<p>Why is the overall acceptance rate 10.1% but the acceptance rate for those without CEEB (Collegeboard, I presume) scores, in other words ACT submitters, only 5.7%? There are various things this might be attributed to; perhaps the numbers in themselves are negligible, or perhaps the SAT pool is more self-selecting. But is it possible that there's a slight unspoken bias for the SAT still at Princeton and other top schools?</p>
<p>I realize this is a can of worms that people like to avoid. But the stats have me intrigued.</p>
<p>Well who takes the ACT anyways? Generally you’d only find ACT-only people from certain states that mandate statewide ACT testing. However, the “best and brightest” of those kids are more likely to be all “Type A” and take the SAT too, either for its perceived advantage in admissions or just to get another gauge of their abilities. </p>
<p>However, I could just be saying this 'cause I’m from a state that required ACT testing to graduate and also sent in both types of scores to Princeton.</p>
<p>Perhaps more people take the SAT. Also, the ACT isn’t available in all international testing centres. Few people outside the US actually take the ACT, even though it’s not going to reduce the accepted rate much… Nevertheless, it’s nothing to worry about. If the college says it’ll accept ACT/SAT scores on an equal basis, it’s not going to be prejudiced :)</p>
<p>Harvard and Princeton have admission policies that slant in favor of the SAT (Princeton has explicitly stated that the SAT is “strongly preferred” but I do not have the source). The SAT provides a unique aspect of the application since it is aptitude-based whereas the ACT is achievement-based (achievement is present in the rest of a student’s application).</p>
<p>Really?!?! I find that to be stunning. I have NEVER heard of a school that accepts both the ACT and SAT actually admit that they prefer the SAT. Though, if memory serves, some racist professor at Pton designed the SAT.</p>
<p>silverturtle, we’re both from Illinois. Explain how any of that test was “achievement-based.” I mean, some of it is arguably achievement-based to some degree, but no more so than the SAT.</p>
<p>if princeton did have a strong preference though, why wouldn’t they state their preference? why not say directly that they prefer the SAT? seems like idle conjecture to me.</p>
<p>I think up till 2007 they flat out did say just that. However, it would make sense that Pton would be coerced into saying both tests are treated equally to conform more to what their peers (HYS) are doing. Its the same thing with what colleges say about legacy treatment. When I visited HYPS, they all said that being a legacy was “no big deal” and that maybe 1/6 legacies are admitted. However, we all know that thats bogus too. Its all just keeping things politically correct and nonconfrontational. Though, I think the SAT preference is very minimal.</p>
<p>Oftentimes, the ACT is taken by applicants who do not do satisfactorily on the SAT. Similarly, most applicants will elect to send their SAT scores over the ACT scores even if the scores concord similarly. Most admissions officers have a sense of this, and thus tend to view the ACT as somewhat of a fallback test for people, especially for those outside the midwest. </p>
<p>University of Illinois, for example, has the ACT as its informal “home field” test; the ACT is the predominant test in the midwest. If an applicant from Illinois, where taking the ACT is state-mandated, sends in only his or her SAT score, the admissions officers will wonder why the applicant resulted to taking the SAT over the ACT: “did the applicant do poorly and was forced to find a second metric?”</p>
<p>Similarly, Princeton’s “home field” test is the SAT. Any benefit afforded for sending in SAT scores over ACT scores, however, is probably largely a product of mostly negligible and unconscious factors.</p>