Covid is making it harder to get into a top college

Applying to College
143

Sorry mixed you up with @aquadecoco who said it a few comments above yours and same general point. If that many schools there had in in March as their state test or free test then hundreds of students had it by and before March at least once and very few were then taking it in April or later for the first time. The ACT is only offered every other month as it is so after the February one there were only a few more left and a lot (not all) got rescheduled. So if you take into account that many juniors start taking it for the first time in July before junior year and more and more take it each month as seniors stop taking it, the bulk of juniors are done by March. That doesn’t mean all have taken it but most have. They just may not be happy with their scores. Then by the time fall came around more first timers had the chance to take it, many never bothered to take it or just couldn’t take it, some took it for a 3rd or 4th time and by now the majority have taken it.

As I said, I read the article and stats back in September or October so if I come across it again I will send you the link but it isn’t that difficult to realize that even through March ore covid more than half in any given year would’ve already taken it just by the mere fact that more than half the testing dates would have already passed and there are only so many spots available and by July you normally have the mix of two grades again.

144

At our HS, the ACT is given as the state test in the spring. That test was canceled. So were the next 2 tests that D21 studied for and signed up for. The next test date (after the 3 canceled tests she had prepared for) she was bumped to a different testing center over 2 hours from our house about a week before the test, in a town with no hotel. She left our house at 5:00am to get there, and it was certainly not her best showing. Eventually our school did host it for seniors at some point this fall, but many who had prepared multiple times in the past for canceled tests either did not prepare or chose to not take it and focus on other endeavors because at that point most schools had already declared they were TO.

I have said this before, test scores have been beneficial to me personally and to my family in general. So this is not sour grapes. They let me go to college essentially for free in the dark ages, and D21 was able to eventually get a score that while probably lower than it would have been under normal circumstances was still helpful to her application. Her older brothers were not negatively impacted by low scores, both got what they needed to go to the schools they choose to apply to. If they had earned perfect scores (they did not) it would not have affected their choices at all.

But I also think test scores are more likely to measure privilege than ability to succeed academically. The purported goal is to give the kid from the unknown rural school a fighting chance against the kid from the private school or wealthy suburban school. The tests have utterly failed at that goal. They do an excellent job at measuring parent wealth, education, and involvement in their kid’s education. In general, kids of parents on CC are well ahead of the curve, regardless of parent or school wealth. Having an informed parent willing to make sacrifices to further their child’s education may be the greatest advantage of all.

I think the complaining about how kids are sneaking in who would have been screened out by a lower test score is really just complaining that the privilege we expect for our kids is not being provided adequately. Again not sour grapes, D21 did submit a score. Pointing out that parents could have driven or flown to a different state to still get a test score kind of underscores my point that the test scores are more a measure of privilege than academic potential.

14 Likes
145

Sheesh. Just sheesh. I just had to read a bazilion posts to catch up and so many of you are still fixated on these tests. It’s not going to do your kids any favor to do this.

The elephant in the room is that, of the kids who get through First Cut, at an elite, most are 4.0 (or darned close,) had high enough test scores, in years past, and then now compete on the rest of their packages.

It seems to be assumed that your kid (or those you admire) DOES have a sufficient “rest” to equitably compete with other top performers. I hate saying this, but it’s not so. For too many, their ECs are off, one way or another (no matter how impressive they seem to CC folks.) Or they don’t even provide relevant LoRs. (Just imagine how frustrating this is. Kid wants, say, stem, proclaims his interest, but no stem LoR?) They write these sorts of essays CC often advocates, which show the adcoms nothing about what the college is looking for, they’re just writing, as if another hs essay. CC advocates “be yourself,” forgetting that this isn’t about you as Mr or Ms Nice Person or how you love cats, it’s a specific app/supp to specific colleges with high expectations, all around.

Many kids get honest about things which can stop adcoms in their tracks- revealing they’re sheltered, have limited perspective, don’t get along, quit pursuing something too soon, it goes on. Or proudly state they’re loners or show, in other ways, that they’re not collaborative.

The example, “would have loved to visit Philadelphia but couldn’t because of covid, I know its a great city with lots of things to do
 I will totally find myself there!” is not going to make a kid compelling. You’re appplying to the college, not the city.

Those are just some examples that show, despite grades and maybe scores, these kids are not presenting themselves in ways that promote their apps. Many leave the impression they are sleep-walking through the app/supp. Many offer generic explanations of their interests (Ack, “You’re a top college and I want a top college.” Or over focus on college being career prep.)

But this thread keeps returning to the issue of TO- and repeated certainty that not having scores is some fake-out or character flaw. Congrats, if your kid could test and you like the results. But whatever you think, the colleges believe enough kids couldn’t get the tests, so they went TO. (You want to argue with them, their view, because your kids could test?)

In a competition for an elite slot, it is not simply stats and some leader “titles.” Any mistake in the rest can set a kid aside. Once your kid has evidence of academic qualification (rigor, grades, and, if available, scores,) the rest is where you and your kiddo should put the energy. It’s been so for many years.

As for the continuing assumption that only affleuent kids can pull it together, think again.

10 Likes
146

Speaking as a supporter of testing, I think it’s nuts to expect students to travel long distances to take the tests this year. In fact, I think it’s irresponsible to hold such tests in the midst of a pandemic (6-ft physical distance isn’t sufficient to protect the students indoors because of the duration of the tests).

5 Likes
147

A lot of the parents I heard complain about having to travel a bit to take the SAT/ACT are the same parents that have no problem driving up and down the east coast to play soccer. I get it that many kids across the US do not have that option, but many do have the option. Hopefully in a few months we will have the stats to argue over who benefited and who did not.

2 Likes
148

^I just think that we need to get our priorities straight. Stopping the spread of the virus should take precedence over almost anything else at this moment, whether it’s testing or soccer.

13 Likes
149

Agree 1000% with your points @dadof4kids. And add to that, important to keep in students with high risk family members at home. These are often multi-generation households that tend to skew low-income. No way these kids should have or should be trying to get a test score. Sheesh - I thought we’d ‘settled’ this debate months ago.

Anyway, this is a forced and real-time experiment for colleges – how will they make decisions when so many students don’t submit a score. It will vary tremendously, and students (and parents) won’t know the sausage making. But I imagine they’ll be tracking academic performance of students admitted w/o a score and this will have a big impact on future use of test scores for admissions.

I work in higher ed policy and so what I will finally add is that there’s loads of research that high school GPA – not a test score – is the most significant predictor of college success. People think “oh, but what about grade inflation and varying quality of schools?” Doesn’t matter. When you examine aggregated datasets of high school student info to see what predicts future college grades, HS GPA is the leading indicator. It’s a measure that captures academic achievement over time, across disciplines, and across different teachers so it has a lot of embedded info, so to speak. Point being colleges don’t need test scores – they may want them, but they don’t need them.

14 Likes
151

Seems typical for college students to get lower grades in college than in high school.

Colleges generally take 3.0-4.0 HS GPA students and spread them across 2.0-4.0 GPA range in college (with some falling below 2.0 and being academically dismissed).

The most selective colleges generally take 3.8-4.0 HS GPA students and spread them across the 3.0-4.0 GPA range in college, based on their typical college GPA averages in the 3.5 range.

3 Likes
152

@srparent15 but does this happen? You are assuming it does, but somehow all the test optional schools were able to figure out how to admit kids that would thrive at their schools without having test scores. Give the AO’s more credit!!

7 Likes
153

@cinnamon1212 Yes, it happens. That’s why I’m asking. My daughter knows many kids that this has happened to. If I didn’t know firsthand of cases like this, I wouldn’t have asked! It blows me away in the parent group how these parents of the kids also think their 4.0/4.0+ kids are the only 4.0/4.0+ kids at that school. But many struggle. It’s a really hard school. Maybe it’s parental pressure too from high school and some just break out in college, not sure. And AGAIN, I am not talking about tests here at all. I specifically said that in my question, so please read the full comment before making assumptions!!

My husband too (although this was 40+ years ago) the straight A kid at his high school valedictorian, went to Harvard, couldn’t hack it and failed out. Cant’ say it was the high school because my husband at the same high school also went to an Ivy League and onto U-Chicago for law school so it wasn’t the school, but I’m talking about kids today, not 40 years ago.

@ucbalumnus This makes sense. There will be a few of course who at these top colleges can achieve high A’s but for others it’s “welcome to the real world”. I do think some kids just sail through high school not reaching a wall, then they hit the wall and don’t know how to study because a lot of things came easy to them. I saw this with someone here but they hit the wall in high school which was probably a good time to hit it so they could learn and adapt. I do think another issue is kids who aren’t used to collaborating and want to only work alone and there is a lot of collaborating in college on projects, etc. So many hate them, or hate working with a particular person in their group, but that’s what real life is going to be like too. Thanks for your feedback.

154

Agree with @ucbalumnus on this. Students may generally get lower grades in college, but elite schools having significant numbers of kids who can’t do the academic work is not really a problem, including those that have ben TO for years.

The vast majority of kids who struggle in college do so for reasons that don’t relate to their academic ability. Common stumbling blocks are not feeling like they belong, esp. an issue for first gen kids and URMs, unfort.; bad study habits (as you pointed out) and not asking for support (e.g., tutoring)when they need it; homesickness; partying too much, etc – none of these are issues that a high test score would fix.

6 Likes
156

I think most tests definitely measure more than someone just being a good test taker. The group of kids I am most familiar with are repeat AIME qualifiers that do not need to study for the SAT to typically get an 800 on the math or 36 on the ACT. While I definitely agree there are kids that do not test as well under pressure, I think those are fewer than many want to admit.

1 Like
157

Yes true, good test takes learn the rules to do well on the English section of the ACT and someone good and fast at Reading can do well on the English and Science, but you cannot just do well on math unless you’re a good guesser. But for non test takers that are good at math, aside from grades, some of those students (harder obviously for students who’s schools don’t provide some of these opportunities due to cost) their EC’s can show that they excel in math if they earn these awards or do well on the AIME or AMC exams, or other activities that are free in their states. The motivated ones regardless of socioeconomic status should hopefully be able to find a mentor or these opportunities somewhere, although if they can’t even get internet service or hotspot w/a device which should be a right that every child has, then that’s a whole different story. My oldest took a free math course at either Harvard or MIT when he was in high school just for fun. (Doesn’t sound fun to me). There are also coursera courses that are free to take. So it doesn’t necessarily have to be by testing to show certain abilities, but yes agree, you can’t fake being good at math on the ACT or SAT.

158

@srparent15, I recall an eye opening study on this about students from two states in Germany, with aggregate standardised tests scores across the states at the opposite end of the achievement scale (think Mississippi to Minnesota).

By using standardised achievement testing, they found that the “Mississippi” students, on aggregate, were two years behind the “Minnesota” students, across the board. The A students in the most rigorous classes in college prep track two years behind the A students in the most rigorous classes in the other state, and so on, all the way down the scale of rigour to the F students in the remedial classes.

When they compared IQ tests for these students, though, they found that the A students in the most rigorous classes in the low achievement state scored just as highly as the A students in the high achievement state, and so on down the achievement scale. The 4.0 students in one state were just as smart as those in the other state - but the system had taught them two years worth less knowledge.

Kids step up to what is demanded of them. The 4.0 kids are bright, take what is thrown at them and work as hard as they have to. But some will be hurt more by the lack of academic preparation than others, and some colleges will be better at scaffolding, and it’s probably dependent on major, too, though in the US system, in which you declare your major by sophomore or junior year only, students have time to adjust and adapt.

1 Like
159

Just going to throw this out there, but I do think schools will lean on demonstrated interest more than ever this year. (I know some don’t track it - at least that’s what they claim.) You can see which schools track by doing a quick Google search. If they are comparing two great candidates, they would probably offer a spot to the one who was tracked through CRM (did they open emails, did they click thru, read content, fill out forms), attend virtual visits, attend special major related webinars, reach out to college admissions officers, do interviews if offered. A kid who invested time over summer & fall in learning about a campus is more likely to attend.
Anyway, that’s my guess as to how some schools will make decisions. :woman_shrugging:

160

If we are talking about the type of highly selective colleges that are the focus of this forum, they do not admit by only GPA and test scores. I am not aware of any exceptions among “elite” colleges in the US. All of them consider other factors. If you remove test scores, you have more factors to consider than only GPA.

When test scores are removed from the other factors, the influence on predicted ability is probably far less than you expect. For example, prior to going test optional Ithaca did some research comparing how much predictive ability was lost when removing test scores from other available information about the student. Their results are discussed at https://www.ithaca.edu/ir/docs/testoptionalpaper/ and summarized below. Note that there was essentially no difference in prediction of college cumulative GPA between GPA + Rigor with SAT and GPA + Rigor without SAT – one explained 43% of variance in cumulative college GPA and the other 44%, suggesting hardly any predictive ability was lost by removing test scores. Test scores did add to the prediction in isolation, but that predictive power seems to have been duplicated by the combination of GPA + rigor + AP count.

First Gen + URM + Gender – Explains 8% of Variance in Cum GPA
Demographics + SAT Score-- Explains 25% of Variance in Cum GPA
Demographics + GPA + HS Course Rigor + AP Count – Explains 43% of Variance
Demographics + GPA + HS Rigor + AP Count + SAT – Explains 44% of Variance

This fits with test submitter and test optional admits tending to have extremely similar GPA distribution at test optional colleges. For example, the previous linked Bates study mentions average GPAs of 3.12 test optional vs 3.16 test submitter. The Bates study did note some small differences in major distribution such as natural science majors (tends to be harsher grading) being 23% test submitter vs 17% test optional, but the point is that I wouldn’t assume that the kids with lower grades are primarily going be test optional ones, rather than test submitters.

It sounds like you aren’t familiar with the grade distribution at typical “elite” private colleges. As a general rule of thumb, when a larger portion of students do a A quality work, colleges tend to give a larger portion of A grades. At elite private colleges where most do A quality work, most students typically get A’s and very few get C’s.

“Elites” that have GPA based cutoffs for honors tend to have cutoffs that are close to a perfect 4.0. For example, back in 2017, Yale’s cutoffs for summa and magna were cumulative GPAs of 3.95 and 3.90 respectively. I’d expect they’d be significantly higher today. Harvard’s senior survey mentions that 33% of students report a cumulative GPA of 3.9 or higher, 72% of students reported a cumulative GPA of 3.7 or higher, and only 1% of students report below 3.0. Almost nobody fails out from “elite” private colleges because they can’t cut it academically.

That said when students at elite colleges get the first B of their life, it can be very psychologically stressful for some. While a freshman at Stanford, they had counselors come to my dorm as preventative measure after midterms of first quarter, so students who were struggling with the first B’s of their life had a chance to talk to someone. My personal experience was the students that seemed to be most freaked out about getting a B were not recruited athletes or others that are likely to be weaker academically. Instead they tended to be unhooked kids who appeared to be excellent students. I had no reason to believe they had relatively lower test scores. Anecdotally they were often kids who were really focused on medicine and seemed to have unrealistic beliefs about the importance of perfect grades, such as thinking that getting a single B+ on a midterm instead of straight A’s on everything would kill their chances of getting in to a top med school.

8 Likes
161

@data10 Actually, you’re wrong on many accounts, both on answering what my original question was, since it has nothing to do with test scores, URMs, first gens, or in general a bunch of statistics that you spewed. Secondly, you are completely wrong in your comment that I don’t have a clue or any experience on grade distributions on elite schools or what they expect and how they work. You don’t know anything about my background, my family background, where we work, where we come from, where we all went to school, are attending school, what we have seen first hand, who we know, etc. so before you make erroneous assumptions, ask first.

I asked a simple question. I didn’t ask for a monologue of a bunch of stats. Nor did I ask anything about medical school or graduate school. I also directed my question at one person. Since you think it was directed at you, when it was not, I am going to make it easy on you and everyone else and just delete it.

No response is necessary here.

1 Like
162

You have an interesting perspective. One question: what do you mean by “an elite slot?” Do you mean T20 college? Something narrower?

163

You are entitled to believe I am wrong, but to be convincing, you need to state a specific reason. What specifically in the post was not correct?

Regarding listing stats, the referenced test optional study suggested that removing test scores did not significantly reduce the ability to predict GPA at a test optional, which is absolutely relevant to both this thread and your post . The demographic variables you listed were controls, not the point of the study or point of the post.

I listed specific information about grade distributions at 2 “elite” colleges, and have personal experience at a 3rd where I completed 3 degrees and interview students for admission. Rather than just saying I am wrong, do you have any evidence that conflicts with the grade distributions I listed? For example, can you find any evidence that most common grade at Harvard, Yale, or Stanford is not an A? Or that C’s are common at any “elite” private school, as your post implied.

If you only want one person to reply to your comments, I’d suggest sending a private message rather than posting in a forum thread. Forum posts do not restrict who may apply to who. I welcome anyone to reply to this forum post or any other I have made in this thread, even though you are only the person mentioned in my direct reply.

8 Likes
164

“who didn’t even get it at that time that drive to Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana, Arizona, Maine, Jersey, Ohio, or just anywhere they could get the test in.”

I lived in upstate NY, midwest and CA and it’s not that easy to drive to a neighboring state, especially one that had more lax testing standards wrt covid. I knew people that flew to a red or purple state to get the test (not to get political, but that’s what happened). They decided they needed the test for a number of reasons but CA statewide pretty much shut it down testing after Feb.

“You’re appplying to the college, not the city.”

Well many times they’re intertwined, Columbia a few years back showed an essay from an admitted student that started with their falling in love with NYC the first time she visited the city. It was genuine but I would say half the essay was about NYC.

“For too many, their ECs are off, one way or another”

ECs were also impacted by covid but colleges went test-optional not EC-optional, so of course the focus in on the tests because that’s one thing, along with demonstrated interest that changed. If you want the focus to be on ECs, then colleges should have said, it’s ok if couldn’t complete the ECs in spring and the summer plan you had for 2020, but they didn’t, at least publicly. But every college made a public decision on tests, signaling it’s importance in college admissions.

1 Like