Family Gets Lesson in Admissions

Parents Forum
281

<p>"It seems like you view a 1380 as an unusually low score yet it is in the 95th percentile. Additionally, we do not understand how the scores were skewed (Math 800, CR 580?). Or whether he had good scores on his AP or SATII tests."</p>

<p>I would still find it very unusual for a person who can win the kind of science awards that he won and to have done those kind of science activities to have relatively low verbal scores. Things like science projects require students to do research -- reading professional journals in that field. To do that requires very strong verbal comprehension skills, and such strong comprehension skills should be reflected by having a high verbal score, too.</p>

<p>Of course science expertise requires strong math skills, so I'd expect that the math skills would be high, too. </p>

<p>Consequently, no matter how I look at it, his SAT scores seem very low for someone who has made the kind of science achievements that he has.</p>

<p>Someone suggested that perhaps he just took the test one time. I'd be surprised if that were the case because normally students who come from the kind of families that he does and who have the kind of college aspirations that he does take the test multiple times unless they get a very high score the first time.</p>

<p>I would, however, like to see his SAT II scores. If they were extrremely high in math and science, I would assume that his SAT I scores didn't reflect his abilities. </p>

<p>"To me it looks like the kid/student had a lot of activities . . . but was not a kid. I suspect his parents may have helped him on his research projects because of the number of activities he listed, which happen to coincide with his parents areas of expertise, not because of his scores.""</p>

<p>His activities' coinciding with his parents' fields didn't raise suspicions with me because one of my son's had exactly that. That reflected the fact that that S's talents were very similar to my husband and mine (Husband and I have worked in the same field, indeed worked together in 3 different institutions). S was lucky in that his talents were similar to his parents, and he got to learn about some activities as a result. However, we didn't force him to work in our field. We even tried to discourage him. S, however, ran full speed ahead dragging us after him. His particular talents are reflected in his SAT scores as well as his activities. People usually assumed that H and I were forcing S to be involved in our field, but that was never the case. Our most effective punishment for him was keeping him from doing activities related to our field.</p>

<p>By contrast, our other S had similar exposure, but doesn't have those interests. Despite having measured abilities that could lead to similar achievements that his brother has made, this S has very little interest in that field, and has chosen a completely different path. What's funny is that his SAT score in the field related to my husband and mine is actually higher than is his brother's already 98th percentile score, but this S has not done any activities in the field related to this talent.</p>

282

<p>
[quote]
These paid for summer programs are a dime a dozen, but if you have a kid who has stuck their thumb in a leaky dike without a lot of parental involvement, and your kid can be convinced that they should talk about it (not that easy), at some schools you may have an app that is reviewed more favorably than an app full of Intel's and Newspaper Awards. At least that was our experience.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>agree. A common refrain I've seen on CC is kids complaining they don't have impressive ECs because their time is taken up with sports and/or church-related activities. They have to be convinced that these are great ECs.</p>

283

<p>
[quote]
They have to be convinced that these are great ECs.

[/quote]
I'm trying, marite. I'm trying. If we can convince them of this , maybe some of this other arms race crap will end.</p>

284

<p>Full disclosure: My kid is one whose board scores <em>absolutely</em> do not reflect his abilities or performance by other measures. So the below viewpoint is surely affected by this.
[quote]
What I find suspicious about the kid in the story is that his board scores were so low for a person who had recieved a major award for a science project.

[/quote]
That 1380 is a relatively low SAT score for admission to the uber-selectives is all too true. They want high board scores as much as anyone for purposes of reporting to the vaunted USN&WR, imo. That they believe high board scores can measure potential also seems to be true. However, the uber-selectives aren't wedded to board scores as the <em>best</em> measure of potential; if they were, they would be populated only by those with 1500+ because they have hordes of such applicants.</p>

<p>Is it interesting that a kid with "only" a 1380 was admitted to an uber-selective? I think so. Does the 1380 render his qualification for such a school questionable? Hogwash. Does a 1380 mean he can't achieve something very unusual in a field of interest? It does not.</p>

285

<p>Just to clarify Robinson's policy</p>

<p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/16/AR2006061601789.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/16/AR2006061601789.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
All those late-night study sessions finally paid off. Christina Azimi graduated as valedictorian of Fairfax's Robinson Secondary School.</p>

<p>So did Travis Halbert, Azimi's friend since elementary school. And Jonathan Cross, who was in her English class. In fact, when Robinson Principal Dan Meier praised the school's top academic talent at commencement Thursday afternoon, nearly two full rows of graduates stood to be recognized as valedictorians.</p>

<p>"At this time, I would like to award all 41 students who have achieved that honor," Meier said as the crowd cheered. "I tell these guys," Meier joked, "the only thing I have in common with them is I rarely received a B in high school myself."

[/quote]
</p>

286

<p>
[quote]
...which S took to mean the green light to discuss Bayesian statistics and the Poincare conjecture...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>marite, the difference between your son and my 9 year old is that my h discusses physics at a 9 year old's level with him. You no doubt were able to discuss mathematics at a 40 year old's level with yours!</p>

287

<p>Not a discussion but a monologue. I'm totally math-challenged, and thus Bayesian statistics is as much white noise as the music S plays on his MP3. The only difference is that he has earplugs and therefore I don't hear the music. I don't wear earplugs, so I hear the talk on Bayesian statistics. But hearing and listening are different things.<br>
And I think that a 9-year old who likes to talk about 9-year old physics has a great chance of knowing a great deal more than his age peers in just a couple of years.</p>

288

<p>"That 1380 is a relatively low SAT score for admission to the uber-selectives is all too true. They want high board scores as much as anyone for purposes of reporting to the vaunted USN&WR, imo. That they believe high board scores can measure potential also seems to be true. However, the uber-selectives aren't wedded to board scores as the <em>best</em> measure of potential; "</p>

<p>Very true. The problem, however, is that his low board scores for the uber selects coincide with extremely high achievements in the sciences. That IMO is very rare, and is why I'm suspicious about what he did to attain his science achievements. How much did he do; how much did his dad do?</p>

<p>If the young man's achievements had been in a field that didn't relate that much to board scores -- for instance community service or music -- I wouldn't be as suspicious. </p>

<p>I do think that there's a reason that, for instance, CalTech and Cooper Union rely so strongly upon board scores when selecting their classes. Presumably when it comes to fields like engineering, board scores reflect a person's abilities.</p>

289

<p>
[quote]
marite, the difference between your son and my 9 year old is that my h discusses physics at a 9 year old's level with him. You no doubt were able to discuss mathematics at a 40 year old's level with yours!

[/quote]
While I discussed hook shots , spin moves, and whether or not Arroyo's leg would get well by Friday night's football game at Glen Rose. </p>

<p>jmmom, there is no doubt that the SAT are poor indicators of future performance or of current performance for that matter. But I do believe that they use them . If the GPA is way higher than the test scores suggest, the school will challenge the difficulty of the grading or material covered. If Calc AB is a 2 , they challenge the curriculum. It's just a piece. Just like a cough disclosed at a checkup can be a symptom of something major or minor. It deserves to be looked at in the context of the rest of the record.</p>

290

<p>Cur:</p>

<p>Your D is probably streets ahead of my S in biology. At least she knows one end of a cow from the other!</p>

<p>Last year's freshman orientation included a "State Fair" where students got to milk a cow. Only a an overwhelmingly urban college would this be considered fun and educational.</p>

291

<p>A couple of things:</p>

<p>I. ON SCORES:
I agree with Eagle & several others who warn against presuming the spread of the scores between the sections. That is not based on random speculation but on postings from the student forums over the last couple of years (Admissions, Chances, and the Colleges forums). Many an 800-er with impressive achievements in science & math areas has received a 550-600 in the Verbal (sometimes even lower).</p>

<p>II. ON THE FACTOR OF ‘PRIVILEGE’ AND ‘ENTITLEMENT’ IN ADMISSION</p>

<p>I would argue that recent admission trends have tended to, if anything, disadvantage the “privileged,” or at least those who are transparently so in their application + resume + zipcode + parents’ occupations + lack of employment + summer activities, etc. At the very least this is true for the upper-level U’s and colleges that are mythologically believed to exist “only for the privileged.” Nor are the very richest “elite” U’s admitting only impoverished achievers & bypassing middle-class achievers. Not at all: they are admitting a spread of representative incomes nationally & globally. And as to financial aid, it is especially some of the upper-level private U’s, well endowed as they are, that aid across all incomes. </p>

<p>Michele Hernandez wrote about this in her book about writing admission essays (several years old now, so this is not some brand new concept). In fact, she made quite a point about how committees dislike applications & essays reeking of privilege & entitlement, & warned against writing essays which have that tone or which reveal such privilege by their content or theme.</p>

<p>On a philosophical note -- not necessarily impugning the student in the article --I also find it unattractive to "assume" a certain right of privilege to attend a prestigious University, based on advantages of birth/environment & the expectations of peers & family. However, I dislike that assumption as much coming from the opposite end of the economic spectrum. These are private universities we're talking about. I don’t feel that my children deserve equal financial access to any expensive U for which they meet entrance requirements. One D happened to qualify for some richly endowed U’s, but the other probably will not. Her 2 dream schools are super-reaches financially, with a track record of lousy aid. One of them was recently mentioned here. They are also slight reaches admission-wise – one of them not only because of selectivity, but because it announces it is need-aware. If by a miracle she gets into this latter one but cannot afford it, them’s the breaks. She’ll go to a public, won’t she? </p>

<p>This probably sounds like a lame rationalization, but I do believe that U’s that cannot (usually it’s cannot, I think, not will not) aid generously are institutions which suffer by doing so: they suffer because they do lack that spread of backgrounds which can enrich a school; further, they cannot “afford” to choose only the best and brightest from whatever economic segment that is. (Undoubtedly we all have met some development admits to elem. & high schools who are not the brightest bulbs in the chandelier.) I genuinely see this situation as “their” (name the college) loss.</p>

<p>There has been thread upon thread of argument mostly in favor of the idea that a particular diploma neither guarantees nor prevents a wildly successful future. I do not see it as a problem or a deprivation that the entire U.S. population cannot afford all private U’s, including those which are not richly endowed. The only way to make all private U’s equally financially accessible to all population segments is to federalize them. Do we want that? Not I! Even foreigners from countries very socialized economically admire our mix of higher institution options: they like the mix of privates & publics, of styles, of sizes, of programs. I’ve never heard anyone from one of these socialized countries advocate that we reduce those differences in character among our institutions of higher learning. (Indeed, they often come here precisely to partake of those options.)</p>

<p>III. ACCESSIBILITY </p>

<p>While I do not think that equal accessibility is realizable, I do strongly feel that one of the greatest deterrents to better educational accessibility is the absence of a functioning data & application matrix for merit aid. Clearly, merit aid signficantly affects both lower & middle income segments, which affects the ability to attend that college. The system (or really, the lack thereof) is beyond Byzantine. To the extent that the NYU’s and others either do not offer merit in many cases, or in other cases invite the applicant to as much as search the entire ocean floor, both the institutions and the applicants suffer.</p>

292

<p>JMMom, I SO agree with you about the SAT scores as not an indicator of a person's qualifications to do the work and to achieve at a high level. I know colleges use the SAT but thankfully the top colleges weigh much more factors and they don't just accept only 1500 and over SAT kids. I don't know this boy's subtest scores. But if they were equal, that's about a 690 or 700 or so on each. That is not someeone who is not capable of research or hard math/science work. My D who goes to an Ivy has a very high math SAT. My feeling is that in this crowd, if I gave her verbal SAT which is very good but not stratospheric, some might say...she must not be able to do the work. To the contrary, she was a top student also in the humanities in HS. Now, in a very demanding college, she gets top grades in courses involving research and writing. In fact, on one occasion as a freshman in a very large course, the professor used her exam essay as exemplary to the class. She excels in school in all things verbal and math/science. Her verbal and writing SAT score, while good, aren't a total indicator of her abilities to excel in academics and in her field. </p>

<p>I don't think ANYTHING of the fact that this boy was able to get into the likes of Duke with a 1380 because this kid is acomplished, had top grades and rank in a surburban school and exceled at many things beyond the science project being discussed here. These offset his score and his score was at least in the ballpark, even if on the lower end of that ballpark of admitted students.</p>

<p>My D also had many admissions to very selective schools. She was waitlisted at Princeton even, which is not an acceptance, but clearly they were willing to take someone with her SATs which I admit are quite a bit higher than this boy but her verbal SAT is in a range that I think some here are claiming would indicate some incapability to do the hard stuff or a high level of achievement. To the contrary, my D has achieved quite highly even without a super high verbal SAT score, and I'm not talking just achievements in math/science but across the board, including verbal/writing type things. She only took the SATs twice and felt as long as she got over the total score goal / threshhold she felt she needed, she stopped. She was in the ballpark for every school on her list, includng the most selective schools in the land. She didn't care if she had a SUPER high score, just a score that was in the target range. Her life did not revolve around testing. She was too busy, lol.</p>

293

<p>Epiphany, while NYU may not have a lot of merit aid across the board, I just want you to be aware that they do offer it. My D won a very substantial four year award there. Just wanted to be clear that they do offer it to some, but maybe not a lot.</p>

294

<p>Yes, I know that soozie. That's why I included "ors," "ands" and "some others" as qualifiers.;)
And some privates offer only need aid, with a high bar (or I should say, low) for need, and further, do not aid beyond 50% of need. Many middle-class, & certainly low-income, would find a total of $88K for 4 yrs. beyond affordable.</p>

295

<p>I agree and understand....it is a problem and huge consideration for so many people. I just wasn't sure you were aware that there are some scholarships at NYU. Frankly, until we received the award, we were naively unaware it was even a possibility or that any such scholarships existed. When the letter arrived, I was shocked and counting the zeros, to be honest with ya. I remember the moment well. My D was lying in a hospital bed! It was good medicine. ;)</p>

296

<p>Please free up your PM box, soozie.</p>

297

<p>
[quote]
JMMom, I SO agree with you about the SAT scores as not an indicator of a person's qualifications to do the work and to achieve at a high level. I know colleges use the SAT but thankfully the top colleges weigh much more factors and they don't just accept only 1500 and over SAT kids. I don't know this boy's subtest scores. But if they were equal, that's about a 690 or 700 or so on each.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It is interesting to compare this statement with one of the very early comments after the thread started: </p>

<p>"Thanks for the post, Coureur. I wonder whether we should conclude that, in the end, SATs matter--at least at Princeton and Yale where this stellar student was rejected."</p>

<p>It's not very hard to agree with positions that the SAT should not be considered the strongest predictor of future success ,,, when viewed by itself. On the other hand, it's a mistake to ignore that the SAT scores--when coupled with other parts of the applications--is still a very good predictor. I wrote earlier that the SAT is in fact used to validate the remaining part of the application, since it one of the few stantardized measurements, which is a departure from GPA that can come in a wide range of exotic flavors. </p>

<p>As far as speculating about Princeton and Yale's decision, the answer may very well be found in what the article did NOT address: the SAT-II Subject scores. Princeton is one of the VERY few schools that still require 3 SAT Subject Tests. In this regard, a score of less than 1400 on the SAT would kost its relevance when juxtaposed to scores of 780-800 on the SAT Subject Tests in Math II, Physics, or Chemistry. Because there was no mention of the lower than 1400 SAT but no discussion about the SAT ST, one could conclude that such scores did not eclipse the SAT scores, and might have brought a new perspective on the scientific EC accomplishments.</p>

298

<p>Xiggi, the early post was from me, the highlighted one sounds like it came from Soozie.</p>

<p>You are right that SAT-II scores could have provided useful information. But I do not see many newspaper articles ever mentioning SATII scores. When it is said that somebody had a perfect 1600 or perfect 2400, it just means perfect SAT scores.</p>

299

<p>SAT scores were not mentioned at all in this article.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2006-05-17-hs-allstars-first-team_x.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2006-05-17-hs-allstars-first-team_x.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

300

<p>
[quote]
Jonathan graduated from Robinson High School in Fairfax, Va., as a valedictorian with an International Baccalaureate diploma. Though his SAT scores weren't the highest — just under 1,400 —

[/quote]
</p>

<p>from the article that precipitated this discussion, linked in very first post of the thread.</p>