<p>You pay to send the scores from a particular sitting. If you want to send the scores from more than one sitting, you can. You just pay more.</p>
<p>Thanks for the link, hyperpuritan. I did find the methodology of the study a little strange, though. They did a regression analysis to find out the important factors for admission for the 1997 cohort. And then they said that their regression was good because it compared well to the 1997 data. Well, duh! The real test would be to come up with a model and then apply it to a different year and see how well it predicted the results.</p>
<p>For instance, it is easy to come up with a great regression analysis that will yield the stock market winners for any past period. The test is always to apply it prospectively and see if it actually works. In fact, choosing different periods will cause a different regression formula.</p>
<p>A regression analysis is only as good as the variables you choose to pick. There are a number of factors that adcomms say are taken into account that are not in this model, probably because they are qualitative and thus hard to put in. What about extracurriculars, recommendations, essays, personal factors (triumphing over adversity, etc.)? If it were as simple as this regression analysis would indicate, they wouldn't need adcomms at all. They could have data entry folks input the pertinent facts and the decisions would be made.</p>
<p>I'm not trying to give you a hard time. Even if a study isn't perfect, it is better than nothing at all. My knowledge of the subject has been increased by your post. I've just run across a bunch of misleading regressions in my life. As it is always said, correlation is not causation.</p>
<p>Hyper:
I have worked as a professor for more than 6 years, and I have worked on an admissions committee making actual admissions decisions for a graduate program. You claim to be an expert who understands the reality of the admissions process and the ACT versus SAT debate, yet you are a senior in high school and not an adcom. (?) </p>
<p>I am not saying that your opinion is not valid and worthy of respect-- it certainly is, but your claim to be an expert on "reality" is a bit much, given the fact that colleges provide very little actual data on how they really treat the ACT versus the SAT in the admissions process.</p>
<p>Anyway, Hyper I wish you the best in your college process--- I personally have many Ivy friends (Harvard grads) who did little with their Ivy degrees--- so an Ivy degree is not always the key to success in life, although it certainly does carry rights and status that are valuable.</p>
<p>Your passion, motivation, discipline, single minded dedication and kindness to others is the key to your success!</p>
<p>Diane,
Thanks for your kind encouragement. I had not anticipated this March madness-- all these "early write letters" ---making trips to the mailbox stressful this month--- I thought that there would be a few days of stress at the mailbox in April, and that would be it... and also seeing many early writes with 31s and 32 ACTs on another forum here is getting a bit painful, but I have to realize that these students' SATs were indeed better than my d (2160)--- hence my intuition that the SAT is valued more than the ACT is looking just about right.</p>
<p>I still have hopes for a top outcome for an east coast school, but if that is not meant to be, then my d got a good scholarship at a very wonderful school in California that she'd be proud to attend, and it would be nice-n-easy on my wallet!! She was also invited to attend the honors program in a prestigious state school here on the East Coast here (no money), so things look great for her.</p>
<p>I still hope for Brown, and perhaps my d will see your d there next year!</p>
<p>I wish your d the best of luck in Egyptology-- we once went to the second largest pyramid there, but was too afraid to continue crawling to the center ( VERY bad vibes and claustrophobia after descending five minutes in the musty darkness.) My d crawled all the way to the central chamber and said it was very frightening but wonderful. I roasted in 105 degree heat at the base of the pyramid outside, being hussled by a dozen poor street vendors taunting me! Please tell your daughter to be EXTRA careful if she travels to Egypt....</p>
<p>I'll keep my fingers crossed for your daughter. But it seems like she has a place no matter what happens, so this must be a relief.</p>
<p>We actually took our first trip to Egypt over winter break. Even though I'm claustrophobic, the insides of pyramids didn't bother me too much (and my daughter not at all). I WAS bothered when I was in the small subterranean rooms of a temple and more people kept coming down and filling them up. Fortunately, some big Italian guy decided he was going up so I followed him as he bashed people against the sides.</p>
<p>There was one mustaba we decided against going into. Apparently you have to go in on hands and knees and that was too much for me. </p>
<p>I think my daughter takes after my husband, though. He was a salvage diver for the navy and did most of his work in pitch darkness. Apparently, during the first day of training, they put people in hard hats with electrical tape over the face mask and then put them in the water for a while. One third flunk out right then and there. The hero of salvage diving they talked about is some guy who was trying to position a rope under a sunk destroyer at Pearl Harbor during WWII. The destroyer rolled on top of him. He was pushed into the mud. He still got air from the hose and they sent soup down, which he licked from the inside of his helmet. To rescue him, they had to disassemble the destroyer, which took three days. The whole thing freaks me out, but this guy got out, was fine, and continued to do salvage diving.</p>
<p>It seems everyone builds these "Ivy" schools up too much. Dont get me wrong, they are excellent schools. But to tell you the truth, I couldnt afford to go there. Almost no matter how well I do in school, I'd probably never have a chance to go there. If you look at it, the majority of the students are from wealthy families. Many, many, many other schools offer a great education, equal to, if not better than some "Ivy" schools. The way I see it, is, if you have money, you can go there, if not, SOL.</p>
<p>PatrickK, basically any private school in the US will be around 40K+. Your critique is not just of "ivies"; it's of really all private schools in the country (including USC, Northwestern, Georgetown, Duke, Rice, Santa Clara U, Whitman College, Williams College, basically everything). Plus, ivies tend to have tons of money, so they can give more aid than other privates. At Harvard, for example, if you make under 40K, you go there for free, and if it's between 40 and 60K, it's a couple thousand. Other ivies give similar amounts of aid; you can check on ivy calculators.</p>
<p>But you are right that there is a bunch of hype over ivies and that some schools offer educations on par with ivies. But it's undisputed that, whether it's technically justified or not, ivies carry distinction which make them desirable.</p>
<p>Clayvessel:
"You claim to be an expert who understands the reality of the admissions process and the ACT versus SAT debate, yet you are a senior in high school and not an adcom. (?) I am not saying that your opinion is not valid and worthy of respect-- it certainly is, but your claim to be an expert on "reality" is a bit much, given the fact that colleges provide very little actual data on how they really treat the ACT versus the SAT in the admissions process."</p>
<h2>True, I'm not an admissions officer, but I've read books by a former Dartmouth assistant admissions director and a former Harvard senior admissions officer, both of which said that ACT and SAT are interchangeable.</h2>
<p>You also said: "seeing many early writes with 31s and 32 ACTs on another forum here is getting a bit painful, but I have to realize that these students' SATs were indeed better than my d (2160)--- hence my intuition that the SAT is valued more than the ACT is looking just about right."</p>
<h2>Please give me the link to where people are getting likely letters left and right with 31 and 32 ACTs. Also, if people submit both tests, then whichever converted is higher, then that will be used. How does that even prove your point that there's a bias against ACT?</h2>
<p>i got a 29 so i don't know what you're so worried about</p>
<p>It is really up to each individual student--at our kids' HS, all test scores from ACTs & SAT & SATII are listed on the transcript anyway. I don't know whether you can request that they be removed, but son was satisfied with them anyway, so we never asked.</p>
<p>Our GC says that most schools prefer the SAT & SATII (especially schools in the West & ivies). He recommends that all students take the SAT, SATII & ACT as juniors & decide what they want to do & which schools they want to target.</p>
<p>My son's scores were simiilar for ACT & SATI & SATII, but as his GC says scores are only a portion of the picture & with highly selective schools, it's really tough to know how they will decide with so many great applicants to choose among.</p>
<p>On the issue of whether ACT is not preferred, my college counselor says otherwise, as do former admissions officers from Dartmouth and Harvard.</p>
<p>Also, Clayvessel:
Again, in response to your comment about how admissions offices don't release information and my view of college admissions is just that of a high school senior, why don't we take a look @ a statement released by the Harvard admissions office: "By standard measures of academic talent, including test scores and academic performance in school, this year's applicant pool (and admitted group) remained quite similar to last year's impressive Class of 2008. For example, once again 56 percent of the candidates scored 1400 or higher on SATs; almost 2,150 scored a perfect 800 on their SAT verbal test; more than 3,200 scored an 800 on the SAT math; and nearly 3,200 were valedictorians of their high school classes."</p>
<p>At Dartmouth, the admissions office views the ACT and SAT similarly, according to Dartmouth's Dean of Admissions Karl Furstenberg.</p>
<p>"They're essentially interchangeable. We'll take either one, and we've been that way for at least nine years," he said.</p>
<p>Well, the reason I was targetting Ivies is because they are built up. There are hundreds of privates schools that are excellent, but they arent boasted about too much. As far as getting in free or 2k a year, I find that extremely hard to believe. Probably 99.8% of the students at Hardvard are are familys who have income of $100,000+. I have had many friends who are top of their class, excellent ACT, clubs, sports, etc. and Harvard didnt accept them. </p>
<p>Reply to:
PatrickK, basically any private school in the US will be around 40K+. Your critique is not just of "ivies"; it's of really all private schools in the country (including USC, Northwestern, Georgetown, Duke, Rice, Santa Clara U, Whitman College, Williams College, basically everything). Plus, ivies tend to have tons of money, so they can give more aid than other privates. At Harvard, for example, if you make under 40K, you go there for free, and if it's between 40 and 60K, it's a couple thousand. Other ivies give similar amounts of aid; you can check on ivy calculators.</p>
<p>But you are right that there is a bunch of hype over ivies and that some schools offer educations on par with ivies. But it's undisputed that, whether it's technically justified or not, ivies carry distinction which make them desirable.</p>
<p>My daughter checked her admission stats at Amherst College tonight, only to view the words "ACT score waved" next to her very high score of 34. </p>
<p>The college, its seems is using her lower SAT score of 2160, not her higher ACT score as its official score for admission. It seems that when both ACT and SAT are sent, prestigious schools wave the ACT in favor of the SAT as a part of the admissions process, thus NOT considering the ACT score -- even if it is considerably higher than the SAT, which is the case with my daughter.</p>
<p>I can't say that I am surprised-- I suspected that her 34 ACT would NOT go down as a 1520 SAT equivalent-- despite all the equivalency charts bandied about here, and the promises by many here that the tests are treated "equally."</p>
<p>So---- a warning to all those who think the ACT and the SAT are treated equally--- they are NOT, as was PROVED to us tonight..... (!)</p>
<p>I'm surprised they would write "waved" instead of "waived." How disappointing that they CLAIM the scores are equivalent yet still use the SAT instead of the ACT for students like your D who had higher ACT than equivalent SAT.
None of the schools my S applied to wrote whether they considered the ACT or not. In his case, his scores are pretty close--34 & 2230--so it doesn't seem to matter all that much. He only sent his official SAT scores because his GC said that the schools he's applying to prefer t he SAT anyway.</p>
<p>Yeah, they supposedly misspelled the word the same way the poster does! AND they use the word incorrectly in the same way too -- to waive a test would mean to not require it, not that its results aren't accepted or taken into account. Strange, also, that the stats are being checked online only now despite the long time nervousness about the process expressed by this poster and something is seen that no one else has ever reported seeing and which supposedly supports the position the poster had all along (without proof) that the ACT is not as acceptable.</p>
<p>If this really happened, the natural response would be to talk to the school about its peculiar annotation, not post here to try to win a debate.</p>
<p>If this really happened and one can interpret the word "waved [sic]" the way clayvessel does, at best it merely shows that if you have a high ACT and a lower SAT I, this one school will look at the latter -- and that if it looks like you will do better on the ACT, you should take that and not the SAT I! It wouldn't mean that an ACT, by itself, would not be acceptable to highly selective colleges. But I have my doubts about even the more modest claim, since ad comms invariably say that they look at the highest scores.</p>
<p>Schools can (and in the past did) express a preference forthrightly. They have no need or motive to lie about it. I'm getting pretty tired of hearing in numerous threads about this supposed conspiracy among hundreds, if not thousands, of past and present adcomms at colleges outside the midwest to decide to start lying to potential students for no reason at all.</p>
<p>Traditionally, west coast schools treated the ACT the same way east coast schools did. Yet by your own admission your daughter got a scholarship at a good west coast school. And she got into an honors program at an EAST coast school, for that matter -- so the idea that she destroyed her chances by taking the ACT seems rather farfetched.</p>
<p>hyperpuritan asked for a link to the discussion where kids are getting likely letters with 31 and 32 scores. It has not been provided.</p>
<p>BTW, I didn't say anything before, but I might as well at this point. Tourists aren't allowed in the second largest pyramid in Egypt, contrary to what you claimed your daughter did.</p>
<p>HImom, I wouldn't necessarily rely on what a GC says. hyperpuritan's GC said something else. I've certainly read lots of posts on CC where GC's were pretty clueless. I know mine was back when I was in high school.</p>
<p>clayvessel, why don't you CALL the school and ask what "waved" means rather than speculating? It doesn't hurt, and you'll know what's actually going on.</p>
<p>Btw, I just got into Georgetown School of Foreign Service, an elite school, with a score of 34. Not meaning to boast, just trying to refute your point.</p>
<p>Also, in addition to not providing the link about the 31 and 32 kids getting likelies (a ridiculous claim), you also cannot refute my point about two books by former Dartmouth and Harvard senior admissions personnel who say that ACT is interchangeable with SAT and who are no longer affiliated with the school so they HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO LIE. Even for school officials today, why would they lie. Why would they say ACT and SAT are interchangeable? To lie to kids and get them rejected? Kids who want these top schools would not mind NOT having ACTs as an option. If a school asked for that, then it wouldn't be a problem; they have zero reason to lie. But they DON'T say that. So, to put it in four words, you have no argument.</p>
<p>If you call them and they say what you think they mean (a very unlikely prospect), then that only proves that one LAC discriminates in this country.</p>
<p>Plus, why even take the SAT when your ACT is much higher? 34 is around 2270 or 2280, so why even take the SAT and get a much lower score? It's not like that matters, but it's a waste of a Saturday for you.</p>
<p>In summary,</p>
<ol>
<li>Call that college to see what actually happened before leaping to conclusions</li>
<li>Think of a logical reason why colleges would lie about these things</li>
<li> Even if that college did really discount ACT, is one LAC the indicator species for every single elite college?</li>
<li>Try to refute books by former admissions officers from Dartmouth and Harvard</li>
<li>Try to find that link where 31 and 32 kids are getting likely letters (if it exists)</li>
</ol>
<p>Congratulations, hyperpuritan! Georgetown is great for what you want to study and also is an incredible place to be, with all the restaurants, stores, etc. (My husband works in Georgetown.) About the only thing it lacks is reasonable traffic and a Metro stop (so it's bus, cab, or a hike to the GW/Foggy Bottom stop if you want to leave the vicinity).</p>
<p>Re: waving -- I'm imagining an admission person holding a paper with the ACT results, moving it back and forth, and saying, "Look at this excellent score!"</p>
<p>waived/waved ooops... jest got lzy and ws in a tired rsh when I saw the scrn....</p>
<p>Hyperpuritan,</p>
<p>congratualtions on your acceptance to Georgetown School of Foreign Service with a 34 ACT. </p>
<p>My daughter was waitlisted at Georgetown wth a 34 ACT and legacy... Boo hoo..... </p>
<p>Anyway, good luck in your diplomacy career. I am sure Georgetown will teach you a lot, especially with regard to usage of inflammatory words like "ridiculous..." when negotiating --- tee hee........... :)
Anyway, "wave" notwithstanding, we cannot prove this debate either way with current statistics.... so I suggest we put our energy into more productive pursuits......
Good luck in your future career, and congratulations to all who were accepted into top schools....</p>
<p>Diane:</p>
<p>Re: Nile Boat Veterans for Truth </p>
<p>You claim that I lied about my trip to the second pyramid. My first thought was: wow, Diane is skillfully using the oldest propaganda trick in the book.....Kinda like a Nileboat Veteran for Truth deal.." tee hee :)) Let me state it again: I am NOT your opponent, anor do I make a habit of bothering to lie about my family vacations. In fact, I like you alot --- when you are not falsely accusing me of making up the details of a beloved family vacation... :) Really, now.....</p>
<p>To set the record straight:
The second pyramid was opened for a short period of time to tourists in July of 2001 while we were there. Our guide must have paid extra for us, but she mentioned that we were VERY lucky to get in. My husband and daughter made it to the end of the tunnel, i did not out of fear of enclosed space, musty smell and the need to crouch for a long period of time in the darkness. </p>
<p>The fact that you chose to publicly accuse me of lying regarding our entry into the second pyramid is a form of cyber-bullying-- provocation and was uncalled for. I think you owe me an apology. </p>
<p>Thought I'd include the following article on cyber-bullying for your edification, if you are interested:</p>
<p>Cyberbullies get a perverse sense of satisfaction (called gratification) from sending people flame mail and hate mail. Flame mail is an email whose contents are designed to inflame and enrage. Hate mail is hatred (including prejudice, racism, sexism etc) in an email.</p>
<p>Serial bullies, whose behaviour profile you'll find in full at Bully OnLine, harbour a lot of internal aggression which they direct at others. This may include projection, false criticism and patronising sarcasm whilst contributing nothing of any value. It may also include a common tactic of "a number of people have emailed me backchannel to agree with me". This is standard bully-speak which I've experienced on several forums. In every case it's a fabrication or a distortion - usually the former. It's also a variant of the serial bully head teacher who says "a number of parents have complained to me about you...". When challenged, the identity of the alleged complainants can't be disclosed because it's "confidential". The purpose of this tactic is to wind people up. Don't be fooled into believing it has any validity - it doesn't.</p>
<p>People who bully are adept at creating conflict between those who would otherwise pool negative information about them. The method of creating conflict is provocation which bullies delight in because they know they can always coerce at least one person to respond in a manner which can then be distorted and used to further flame and inflame people. And so it goes on. The bully then sits back and gains gratification from seeing others engage in destructive behaviour towards each other.</p>
<p>Many serial bullies are also serial attention-seekers. More than anything else they want attention. It doesn't matter what type of attention they get, positive or negative, as long as they can provoke someone into paying them attention. It's like a 2-year-old child throwing a tantrum to get attention from a parent. The best way to treat bullies is to refuse to respond and to refuse to engage them - which they really hate. In other words, do not reply to their postings, and on forums carry on posting without reference to their postings as if they didn't exist. In other words, treat nobodies as nobodies.</p>
<p>anything else, you should at least have the decorum to pm me. </p>
<p>Falsely accusing people on-line is a form of cyberbullying... We asgrownups shoudl be above this.</p>