I agree test scores are not perfect and favor certain subsets of the population but these advantages can be easily adjusted for by the ADCOM. The problem colleges are running into with high school grades are:
Grade inflation, some schools have 30% of the class with a 4.0…they don’t identify academic stars anymore.
Class rank, not followed in more & more high schools…can’t tell how a students compares to peers.
How does a 4.0 at school A compare to a 3.8 at school B??
Different high schools have drastically different levels of rigor.
Different schools have different grading scales.
So GPA helps with determining the ability to succeed in most colleges but is worthless in comparing students from different high schools which is what the most selective U’s are trying to do. Different high schools also vary greatly in the number of AP classes offered. They don’t want to penalize students from high schools that are small and/or don’t offer many AP classes.
There is also a difference in a university wanting high stat kids and high stat kids wanting a university. You can admit lots of high stat kids but if none enroll you end up with lower stats with enrolled students. The data show high stat students want VU.
What Bud said. While the transcript is the most reliable indicator of student success in college, there’s a ton of noise in that data which makes it less useful in making fine distinctions between applicant A and applicant B.
Going all the way back, the reason Harvard invented the SAT in the first place was so that they would have a tool to help them identify the kids in Kansas that were Harvard material.
But back to the original post/question. Schools in the 11-25 band like Vandy probably do give a bit more relative admissions weight to test scores than the 1-10 schools do (for a variety of reasons).
And if you REALLY want to go to Vandy, go ED (since about half of Vandy’s seats get filled via ED).
@bud123 I agree with you mostly, but aren’t AP and IB (plus A Levels, French Bacc,etc) the great equaliser here? I know that some schools surprisingly don’t offer AP courses, but for a school such as Vandy, wouldn’t that be a small minority of kids? Furthermore, many of kids from “No-AP” schools are likely to be low-income/first-generation anyway, so they can be evaluated separately anyway.
^ I was referring to the AP Exam Grade not the AP class grade.
But an AP exam grade represents an objectively graded exam taken after a full year’s study of a core subject. Whereas an ACT/SAT exam is still considered an aptitude exam which is the culmination of a 4 hour sitting (although there is preparation involved.
It’s not perfect,but isn’t an AP exam grade better than an SAT?
@northwesty@londondad@bud123: I typically think AP is a “better” test though because students specialize or choose a major in college. In addition, it isn’t necessarily dominated by multiple choice when it comes to the weighting. If you truly want prepared students that can handle more rigorous courses in certain areas that require higher level thinking often in the forms of heavy writing requirements or even constructed response questions on exams, it is a better proxy for those who had access. Also, success on them is indeed more comparable to success on a final after conclusion of a college course (one could actually argue that some AP exams are technically more difficult in terms of cognitive complexity, than some of the finals give in introductory courses even at elite universities. This is primarily because the courses are large so the instructor writes more “gradeable” exams. AP has tons of graders). One could match the score to the course performance and it gives an idea of how difficult the instructors of that AP may grade (like if it is observed that some stronghold schools for a particular university have many students applying with a lower raw grade before weighting and then a 5 on the exam, the course is rigorous and didn’t have too much grade inflation. If the opposite, be concerned)
Then you get into access: Less wealthy students may not be at schools with lots of AP/IB, but let us be real in recognizing elite schools are already biased toward wealthy students who have better access to these AP/IB courses, so students who typically apply will have those under their belt. Maybe for those falling outside of those income brackets and with less access to AP/IB, SAT/ACT can be used as a proxy. But interestingly SAT/ACT reliance has skewed the income brackets at WUSTL and Vanderbilt more than other non-“Ivy and Ivy Plus” schools.
Also, we can argue that it is perhaps more objective all we want but it gets away from explaining why Vanderbilt, Chicago, WUSTL, Notre Dame use it as much more of an indicator than peer schools. Are you saying that other peer schools that have the same success levels are doing it wrong? Evidence is quite to the contrary (especially when you bring in all those top 10 schools with LOWER score ranges. Let us not talk about the ones with similar score ranges). Those students seem to be doing as well or better post-grad. The scores at all these places put the student bodies at an academically elite level. What is the point of constantly adding points each year to the SAT/ACT range despite the diminished returns? Some schools have made a CHOICE to take it to extremes and some haven’t and are just fine. It certainly appears that a choice whether or not to aim for a statistically more perfect student body each year is not driven by desires to improve or make academics more rigorous. Given that, all of this talk about whether or not it accurately measures achievement or success is irrelevant. Also, sometimes these schools get less applications than in previous cycles and still find a way to lower the admit rate and enhance the SAT range. I am sorry, but if that happens, then one must admit it is a game. No matter what the app. pool looks like, they must find a way to make it appear better than last year and the scores and admit rate are a way to do this.
Again, I understand when say, engineering units of schools and/or elite STEM universities (Caltech/MIT) are more score centric to an extreme because often these schools are providing unusually challenging STEM courses (okay, but even these places have a self-selection bias where high scorers apply to them and in addition do tend to have other indicators that they can handle the intensity in their application) even in comparison to their super elite peers. I feel other schools who do it have other goals in mind that have little to do with education or even through “fairly” sifting through the applicant pool. While one can only speculate, based upon the post-grad outputs of places like Duke, Stanford, and Penn (top 10 schools without 1400+ 25% yet. In fact these 3 have actually fluctuate. They do not necessarily seem to increase this year), one would have to wonder if these schools would do better by selecting lower scoring students with more “pointed” EC and academic profiles. I think the high scores, particularly at those 3 has evolved into a selling point so it is hard for them to reverse it. But other than Chicaqo, they may want to find a way to balance enhancing their rank this way while also selecting students stronger than other ways so that their outputs look more similar to their top 10 peers.
The answer to the OP is: “Get a very high score, have a good GPA, have some APs, and decent ECs, apply, and cross your fingers”, the end. The only difference between this and other schools in this tier would be to change “very high” to “high”. Predicting this stuff is almost useless.
“The answer to the OP is: “Get a very high score, have a good GPA, have some APs, and decent ECs, apply, and cross your fingers”, the end. The only difference between this and other schools in this tier would be to change “very high” to “high”. Predicting this stuff is almost useless.”
Actually, I would make it more of a decision tree, as follows
Do you have a very, very high score on SAT (1500+) or ACT (34+)?
If “No”, do not apply and move on to other schools.
if “Yes”,
Can you apply ED?
If “No” do not apply or apply only as a super reach.
I disagree with the above that to get in you MUST have a 34/1500+ and HAVE to apply ED. The RD round is tough, but the same holistic system is used for Vanderbilt as is used for any other elite school, and we don’t tell people to just not apply at all to Ivies RD because they’re impossible. The odds are against everyone, but if you’re a strong candidate and apply to a variety of top schools like Vanderbilt et al, odds are you’ll land one of them.
Getting into Vanderbilt requires the same things we’ve always known - an appealing application narrative (cohesive, well edited common app and essays) supported by strong academic achievement (evidence by scores and grades) and strong character (evidenced by recs, ECs, and essays, and the interview as a minor element). There is no secret formula. Just do your best and come what may on decision day.
Not a must but increases your chances more than it would at comparable schools. And beyond the obvious(same as other schools) and this, it is finger-crossing. Also their are not that many essays to go off of in terms of evaluating character. If you qualify, just apply and cross your fingers especially if outside of a certain score bracket.
@Iondondad & @bernie12 No, low grades and low test scores should not prevent a person to try to apply top schools, if the person has a story to tell or sell to the schools why he/she deserves a spot in that school. Know a true story from a kid currently at Vandy about their graduating class that year. Many of the top students at her school applied ivy schools and other top 25 that year did not get into any, but one of the student who was a B student with mediocrity test scores got into Standford with full ride and surprised everyone. The student in the essay explained well that she had to basically take care the household chores with three very young siblings (baby and toddler ages) for her 3.5 years while her parents working long hours at minimum wage jobs. If a person is out of the typical range of the admitted students but still dare to apply, it would actually raise the interest of the admission officers. So please don’t tell people not to try. The only reason that a person can’t get in is to not apply at all.
@amNotarobot : I didn’t say they should not apply. I am just saying one should never expect anything from these places and that some clearly want some attributes more than others (with the scores thing, some schools clearly cut more slack in that area than others there is no doubt about this even when you look at top 10 schools). I am all for folks applying to reach schools and consider all elite schools reaches. One should just not have expectations. You cross your fingers and hope for the best and avoid taking it personal if not admitted and if admitted, avoid thinking you were more qualified than the people denied. You were either blessed or lucky (for the less religious) to be admitted in these places even if you think you were qualified. Most of the folks turned down were also qualified despite many of us liking to pat ourselves on the back and think that we are truly more special than those who got turned down and gasp…perhaps had to go another elite similarly regarded school.
If you’re poor and have great ECs/grades consider Questbridge. I got in Vanderbilt through QB RD, and I honestly believe they admitted me because of my essay (about my sad life & inspirations). I got in Vanderbilt BME program too if that helps. You should start looking to join clubs (be very active in them), do a sport, volunteer (for what you want & enjoy), take challenging classes. Ask your guidance counselor for what you can join in the school.
There is hope! My S was admitted ED to Vanderbilt Engineering with a 32 ACT. I believe the key was that he was well rounded. Great GPA. State Tennis champion. Musician. President of the Robotics team.
At the summer Vandy preview, they told us point blank, “we like students who like us. Apply Early Decision!” It makes sense… it makes their numbers look good, because ED kids are locked in to VU and won’t choose another college over Vanderbilt.
My kid went to an admitted students’ reception last evening for the class of '21 and learned that this was the first year that the entire admissions committee (and I think it was recently expanded in size) had to UNANIMOUSLY vote to admit a student before admission was offered. Best wishes and good luck to those of you applying '22!
@bud123 “Top U’s with low test scores are having difficulty attracting today’s students to their campus”
Top U with low test scores? Which schools? Seriously, for a high stats student, that would be ideal if looking for merit. I’ve been trying to identify those schools that are in the 30-70 range and have Engineering, where top stats would be highly sought.
As for VU, if applying ED and needing merit to be financially feasible, is it binding if you don’t get the needed financial support? (assume EFC is full pay, but at the same time, unaffordable)
You can pull up the common data sets for top U’s & see where the scores are lower relative to their peers. Merit aid is the holy grail at top U’s…much sought after and hard to find. Most don’t believe in merit aid (Ivies, MIT, GU SU. VU is better than most when it comes to significant merit aid from elite schools. USC is very good, Duke offers some, as does Wash StL. and I think Emory. UVA doesn’t offer merit aid but there is a Jefferson organization that works with the school to offer scholarships. For top LAC’s look into W&L.
Unfortunately, the way aid works is elite U’s end up with full pay and no pay students. The upper middle class students get the short stick. They don’t receive much aid and don’t have the disposable income to afford their EFC. These upper middle class students tend to end up at their state flagship honors program (or at a good private U) with merit aid. It’s not fair but it’s what happening now.
“As for VU, if applying ED and needing merit to be financially feasible, is it binding if you don’t get the needed financial support? (assume EFC is full pay, but at the same time, unaffordable).”
ED really doesn’t work this way. And what your saying really doesn’t make sense.
Vandy (along with Emory, Rice, WUSTL, ND) does do a bit more merit scholarships than other top 20 schools. But merit money at this level is extremely competitive. To be a serious contender for merit at this level, your kid has to be a killer candidate – Vandy says you’ve got to be in the top 1% of the applicant pool. With a 10% admit rate, that means your kid has to be top 10% of all the very smart kids who actually get admitted to Vandy.
Such a kid is not going to need the admissions boost provided by ED. So why exactly are you applying ED?
ED makes sense in order to get an admissions edge and to hear back early from a school where (i) you are OK with being a full payor or (ii) you’ve run the net price calculator and you are willing/able to pay your expected contribution (assuming the school’s need based financial aid comes in as predicted by the NPC).
If you are shopping for merit money, you should be applying to schools non-binding EA and RD.
Vandy says it considers ED applicants for its merit scholarships. But I’d wonder if applying ED would actually reduce your merit chances. By applying ED, the kid is saying I’m 100% locked in as a full pay or if I get a normal fin aid award. So why would the school throw extra $$$ at a kid who says he’s coming even without those dollars?
