<p>Xiggi, that link is at once sad and amusing… only the UC could make the African American population disappear (on the chart).</p>
<p>weetbix, the collegeboard link has been provided</p>
<p>you can also find them here:</p>
<p>[College</a> Navigator - National Center for Education Statistics](<a href=“http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/]College”>http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/)</p>
<p>I understand your point, xiggi.</p>
<p>Thanks, onecircuit. I’m familiar with both sites, as well as figures cited in various Common Data Sets. What I wasn’t familiar with is the basis for the averages you noted, given that none of these sources expresses an average (although some CDS and some individual university websites do express median or mean test scores), nor one given to the half-percent. Presumably I’m correct in thinking the methodology you’ve used for determining a school’s ACT average is to add the 25% and 75% numbers and then divide by two?</p>
<p>Again, thanks for your notations.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>yep…</p>
<p>re: post #29
gadad - Wake Forest did not report SAT or ACT scores. I heard they were trying to remedy some of their recruiting problems by dropping the standardized tests.</p>
<p>On another matter…I doubt tutoring has a significant impact on SAT scores although tutoring companies will probably claim otherwise. I’d like to see some objective data on this.</p>
<p>A good experiment would be to randomly select 200 juniors, have them take the October SAT, then tutor half of them, send the tutored and non-tutored to separate, remote islands without internet or books, then re-take the SAT in December. Check for a statistically significant difference and for the effect size. I might volunteer…it would depend on the island.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>you would be wrong here</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are correct on the lack of objective data on the impact of tutoring. Unfortunately, the claims of (well-known) tutoring companies are often misleading and suspect. On the other hand, the College Board does not find it strange to, at the same, pretend that test prep is mostly ineffective and sell a preparation course. In addition, I doubt there is a standard definition for what constitutes tutoring and test preparation. </p>
<p>Fwiw, there is plenty of compelling anecdotes that support the notion that private tutoring can be very effective. On the other end of the spectrum, the is also plenty of evidence that “self-prep” is very effective for the majority of the students. However, you have an entire cottage industry that falls in between. It is that typical model of group sessions that should makes CH’s first statement absolutely correct.</p>