<p>I think they should. Wake Forest just made the SATs optional.</p>
<p>The President of Reed College accuses test-optional schools of rankings gamesmanship. He's right.</p>
<p>There is no good reason for making the SATs (or ACTs) optional. Test scores can only help schools make more informed decisions. They are standardized and allow valid comparisons between students from high schools that have different academic standards.</p>
<p>SAT scores even the playing field.</p>
<p>That's called the third tier.</p>
<p>Without the SAT or ACT, the unmotivated, low-GPA but brilliant student has trouble being recognized.</p>
<p>the easiest solution would be to simply 're-adjust' the data for schools that do not submit sat (or act) scores for all enrolling students.</p>
<p>we know from data collected by bates that the average non-submitter scores about 160 points lower on the sat than the average submitter. from there it doesnt take much work to get a pretty good approximation of what a schools sat range would be if all students submitted. and if schools doesnt like usnews estimating a range... they can simply start collecting the scores of all students when they enroll, which they should be doing anyway for internal purposes.</p>
<p>its as simple as that.</p>
<p>collegehelp,</p>
<p>I have read, "Wake will require students to submit SAT or ACT scores after they are admitted." If true, wouldn't Wake be able to provide full SAT/ACT score information to USNRW? That would make moot putting Wake in a separate category.</p>
<p>Gerald</a> Bracey: Wake Forest Makes the SAT Optional: Good Move, Wake - The Huffington Post</p>
<p>There are Common Data Set rules about how to report student score ranges, and U.S. News relies on colleges following the rules. </p>
<p>standrews-
One admissions consulting firm studied 28 LACs that were SAT-optional and only one actually required students to submit the scores after admission AND reported those scores in its statistics.</p>
<p>I doubt that Wake will follow through on its promise. Hopefully, they will.</p>
<p>Lafayette College has reversed its SAT-optional policy because they were better able to predict academic performance with the SAT information.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Should US News create a separate ranking for SAT-optional schools? </p>
<p>I think they should.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I have shared the same opinion ... many times. I think that the USNews should move **all **schools that provide **incomplete **data in a separate category where such schools are simply listed alphabetically. </p>
<p>There is no need to adjust the rankings for the schools that obviously consider gaming the rankings by providing questionable and self-serving data.</p>
<p>I also think that USNews should do a better job at flagging schools that have winter admissions and are misreporting their admission data (read Middlebury, a perennial data manipulator!) </p>
<p>My take is that if there were a penalty (by dropping the schools from all rankings) we'd see a change of heart about playing the SAT statistics game.</p>
<p>collegehelp -- When was Lafayette College SAT-optional? I wasn't aware that this was ever a policy. Lafayette is SAT II Subject Test-optional, however.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Gerald Bracey: Wake Forest Makes the SAT Optional: Good Move, Wake - The Huffington Post
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The same Gerald Bracey of Phi Delta Kappan fame? The same moron who wants us to believe that a Nation at Risk was a hoax and that our system of education is exemplary?</p>