@gibby I guess it does come off as a bit test obsessed, but again it does have something to do with the environment. This may not be the right way to go about things, but at my school students are advised to take a minimum of three tests, and usually end up taking four: one each of the SAT and the ACT, and then a second and sometimes third try at the one you feel most comfortable with. I felt more comfortable with the SAT, but retook the ACT because I showed up late, and had my calculator set on radians which messed up some of my trigonometry, and also thought it would be nice to show strong scores on both to colleges–so that’s the four tests.
Students applying to top colleges often do take that third SAT/ACT, so even at the point where I took a fifth standardized test (my 3rd SAT) I was not really an anomaly when compared to other students. I’m pretty sure it is just this fourth SAT which makes me irregular when compared to other students attending competitive boarding schools, which I am completely aware of- that’s why I started this topic in the first pace. This does speak to your point about correlation between test scores and educational opportunity- my family is actually at a very low income threshold compared to most students at my school, but I am lucky enough to have parents that believe that the money invested in the college process is invaluable.
And yes, I too was quite confused when trying to figure out SCEA, EA, and ED policies at different schools, but it is true that applying to UVA was completely okay
I really, really, really appreciate all the input from everyone. It’s been amazingly helpful. I’ve ended up sending the test scores to all schools, and my guidance counselor was able to notify all of them in advance to be looking out for the scores.
It would be interesting to see stats on acceptances by students taking the tests multiple times. I’m sure that the College Board would find such a study too risky to conduct.
It seems to me, aside from any issues of perfectionism or obsessiveness, that the time issue would be a problem. If you’re going to prepare for a test, it takes time (unless you’re just showing up with no additional prep). That is time that won’t be spent on essays, ECs, schoolwork, etc.
@gibby Someone posted this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gv_Cr1a6rj4 in a different forum but I thought it was relevant here. It talks about the importance of test scores. Around the 9 minute mark is what I find to be the most significant part of the talk. There is no ceiling or leveling off of the performance that is predicted by test scores. In fact, it accelerates at the extremes. There is a marked difference in future performance of the 2400 kid vs. the 2100 one. The speaker even addresses the effects of social class later on.
^^ Since that was the 6th time OP took a standardized test and they already sent an ACT score of 34 and was deferred, not sure how much it’s going to help.
When we visited Harvard last year, part of the Admissions Office spiel was something to the effect of “Don’t take the SAT more than 2-3 times. It looks bad.” Anyhow, what’s done is done: good luck to the OP.
I’m working off of memory here, but as I recall, when my older son was applying (graduated high school in 2012), Harvard permitted students to apply early admission to any public university, but Princeton only permitted early application to public universities in one’s home state.
Sometimes, I felt like some of the arcane processes involved in applying were an additional set of standardized tests, to help weed out the unwary.
@notjoe: When my daughter applied to colleges, Harvard and Princeton still did not have SCEA. So, I guess I was remembering Yale’s SCEA requirements, which only permitted early application to public universities in one’s home state. The first year that Harvard and Princeton went to SCEA, Princeton went Yale’s way, and Harvard went it’s own way. The following year, I guess everyone switched to Harvard’s way.