I’m sure this subject has been discussed in the past, but I couldn’t find a recent/relevant thread for the topic. I’ve been looking on the websites for very top schools (including Ivies), which “recommend” but do not require subject tests. Though they often say on the website that those who do not take the tests will not be disadvantaged in the process, I’ve heard conflicting opinions on what that means for admissions. Some people advise to “read between the lines,” saying that because of how competitive admissions are, “recommended” is really required for serious applicants. At the same time, others say that applicants have no reason not to believe the colleges when they say that those without subject tests will not be hurt in the process. Which point of view is generally considered more legitimate? I have strong stats already (4.0 UW, 35 ACT, etc.), but am feeling burnt out & fatigued from testing and would much rather not have the additional stress. Would it hurt my application if I didn’t submit two SAT II’s at >750?
People here generally say that if you are an unhooked ORM, recommended means required. However, I have definitely seen a few people on CC who say that is not always the case. The issue is that without a hook, you are competing with people who WILL be submitting those extra tests. It’s your call. Personally, if you are burnt out and really don’t want to, don’t. The odds of getting into those tippy top schools are slim at best. If you have an outstanding application otherwise, go for it.
“Recommended” typically means expected for most applicants, but they may give some slack about those items for applicants from disadvantaged situations (e.g. a student from a low income family with non-college-graduate parents who attends a high school where hardly anyone applies to colleges that even look at SAT subject tests, so no one told the student that some colleges may want them).
Curious about students who chose not to take the SAT subject tests at colleges where they’re “recommended” and whether they think it affected being admitted or rejected (and not talking about low income students.) I think many can sympathize with the OP and test fatigue, particularly when you throw in tons of AP/IB exams.
Thank you for the advice, everyone! I’d love to hear more from students who’ve gone through this same issue as well. AP scores aren’t in yet from this year (obviously), but otherwise, I don’t really have any academic/extracurricular weaknesses that I’d need subject tests to compensate for. Harvard’s policy that they normally require the tests unless it presents a financial hardship OR “if you prefer to have your application considered without them” is interesting to me – it seems like boiling it down to a “preference” makes it seem truly optional, but I have heard in the past that it still is primarily intended for low-income students.
I think I may just take some tests related to my AP subjects, low stress, and just not submit the scores if they aren’t in the desired range for Ivies, but would still like to hear more opinions. Thanks!
I don’t exactly recall what the details are if you took the ACT, but I know that if you took the SAT, recommended truly means “required” unless you have a compelling reason not to take them. Do some research on the requirements if you took the ACT for the colleges you seek to apply to, and prepare to take them and score high if you must.
I’m curious what makes you say that about the recommended truly meaning “required” for the SAT. Is that anecdotal or are you referring to a specific school’s policy? I know some schools do allow the ACT to take place of the SAT & subject tests, but the ones I was referring to seem to treat the SAT and ACT as equal in this regard. @neoking
If it is a competitive school, treat all recommended as required. Basically they want to leave some room for them to admit students without subject test scores like athlete recruit. Most applicants would submit the subject test scores to make their application stronger. For instance, ~95% of students admitted at Stanford did submit subject test score although it is only recommended. You should also note how much details they talk about subject test scores (e.g. what subjects are preferred) in the FAQ. If it is truly optional, there should be no preference.
Everything you hear on this topic on this forum will be anecdotal. I, personally, am of the opinion, that if you are not super-hooked or the tests represent don not represent a financial burden, you should take them. Yes I do know unhooked kids that were admitted without them. But let’s be real: If I were an unhooked applicant applying to a college that rejects 95% of applicants (which was me 2 years ago), why would I not try to do everything I could to put together as strong an application as possible?
Just a week ago I heard an Ivy admission officer say that the school he represents recently switched from required to recommended subject tests because some low income people could not afford to take the subject tests and others did not have subject tests given near where they lived. Some of these people called and got waivers but the admissions officers worried that other candidates didn’t call and just didn’t apply. So my gut feeling after hearing that is that if you can afford to take the SAT II exams and they are readily offered where you live then you should take them. I would also add that if you don’t score well on the SAT II exams that you are probably better off not sending them in.
“So my gut feeling after hearing that is that if you can afford to take the SAT II exams and they are readily offered where you live then you should take them.”
I concur.
"If I were an unhooked applicant applying to a college that rejects 95% of applicants , why would I not try to do everything I could to put together as strong an application as possible? "
exactly!
@writergirl0316 I say this because the schools who “recommend” SAT subject tests usually have acceptance rates below 20%, which means that competition is harsh and unforgiving. If you seek admission to such an uber-competitive school, they would likely not be thrilled that you refused to follow their recommendations and probably wouldn’t grant admission unless the rest of your application was especially compelling (like your essays).
Truthfully, no one can tell you whether they are “required” or not, but if you really wish to be admitted to such competitive schools, it would be wise to follow each and every one of their recommendations. It would be wise to craft an application as strong as possible and not leave out components that almost all other competitive applicants will have. If you have financial difficulty, apply for the waivers and do your best to prepare for the exams. Good luck!
I agree with the overall sentiment - “recommended” is pretty much defined as required due to competition for acceptance, with a few exceptions (financial difficulty or otherwise).
Just an update on this: I ended up taking two SAT II’s in June, and I scored one 750 and one 800. I hope this thread helps someone in a similar situation though, as I’m sure others feel similarly about the onslaught of junior year exams.
Don’t be. Stress and anxiety will affect you far worse than any lack of knowledge. I truly believe that you can succeed on these tests; there’s no need to worry about them.
What subjects? I ended up pretty much winging my tests (because of the fatigue I spoke about in my original post), but chose two exams that I was fairly prepared for based on AP classes. IMO, if you did well in AP science classes this year, those corresponding exams shouldn’t be too difficult for you to get 750+ on. The history subject exams are pretty different in format from most AP history classes, but I found my preparation for the AP was enough to do well. I probably should’ve studied more for my Math 2 than I did, but that one is pretty low-prep as well. @ConcernedRabbit
