in had they required SATs. </p>
<p>and i don't understand what the big deal is about deciding to submit or not. they say they don't prejudice against people who do submit, so the rubric should be: do you think your scores reflect your intelligence? if so, submit, if not, withhold. it allows the applicant to choose whether the SAT is reflective of them as an applicant. i think the criticism offered so far for the policy is cynical. in fact, were bowdoin not SAT optional, this thread would hardly be as long. the OP wouldn't likely get in, and would have been told so from the beginning. now, the OP has a legitimate shot and is deserving of one, in my opinion.</p>