Then please provide hard data countering the hard data already provided.
After all, data doesn’t care if you agree with it or not. Data is data. Now, if you disagree with the way in which the data was selected or measured, or if you disagree with the analysis of the data, then sure, fine—state your case. But simply dismissing data out of hand just because you don’t agree with it? Nope, doesn’t work.
Seems like “repeating AP courses” is due to one or more of the following:
I would also like to see data from anywhere (reputable) that shows very high scores correlate well with success vs sort of high scores. eg I’d like to see comparisons between 1250 and 1500 or similar.
To date I haven’t seen any data supporting a correlation, but I don’t spend my life looking. There might be some out there, and if so, I’d love it if anyone can post links.
I think you missed the point. You shouldn’t have to link to outside sources to make your points. AND more importantly, data and reports can be found on any number of sources. There’s a ton of data out there on any topic. Take the points which are valuable rather than saying here is my opinion and here is a report that validates my point.
TOS says you can’t argue in case. So my point is,
I disagree completely. I don’t just want someone’s theory about something when facts/studies are out there. Theories are for explaining why the data shows what it does.
What do you define as success? Some on CC think it’s income level. Personally, I don’t think that matters at all. I’d say it’s a combination of factors.
What would you include in your model? I’d include things like satisfaction with career, career mobility ( as warranted by choices), income level, and maybe a couple of other factors. But success? I’d say it’s going to be impossible to build a model all agree on.
So then how do you define which ones are valid and which ones have an agenda, bias or were just poorly researchers? How do you know the model and data they used are valid? Peer review would be one way.
Honestly asking as I am in the researching field and see lots of junk everyday. Many bogus reports are written by folks with professional credentials.
I am not a hard data person either, but I do appreciate when people here share some information that I may not have considered. Think of it as a complementary opinion that may evolve your thinking - or not.
I define success as being happy with your job and self-supporting, but I’ve seen studies that go from graduation rates to getting high up jobs years later.
When folks post links those who want to can click on them to see what the data is based upon. I’d be interested in seeing any providing data showing high SAT/ACT correlates well with anything more than college admissions and scholarships.
Point of order! This claim is incorrect in context because the word argue is polysemous.
TOS says you can’t argue in the sense of to contend or disagree in words; dispute.
I would suggest that we are encouraged to argue here in the sense of to give reasons for or against something; reason.
I will add a couple:
The credit is given for a general course, but major requires a more specific course in that discipline
AP score or course grade is used in determining secondary admit, so while student scored high enough for credit (4) that counts as a (B) and student wants to try for an (A). NC State engineering is like this. Everyone is in first year engineering and then have to apply to specific majors by ranking top 3 choices. The department calculates an “off the books” GPA for each student based on FY pre-reqs and that influences chances of getting 1st, 2nd or 3rd choice major.
That NCSU policy regarding counting AP and IB scores for secondary admission to major ( Join a Department – Change of Degree Application (CODA) | College of Engineering ) seems unusual and seems to encourage repeating for grade-grubbing purposes.
Yes, and a big factor why D21 will likely chose one of her other options.
The part of the presentation where they explained the whole CODA “off the books” GPA and “most get their first or second choice major, but some get their third” was a game changer. She also feels (and I agree) that the premise sets up a competitive vs collaborative first year atmosphere. I guess it’s fine for kids that don’t have a strong preference between 1st, 2nd and 3rd choice going in, but mine does.
NCSU got a bunch of complaints about lack of transparency in secondary admission to engineering major chances, but they recently added a chance estimator that makes things somewhat more transparent:
https://www.engr.ncsu.edu/academics/undergrad/coda-calculator/
Biomedical and chemical engineering appear to be the most competitive. Biological (agricultural), construction, and nuclear engineering appear to be the least competitive.
But, yes, a competitive secondary admission process without any automatic-admission GPA does create a more competitive atmosphere.
Thanks. We had seen the estimator.
1st choice is BME and distant 2nd choice is ChemE, so the most competitive you listed and she doesn’t have a third she really wants to do 
. She has four other options where she’s been direct admitted already to BME or 2nd admit doesn’t have limited spaces (just have to have met the required grades in first year courses).
BTW I know many say to do ChemE over BME, but she really wants to do BME.
That’s pretty common for many majors at universities in Canada. Back in my day, everyone was direct admit to their major from year one, but now more and more have gone to a more general faculty based first year with 2nd year entry to specializations based on first year GPA (usually the GPA includes all courses, not just those that are specific to the major). This is especially common for engineering programs at the more selective schools. S19’s school works this way.
One advantage to this is that it eliminates disparity in grading from differing high schools, especially since we don’t have standardized testing. Entrance to the major is based on success in actual university level courses.
That does seem like a more accurate way to standardize grading, particularly for colleges that have large freshman courses, such that everyone takes the class with the same professor. However, the obvious cost is that students cannot reliably choose their college based on desired major and field of study. If a particular student wants a career in BME or other high demand field, he/she is probably going to want to attend a college at which he can choose that major. If he can’t get into BME at his fist choice college, then he may want to attend a 2nd or 3rd choice college where he can study BME instead.
The “top schools” that are are named in the first post are “Ivys + Stanford + MIT.” I believe all of these schools have open selection among engineering majors after you are admitted to the engineering school, and I don’t expect that to change any time soon. Once you are accepted to engineering, you can choose whatever engineering major you want, and the college will adjust major size to meet demand. However, some of these colleges do not make it easy to switch from non-engineering to engineering. For example, it is not trivial for a Cornell A&S admit to transfer to an engineering major. Whether the transfer is approved depends on a variety of factors including his A&S GPA and how similar the courses he/she has taken at A&S are to the engineering curriculum.
CC is not the real world. On CC, a 1300-1350 or 27-28 isn’t that good, a 1400 is just OK, only 1480+ would qualify as great. Taking 6-8 AP’s throughout all of HS (the threshold for Ivy-level colleges) is considered normal or even “not that much”, with many schedules advocating 5 APs each of jr and sr year. It can give a distorted view of reality. 
If the middle 50% is 1050-1300 and the GPA is 3.8, then… it’s an excellent school with GPAs consistent with their scores.
Is it on this thread or another thread that a top school district is discussed (3rd most educated in the US, top public schools)? The county’s ACT average is slightly above 20 - v. 17 in the rest of the state, where all students test. At these schools, the top 10% students generally score in the top 2% nationally (32 and up) indicating overachievement. A school with a 24 average would be quite above average even in that strong district. A school with a 1050 (21) to 1300 (27) middle spread - where the students in the third quarter of their class would be above average on testing- would be considered a top school with very strict grading in any district.
The good thing with TO is that, if testing shows something about you that the rest of your application doesn’t, then you can send your scores. If tests strengthen your application, then send your scores. But if you cannot test, if testing disadvantages you for whatever reason, then they review your application on its own merits.
That being said, numerous universities and adcoms have explained (upper middle class) HS kids tend to overemphasize their test scores when evaluating their strengths. In reality, test scores are just part of the “Can s/he do the work” first cut round. It’s just one small piece of the puzzle even at that stage, basically used to confirm the rest of the pieces. After that, all remaining applicants “can do the work”, so the choice moves to “what they bring to the college according to our institutional needs”. High test scores can be part of “institutional needs” at some colleges but they’re rarely that important after first cut. They can matter to colleges that want to make sure they keep a certain “score profile” or in that they often indicate a certain income bracket but they rarely matter in final decisions in a minute way, ie., two kids with a similar profile, one has a 1420 and the other has a 1480, the choice will not hinge on the test score but rather on which one meets other institutional needs or their essay or other elements.
Cornell does actually have secondary admission criteria for students in the engineering division to choose specific engineering majors. However, the GPA thresholds for all engineering majors are in the 2.something range (varies by major), so it is not like it is highly difficult to get into any engineering major for those already in the engineering division.
I just looked up the average SAT for the high school I work at. In 2018 it was 1103.2. Only those who think they are college bound are taking the SAT.
A quick google search said the average SAT is 1059 according to a website that came up. I suspect that’s for an individual.
Looking up PA data, the average for public schools in our state is 1041.
I guess I should stop considering my school average. It looks like we’re above average now. I knew we were improving over the past couple of decades. This confirms my thoughts.
In our school, 1300 is really, really good though we tend to get between 0-2 NMF each year. Our graduating class is in the 300s.