@jym626 see above post. Summer 2018.
@MACmiracle that situation is just so unfair. Has anyone you know try to call these admissions departments and put up a fight about the concordance tables? Even ACT does not agree with them.
I saw that, @homerdog. Thought it said thats when they would release the new concordance tables. Wondered if they will also update their app at the same time. That was my question.
@jym626 I assume the app will always have the updated concordance table.
@homerdog I do feel it’s very unfair. But we have good options. A lot of kids might need it a lot more than we do.
I wish I took a screen shot of some old cut offs to compare to the new scholarship levels.
The posted SAT and ACT admissions data for class of 2021 at our flagship does not correlate to the concordance numbers but the automatic scholarships follow the concordance.
I feel fortunate that I don’t have a current senior. If I did, certainly there’s an argument to be made to these colleges.
@jym626 College Board said in summer of 2018. So… all of our seniors will not have the benefit of the adjusted concordance. I assume that College Admissions offices are “in the know.” I hope College Board would send them all a MASS email saying “we goofed!” Not holding my breath though.
@Living61 I think your assumption about the admissions offices is correct. The schools have enough of their own historical data to create concordances between ACT and new SAT. And they probably talk amongst themselves.
The class of 2017 had the same problem with these admission concordance issues. The best recourse is taking the ACT!
We were at an admissions overview at Kenyon (for DD17) where the speaker noted that the admissions office was not sure how to use the new SAT scores. The impression we got was that they would have to form their own conclusions as the applications were reviewed. He did however, chuckle a little and mention that the ACT was a good option. Now that they have seen the results of last year’s class they may have a better idea of how to view the scores.
I had a college counselor tell me that, for the most competitive schools, anything over a 1500 is high enough. He is advising his students who hit that mark to be done testing and focus on keeping their grades high. I suppose the only caveat to that would be if the student is shooting for some sort of automatic merit and the score needs to be higher than that.
For those that scored over 1500, surely that’s true. I think it’s more difficult to guess how selective colleges interpret SAT scores underneath that, colleges where the ACT middle 50 range is around 31-34. There are a ton of desirable schools with middle 50s in that ballpark. With numbers that tight and admissions rates still chance-y, a difference of one ACT point is huge and CB’s table 7 is probably off by one point for most scores in that range if, say, we look at percentiles. Down lower, say <30, it’s off by two ACT points for some SAT scores. This is where I think it was irresponsible of CB to publish table 7 because surely it had an impact last admissions season at schools that used it.
The brings to mind when my son took Sat II Math test. When he came out of the test room, I asked him “How did it go?” “Oh I got 800,” he said. “How do you know that?” I asked. “Well,” he said, “I answered all the questions and I had time to check my work.” He was right. He got every question right, as well as 800 on the test. When that happens there’s no issue of concordance.
Well, that’s good for your son, @mackinaw, and congratulations to him but I don’t understand how this information advances the conversation about concordance between these tests. Am I missing something?
@homerdog Regarding your 1500 comment- I just had 2 people (1 GC, 1 LAC) tell me 1520 was the ‘magic’ number and that 760+ on each section is ‘the’ number to hit.
@wisteria100 Hm. So do you think they would look at a score like 800 math/740 EW and think less of that student because they don’t have the 760? I wonder if they consider a 34 or 35 ACT the threshold.
The post above by @mackinaw seems to allude to the fact that if one achieves a perfect score on any test, then there need be no concern over comparing that score to other markers. And no one can really argue with such reasoning (Congrats to your son!)
That being said, the conversation on this thread acknowledges that many students do not achieve a perfect 1600 on the new SAT and as such, are concerned over how the colleges will compare such non perfect scores to the ACT, the scoring of which have remained constant.
@homerdog I was told that 760-800 is the bucket they look for at the tip top LACs. But don’t really know if they perceive a 760/760 = 1520 better than a 800/740 = 1540. I know they don’t like to see lopsided scores, but 800/740 is certainly not lopsided! Would think your S is going to have lots of choices come next year!
@ThinkOn Agreed. I see a handful of 36s every year at our school but haven’t heard of one 1600.
So, there is an expected update coming to the concordance table which may (positively) impact the Class of 2019 SAT-takers?
I don’t have a kid scoring in the upper 1500s looking at selective schools, but he will be applying to some OOS publics and will need some merit aid.
I was surprised that a 1480 (which is 99th percentile) is only equivalent to a 32 on the ACT (my older kid got a 30 on the ACT without prep and could’t crack 1200 on the SAT). We recently went to an information session for a school with a 1490/33 cutoff for merit. That stings!
So, guess S19 has to retake after all. Hopefully he can eke out an extra 20 points on EBRW (he’s at 780M/700). He’s taking the ACT in December, but he’s no more interested in prepping for that than he was in prepping for the SAT so I don’t know what to expect.
Ugh. @eh1234 They must be using the concordance table of course. 1480 is 32 and then 1490-1510 is a 33. Good luck on getting that extra 10 points!! I think Writing is easier to get a bump in the score. Reading is so different every time depending on the passages. And, he’s got time. Our kids are only juniors. 