I do think it’s awesome those kids have an opportunity to shine on standardized tests if that’s their strength. I would argue though that four years of academic performance is more indicative of future college success than standardized tests. The same student who doesn’t want to play the game to get top grades in high school probably won’t want to play the game to get top grades in college either. As far as students in the arts go I would think many colleges weigh more heavily auditions and portfolios for those majors.
And, it all is a game. My son who’s already in college will complain about assignments, this is pointless, this is stupid. Sometimes what you learn from a class is how to adapt to what the professor wants, all valuable life skills. When I was in undergrad I had a science class on dinosaurs, gen ed requirement. The professor repeatedly graded me low because my writing was too verbose and flowery for scientific research. I thought he was an asshole and I dug my heels in and refused to alter my writing style for him. I received a C- in that class, the only C in my undergraduate academic record. All the I proved was that I was the asshole being inflexible when I professor specifically told me how I could better my grade
@ucbalumnus I’m looking at the very real possibility though that she may not get into UCI, UCD, UCSB, or UCSC because of her standardized tests scores. She’s not looking at an impacted major, but admissions are so competitive across the board this could seriously hinder her. Same thing for CP SLO or my alma mater SDSU, she may not get in because of her test scores. If I look at Naviance she’s in the mix for last years acceptances at those UC’s and CSU’s, but it’s really a toss up. We’re branching out from California both because she may not get in to any of her top choices and she’s just not sure if that’s the education she wants. Northeastern LAC’s are speaking to her right now. As far as Sarah Lawrence she would likely study mathematics and minor in dance. She likes their ideas on cross discipline studies.
’ I would argue though that four years of academic performance is more indicative of future college success than standardized tests. The same student who doesn’t want to play the game to get top grades in high school probably won’t want to play the game to get top grades in college either.’ I totally agree. What good is an SAT of 1400 when the kid has a 2.3 because he didn’t bother to turn in busy work or take the time to re-write papers or thought he knew more than his teachers? A red flag for college adcoms.
‘Sometimes what you learn from a class is how to adapt to what the professor wants, all valuable life skills.’ True as well, and love your honesty about the dinosaur prof.
http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/campuses/santa-cruz/freshman-profile/index.html does indicate that her SAT score is at the 25th percentile at UCSC, and below the 25th percentile at UCSB, UCD, and UCI, so chances may be somewhat lower than predicted from the above, although UC’s de-emphasis on test scores means that they may not hurt her as much as assumed.
Is she willing to consider UCR? It has math and dance majors, and her test scores are in the mid range, while her GPA indicates a good chance based on 2015 admit rates.
She probably would not be willing to go to UCR, UCM, or many of the CSU’s. She would likely opt for private if she can’t get into any of her top choices. Even SDSU where I went doesn’t really appeal to her, probably because her mom went there. I don’t know about you, but as California kids I think they have it pretty well divided in their minds which UC’s and CSU’s they’d be willing to attend.
LACs are more likely to be test optional than more tech/science focused colleges. However, there are exceptions. For example, Worcester Polytechnic Institute is test optional. Their CDS mentions 68% majored in engineering and 11% CS. Only 6% majored in non-STEM fields (mostly business). It’s obviously not an “artsy” student body, nor does it have a reputation for easy grading.
And many of those meh GPA but perfect test score kids would argue that they were bored in high school, that they were tired of coloring maps or doing busy work. I have a friend whose son has a 3.0 and a 34 on the ACT. He does the classwork that he likes (robotic, physics, math) and doesn’t do what he doesn’t like (Spanish, English). At may colleges his performance will be just fine because they won’t make him take Spanish or English. I agree that he wouldn’t like (or apply to ) many of the test optional scores as many are LACs, but in his case I don’t think the gpa built over 4 years shows a better picture than his scores. If I were an AO, I’d not like that he wasn’t trying in high school and I’d probably take a student with a better gpa and lower ACT if it were for the last spot in the class, but I like effort. I have no doubt that he’ll get into top schools with a 34 ACT.
Hmm… I would love to hear where he gets in, I would doubt he gets in to any top schools with those stats. My daughter certainly won’t get into any top schools either with her stats. I come from a state where our flagships routinely turn away nearly perfect (4.5/2200/35) applicants everyday though.
@socalmom007 - How about checking the stats for your own school for previous admits? Do you have Naviance or a similar tool that can tell you the scores and GPA’s of previous students who were accepted? Have you talked with parents of students in previous classes or seen where they’ve been accepted and if they went test optional? What is the advice of the guidance counselor based on your school’s relationship with those colleges? I know more questions than answers, but hopefully some items for you to consider.
Please keep us posted DS is a junior and I may consider a test optional route as well.
Our high school does have naviance. Unfortunately many of the test optional LAC’s we are considering applying to have no data in naviance as we’re on the opposite side of the country. I can clearly see how her test scores are going to hurt her at in state schools, but I’m not sure for any of these test optional schools.
I think what the poster above me meant is if going test optional statistically hurts students when compared with applicants with the same stats otherwise? Given our naviance has almost no data for any of these college I really have no idea.
Take a look at the school-specific boards here for the test optional schools like Bowdoin, Bates, Wake Forest etc, there are usually threads about going test optional to those specific schools and people’s experience with it.
My son visited and interviewed at a handful of test optional schools, including Bates, Dickinson and Conn Coll, and during the info sessions and during the post-interview, “does your parent have any questions” section, we heard over and over that test optional does not hurt a candidate, that these schools are test optional precisely because they recognize that testing is not always an accurate reflection of a student’s abilities. If a student just can’t get the scores up to an acceptable range, then yes, schools like Amherst, Williams and Swat will be off the table and that can take some getting used to for a student/family who thought those schools would be on the list. But that same student is a wonderful candidate at Bowdoin, Bates, etc. and has plenty of options.
As the Sarah Lawrence example shows (poor math and statistics offerings), she needs to check the offerings of each school to see if it has academic offerings that she wants. A school being test optional or test de-emphasized does not help her if it is a poor academic fit for her.
I agree @ucbalumnus. Unfortunately she’s 16 and not quite sure what she wants. She knows she likes numbers and if she could work with numbers all day she’d be happy. She’s getting a bit panicked that she might not get in anywhere decent because of her test scores, so she’s studying like crazy and looking for back up plans.
I didn’t read all the replies, so this might have been shared already. We recently visited Wake Forest and the admissions officer came right out and said that when they say they are TO, they are TO. He said if you want them to consider other parts of your application more, you don’t need to submit them. He went on to use a 36 as an example, not a 20. He said not just low scores don’t need to be reported. TO was one of the more dominate parts of the presentation.
