<p>{{{Colgate did just get rid of online application fees and the SAT2 requirements, which most likely resulted in far more unqualified candidates.
Lots of people will take a chance applying for a school (even if they know they're a long shot) when it is free and you don't have to take extra tests.</p>
<p>{{{Btw, Colgate probably did that (free app, no SAT2s) to get more applicants, so they can reject more and end up with a lower (ie down to 27%) acceptance rate. It makes them look even more selective than they are.}}}}</p>
<p>BTW- My post was sarcastic. The competition for perceived exclusivity and manipulating yield, hence, effecting the rankings is getting out of control</p>
<p>No, but theyre recommended. Whenever SAT11s are recommended by a college most students assume they need to submit SAT 11 tests in order to stay completive. Remove the (SAT11s are recommended, as Colgate has) from the Smith webpage and it would be interesting to see to what degree there is an increase in applications.</p>
<p>Im not advocating doing so. I believe the tests are useful.</p>
<p>Another interesting study would be to see how many low income students dont apply to Smith because taking a couple SAT11s is expensive (in their view)-- therefore they perceive their chances of admission are nill without SAT11s</p>
<p>Holyoke, Middlebury, etc., already have made the SAT reasoning test optional. Im sure their beliefs were along the lines of Bowdoin, Bates, et al, regarding their accurate prediction of college success. But Im also sure they knew they would get a moderate application increase resulting in a lower acceptance rate and higher SAT averages to submit to the ranking services. </p>
<p>If you look at Bowdoins or Bates published SAT scores theyre higher than Smiths by 50-75 points, or so, But 25 % of Bowdoins, and an astounding 50% of Bates students, didnt submit SATs so they arent calculated in the averages. How would Bowdoin and Bates compare in the rankings if the absent SAT scores were included in the stats? Colgate doesnt even require the writing section of the ACT.
The point I was trying to get across, many colleges are changing their requirements to manipulate the statistics.. </p>
<p>{{online application is free}}</p>
<p>Youre correct. I forgot online, in addition to legacy apps, are exempt from the fee. Trying to recall app requirements at numerous colleges is an exercise in futility at my age</p>
<p>I disagree, by eliminating certain testing requirements are getting a wider spectrum of more qualified students. Firstly test scores only measure to a certain level the aptitude of students. I blew my sats but I am the valedictorian of my class, and I know many other students lower sats scores but are extremely hard workers and are doing great. If you look at statistics at SAT optional schools, you'll find that many of the students who didn't submit SAT scores, generally because they were low, often on average did similiar to test submitters. I am not saying that all people will low sats scores are all smart, but you'll find that does with lower score who get accepted to this higher institutions do well because they work hard. Some to prove that they are just as good as high test takers and others because they truly have the aptitude. But eliminating test scores or making them optional, many hard working students, like myself, can get oppurtunities to challenge themselves at higher institutions.</p>
<p>"Bates College, which dropped all pre-admission testing requirements in 1990, first conducted several studies to determine the most powerful variables for predicting success at the college. One study showed that students' self-evaluation of their "energy and initiative" added more to the ability to predict performance at Bates than did either Math or Verbal SAT scores. In comparing five years of enrollees who submitted SAT scores with those who didn't, Bates found that while "non-submitters" averaged 160 points lower on the SAT I, their freshman GPA was only five one-hundredths of a point lower than that of "submitters.""</p>
<p>What I said was, b/c 50% of the SAT scores that arent included in the stats (as you stated, the 50% not submitted are 160 points lower) it effects the US News&WW, et al rankings.
The point was, many colleges are now making the SAT optional to increase their SAT averages, or middle 50% range, and increase applications in an effort manipulate the rankings.</p>
<p>I never stated the Bates students weren't extremely intelligent, motivated and very qualified whether they submitted the SAT or not. My daughter was accepted at Bates. I happen to love the college--Lewiston is a matter. Sorry :) I agree with you, the SAT test isnt a great indicator of college performance with regard to certain students. Youre a prefect example.
Smith is notorious for ignoring the SAT results when other facts warrant admission. Im in total agreement with that philosophy. Do they goof on a few? You bet! But the students who become extremely successful b/c theyre given a chance are worth the risk</p>
<p>I certainly didnt intend to malign you or your fellow students who didnt submit the SAT.
If it appeared to you thats what I did, please accept my sincere apology .</p>
<p>I am so sorry, misread and miswrote. No need to apologize, I just think that colleges use this strategy to increase selectivity. It maybe a side effect, but the ultimate goal is to attract more qualified students.</p>
<p>Again sorry, I hope I didn't offend anyone, it came out alot stronger than I intended.</p>
<p>{{Again sorry, I hope I didn't offend anyone, it came out alot stronger than I intended.}}</p>
<p>You came across as a very bright Bates student intelligently defending a very valid point of view. All is good. Youre going to do well in life. :)</p>
<p>"Smith is notorious for ignoring the SAT results when other facts warrant admission."</p>
<p>This actually is not a decision of the Admissions Office, but a 2002 directive from the President's Office, following a 3-year study by the faculty and Office of Institutional Research, in which, for attending students, they could find no relationship between SAT scores and student performance at Smith, and that the use of the scores worked against Smith's historic commitment to economic diversity.</p>
<p>"Smith obviously does not believe that or they would not require SATI or ACT scores for admission."</p>
<p>You have no clue as to what they believe or don't believe. (You forget that the admissions office has asked me to consult on the admissions of homeschoolers.) I suggest you try again.</p>
<p>{{Smith obviously does not believe that or they would not require SATI or ACT scores for admission}}</p>
<p>Your assertion is interesting and makes one wonder, why does Smith recommend SAT subjects tests when low income and minority students are adversely affected the greatest by doing so?</p>
<p>i've thought for a long time that smith should stop requiring the SAT I...when Mt. Holyoke did it, they found that the difference between submitters and non-submitters was equivalent to one letter grade in one class in four years (ie, basically nonexistent). </p>
<p>it would fit with smith's committment to economic/racial diversity and probably raise our US news ranking too. if people with clout at the admissions office would push this point, i'd be thrilled!</p>
<p>Actually, after Smith did the study, they found that there were other uses for SATs other than purely for admission. They ranged from organizing special enrichment classes for first-year premed (they don't let you AP out of them - my d. was offered a place in one), to ensuring they have enough engineering and math students (they could tell best by which SAT IIs were taken), to the small number of merit awards (yes, they acknowledge trying to wrest candidates from Harvard; my d. was the beneficiary). The most important use is in the Office of Institutional Research, as they are able to compare performance of low-income students with lower scores with higher income students with higher ones. They are unable to do that under an "optional" program, or doing away with them entirely.</p>
<p>After the study was completed, Ruth Simmons did consider getting rid of them altogether, and decided they were useful to have, even when de-emphasized in the admissions process per se. Others (including myself) might have made a different decision, but it wasn't like they hadn't taken three years to think it through. (And, yes, making them optional would likely raise the median score 75-100 points. So?)</p>
<p>Mini, no offense, but I was informed personally by an admission officer administrators talk out of both sides of their mouth, On the one hand they claim SATs mean little but on the other theyre very cognizant the SAT averages play a role in the ranking and can only be ignored at the colleges peril.
Youre more than aware the STRIDE is used to attract students away from Williams, Wellesley etc. By doing so, Smith has gained students with exceptional SATs and class ranks, thus allowing Smith to accept students with lower SATs and class ranks than the norm but still maintain a competitive statistical comparison to other colleges in the ranking. ED acceptances accomplish the same result. By locking up students with outstanding credentials--such as bjm8s daughter-- Smith is again able to
dig lower in the app pool and rely on the extraordinary stats of those already accepted to offset those who matriculate with lower than the norm SATs or class ranks.<br>
Last year precipitous drop of 5 spots didnt go unnoticed and caused a great deal of angst among various administrators, alumnae and board members.
It was mentioned to me by a sr admission officer a couple of numbers increase in the ranking can translate into a substantial increase of apps received and students who matriculate. The same holds true for a decrease.
Like it or not, the USNews&WR is a recruiting and advertising tool used by every top college. Rightly or wrongly, many students choose colleges based on the rankings. Because the SATs are part of the ranking, Smith most certainly pays close attention to their averages, or middle 50%, so as to remain as high in the ranking as possible to attract the best students. In the next few years the app pool will have reached its peak. Those who would have previously been denied at Amherst, Wellesley, Yale etc., etc., may now be accepted and Smith wont need to be a viable alternative. What is Smith going to do to attract students 6 years from now when the app pool is significantly lower and students will have more choices because being accepted at the top colleges will be less competitive due to the lowered number of exceptional applicants? The male colleges resorting to being co-ed has already taken its toll. No womens college can take a significant decrease of superior student applicants and remain the colleges they are today. Radcliffe, Vassar, Skidmore et al womens colleges have already fallen by the wayside. Which womens college is next? If Smith intends to remain Smith, they need continue to attract the highest caliber students and the rankings are one way to do that. A few STRIDES arent going to be enough. Nor will over the top negative reputations that will dissuade women from applying when there will be far better chances of being accepted to Amherst, Middlebury Colgate, Yale, etc in the future than there is now.</p>
<p>{{to ensuring they have enough engineering and math students}}</p>
<p>Thats interesting. I know of numerous students who scored in the 750 range, my daughter, bjm8s and TDs I believe, who have no intention of majoring in math or engineering. I dont see the correlation.
Students major in their interests, not what subject they can score the highest at.</p>
<p>{{They ranged from organizing special enrichment classes for first-year premed (they don't let you AP out of them }}</p>
<p>They certainly do. My daughter was exempt from taking calc which is required for pre med because of her IB calc courses and test. Maggie is going to write the med school she took the courses in h/s and there was no need to retake them at Smith and waste time and money by doing so. I verified this can be done by talking to Duke med personally</p>