NYT article on SAT/ACT

<p>My feeling about the ACT/SAT tests are that if you live on the east coast, in an area which is predominantly SAT, you are going to be better off taking the SATs with select colleges. In fact, I suspect that with the most selective schools, it is going to look a bit out of place NOT to have the SATs, bringing up the question, how low you did do on them. Princeton, I believe, specifically state that they want the SATs rather than the ACTs if they are taken and if you from an area that is more focused on SATs. Rather loosely defined, but the thought is there. Those from the Midwest, would not have as much of an issue, but I think top schools will wonder if students from Boston, NYC, Philly areas reported only the ACT, particularly if they come from advantaged home. No proof on any of this (other than Princeton's preference), but I have never known an east coaster or anyone from a SAT area get into a top school just submitting ACTs. I would sugggest sending both if the SAT is not as favorable as the ACT results. But I have no statistics or study to cite for my opinion.</p>

<p>Patuxent - re: finding qualified readers to score the essays. That is a good question, but we seem to be finding them now. Our state exams have a writing piece that gets scored and I'm sure many other states do, too, as a result of NCLB. This could turn out to be either the latest outsourced industry or the one that saves the American worker (depending on who has the greater command of the English language-a question that's up for grabs, in my opinion).</p>

<p>We visited about 21 schools including Brown, but mostly LAC's in the Northeast. Not one and I mean not one school that accepted ACT in lieu of SAT's said it made a difference. My daughter used her ACT's to get into college. We live in Westchester county in NY in a competitive school district. Our High School Counselors encourage the taking of ACT's because some do better on them. The students are told not to put their high school down when taking the test. My daughter took the SAT's and the ACT's twice. Although she scored in the middle 1300's on SAT's she scored a 33 on ACT the second time and that took all the pressure away. She will be attending Wesleyan U in the fall. I don't believe for one minute that when colleges say they will accept either or that they prefer one over the other, that would be quite misleading. In fact, Swarthmore will now accept ACT + (ACT) writing in lieu of any SAT's, Amherst and Brown allows either or too. I don't think if these schools thought that one test was subpar to the other that they would change policy or always have had the choice, nor do I believe that submitting only ACT's and your from the Northeast that it will hurt you in anyway.</p>

<p>You are absolutely right, lbridge.</p>

<p>Jamimom, you said
[quote]
I have never known an east coaster or anyone from a SAT area get into a top school just submitting ACTs.

[/quote]
While you may never have known anyone PERSONALLY, this happens quite a bit; I myself know a large number of Connecticut and Mass. residents who have gotten into top LACS and Ivies, including my own Ivy, submitting ACT scores. While it is true that a much smaller percentage take the ACT, I believe that will change (as the front-page NY Times article shows).</p>

<p>My school puts all our tests scores except psat on our official transcript. I never thought about that being an issue. I don't even know if that's an option not to have certain scores not reported on the official transcript.</p>

<p>celebrian25: Yes, same here with NC high schools..at least w/specific counties.<br>
After reading some of these posts, though, I'm curious--with earlier posters stating that they believe the number of times one takes the SAT (or ACT), or whether you did great in just one sitting, doesn't really matter to colleges--why, then, is the fact that you don't have to report how many times you take the ACT, and even the possibililty that you wouldn't have to report it to your school at all, so appealing to folks here? I find that curious as this seems to present a conflict in beliefs.</p>

<p>Back in the creaky old days, I remember when colleges were either SAT only or ACT only. Now it seems like they're either SAT/ACT or neither (scores optional). Wonder if there's room for a third testing company (the Xiggi test?).</p>

<p>As long as people are obsessed with school rankings and the SAT/ACT remains a major component of those rankings I wouldn't hold my breath for the score optional thingy to catch on. Yes at a few LACs (some of which had reps that maybe aren't really warranted) decided the could get out of the rat race and pick up a few ealthy full pay students with mediocre score in the process. They saw a market niche and went for it but I suspect in the long run the market will punish them - not saying that the market should punish them only that I think it will.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Yes at a few LACs (some of which had reps that maybe aren't really warranted) decided the could get out of the rat race and pick up a few wealthy full pay students with mediocre score in the process. They saw a market niche and went for it but I suspect in the long run the market will punish them - not saying that the market should punish them only that I think it will.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is so far from applying to Bowdoin, which is, as far as I know, the highest ranked LAC that doesn't require SATs, that it is out of the ballpark. The school, founded in the 1700s, has an EXCELLENT rep. and always has.</p>

<p>Bates and, I believe, Connecticut College are also excellent schools that do not require tests. </p>

<p>Besides, the score-optional is mostly used to enocurage URMs and first generation college strudents who might have lower scores. We have a poster on this board who got into Harvard with a 1000 and went on to do <em>brilliantly.</em> Scores don't tell as much as we think they do, and many URMS and immigrants may not test well but DO well (I know from experience). These top LACs see beyond the scores - it's not that they are "picking up" wealthy students.</p>

<p>jamimom:</p>

<p>you may be correct in your assumptions about the importance of SAT on left and right coasts, but on the other hand, since colleges want to brag about the scores of their accepted/matriculating class, it is in THEIR interest to give a kid credit for the highest score s/he received regardless of which test and regardless of sitting. Of course, the UC's, CollegeBoard's biggest customer, require one sitting, but even they will accept the ACT+Writing, plus SATIIs.</p>

<p>You can ease up on the defensixeness voronwe. I was thinking of Middlebury when I wrote that.</p>

<p>But of course not requiring the SAT or ACT has the advantage of increasing you "average" scores as long as US News and World Report doesn't tag an asterisk on you. After all only people with high scores will submit them so I gues it can make you student body look way better than it really is.</p>

<p>Middlebury is not one of the schools that has abandoned the standardized test requirement. Applicants have to submit the ACT;the SATI; or a combination of 3 SATIIs, IBs, and AP exams.</p>

<p>Middlebury's website has the following information posted: </p>

<p>"Candidates must submit standardized tests in at least three areas of study. The requirement may be met by submitting either the ACT; or the SAT I administered on or after March 12, 2005; or three exams in different areas of study which may be selected, mixed and matched from either the SAT IIs, APs or International Baccalaureate exams." </p>

<p>The guiding word is EITHER!</p>

<p>According to The College Board, this translates into:</p>

<p>Test Scores Middle 50% of
SAT Reasoning Verbal: 690 - 750 50%
SAT Reasoning Math: 690 - 750 50%
ACT Composite: 28 - 32 23% </p>

<p>*First-Year Students Percent Who Submitted Scores:
Verbal SAT 50%
Math SAT 50%
ACT 23% *
</p>

<p>SAT & ACT Policies
For admission decisions:
ACT Required*
SAT Subject Required
* ACT with or without writing accepted
* SAT Reasoning Test with or without writing component
SAT Reasoning/ACT score report due by: 01-JAN
SAT Subject score report due by: 01-JAN </p>

<p>Source <a href="http://apps.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?collegeId=850&profileId=6%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://apps.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?collegeId=850&profileId=6&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I used the connector "or" in my post referring to Middlebury's requirements, and I do not believe I was unclear, Xiggi.</p>

<p>I wasn't being defensive, patuxent; none of my kids went to (or applied to) Bowdoin, Bates, or Conn. College. I just thought you were wrong - as you were wrong about Middlebury, which is itself a fine school whose rep is NOT undeserved. And I have no kids THERE either. The inference that only poor students hide their scores, yet get in, is also wrong. Bates did a very thorough study that resulted in this particular fairy tale being debunked. The students who did not submit scores performed in a statistically similar manner to those who did. These schools (I know about Bowdoin especially) considers class rank, quality of classes taken, school the student is from, etc. etc. etc. etc. That's why this quote:
[quote]
After all only people with high scores will submit them so I gues it can make you student body look way better than it really is.

[/quote]
is so abysmally ignorant. It does not even TOUCH upon the fact that high scores do not always NECESSARILY correlate with being a good student. Those of us with three decades of college experience under our belts can virtually GUARANTEE that this is false. I have had way, way, WAY too many high scorers that only did OK, and way, way WAY more low scorers who shocked everyone and turned out to be excellent students- some were brilliant.</p>

<p>
[quote]
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, their freshman grade point average - which is what SAT scores are supposed to predict - was only five one-hundredths of a point lower than that of "submitters."</p>

<p>The academic survival rate of non-submitters was found to be nearly flawless and better than that of submitters: in five years only one of the 14 students dismissed from Bates for academic reasons was an SAT non-submitter: 93% of those dismissed were SAT submitters. Those who didn't submit their SAT scores had an academic survival rate of 99.8%. Hiss states, "These results seem to us, to put it mildly, very good. "

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You are right, voronwe. Apparently at Bates, as at Bowdoin, scores must be submitted for placement, even if submitted AFTER acceptance. Hence Bates had the scores to do the comparison.</p>

<p>I'll comment that if you believe the drumbeat that......... scores are a proxy for income, the myth of the stupid rich guys doesn't have much of a foundation, does it? </p>

<p>It would seem that any school looking to add more full pay students would be able to do it without any problem regarding scores, based on the arguments that are regularly dished out on these boards.</p>

<p>First I did not imply that only poor kids did not submit SAT scores I implied that kids with poor scores did not submit the scores. Second the Bates report would seem to confirm what I said. And third if you care to research the matter you will find that only 81% of the Middlebury applicants submit either SAT or ACT scores.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.xap.com/gotocollege/campustour/undergraduate/3616/Middlebury_College/Middlebury_College3.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.xap.com/gotocollege/campustour/undergraduate/3616/Middlebury_College/Middlebury_College3.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Percentage of incoming freshman who submitted SAT I and/or ACT scores: 81%
Percentage of incoming freshman who submitted SAT I scores: 50%
Percentage of incoming freshman who submitted ACT scores: 31% </p>

<p>Fourth as to whether Middlebury is overrated tha6t is obviously a matter of opinion but I would wager a large sum of money that if you were to put the scores of that 19% of the freshman class that did not submit either SAT or ACT scores in the mix their class profile would be a lot closer to that of Gettysburg College and a lot lass like Princeton's. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is also a legitimate matter of debate.</p>

<p>Xiggi:</p>

<p>if I may digress this thread slightly -- it appears that the CB website for conversions is more favorable to CB than to ACT. For example, the 50th percentile range for Dartmouth is:</p>

<p>SATV: 670-770
SATM: 690-780</p>

<p>Total (yeah, I know I can't readily add 'em, but for the sake of arguement)::</p>

<p>SATTotal: 1360-1550
ACT: 28-34</p>

<p>But, CB's conversion chart would place a 28 at a composite 1260, and 20, and a 34 at 1520 (which is closer)</p>

<p>Amherst has similar stats to D-Mouth</p>

<p>your link to Middlebury shows something similar, i.e., Midd's low ACT = 28, which should convert to 1260 on the SAT, but Midd's low actual is 1380 (again, adding m = V)</p>

<p>What am I doing wrong in my analysis? </p>

<p><a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/prof/counselors/tests/sat/sat-prog-handbook.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeboard.com/prof/counselors/tests/sat/sat-prog-handbook.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>or, viewed another way, according to CB, 700+700 = 94% (averaged), which should convert to a 31-32 ACT score, according to CB's conversion chart. But, ACT claims that a 31 is the 98th percentile, and 32 is the 99th% of kids taking their test.</p>

<p>It would seem to me that 4-5% at that level is a significant difference....</p>