<p>I emailed the A/O who interviewed my son, explained the bubble misadventure and the retake (his verbal dropped only slightly) and asked what he wanted me to do. He told me to send both and they would take the best from each section. It's amazing to me how just a few questions missed will hack off 5 percentile points. I guess there really isn't much difference between an 90 and a 99. It's splitting hairs and I seriously doubt that schools are that petty when it comes to a stupid test.</p>
<p>Obviously this post is old, but now that your acceptance letters will be arriving from each school, I would like to share with you my experience. When I applied, I looked at Hotchkiss, Deerfield, Taft, and Berkshire. My SSAT scores ranged a large amount between my sections, with my math being an 86%, reading a 71%, and my verbal at a 42%, giving me an overall of 72 Percentile. As for grades, at the time I was attending Indian Mountain School, and was in the top 3% of my class.</p>
<p>When I received my letters from the schools, I was waitlisted at Hotchkiss and Deerfield, and accepted to Taft and Berkshire. My best conjecture for your son is that he will be waitlisted at many schools due to his SSATs. Possibly, the headmaster of your son's school will personally speak with the Admissions Director of one of the schools, and your son will get in. Don't worry, he'll get in one place or another because he has straight A's.</p>
<p>As for me, I decided to go to Berkshire School because of its size and community. Currently I am at the top of my class and enjoying an amazing freshman year. I wish your son best of luck, and if nothing ends up working out, I encourage him to apply to Berkshire due to its special instances of accepting applicants on a rolling basis.</p>
<p>This is the first hint I’ve read that you can even find a school’s test score. Can you please let me know where I can find such information? I’ve been searching and cannot find listings of SSAT score admittance for private schools.</p>
<p>I’ve heard that the boardingschool review stats have pretty old info. Is there any source that is more reliable/recent on things like SSAT scores, % boarders, endowment, etc?</p>
<p>Often, on a school’s website under “fast facts” or “by the numbers” or something like that, it will tell you. For instance, SPS does not have that listed on BSR but it does on the “information card” link on the admissions page. I’ll looked it up so I can save you the trouble on that school. It is 88. </p>
<p>Another thing that is interesting is that even though the “date updated” is often recent on BSR, that stats listed do not always match the ones on the SSAT search for schools data base.</p>
<p>Those scores are “relative” and “averages.” Because not all smart kids do well universally on tests - and because many schools are not looking for clones, they give the scores a cursory glance at best. A lot of other circumstances apply and I know of students who matriculate to top tier schools with lower scores than are reported when grades, rigor and EC’s are otherwise stellar. Some go on to graduate as valedictorian.</p>
<p>The following seem to be unconfirmed claims, but it would be interesting to see if there is any validity here. Has anyone found studies formally comparing the SSAT and SAT?</p>
<p>Schools vary: some publish median, some publish average SAT scores (probably the higher number). When a school has “median 90% SSAT” and “mean SAT M/V/W of 700/690/680”, that tells nothing other than presenting these scores (the SAT is not even one student’s score but a composite median; a 2100 composite is a higher percentile than individual 700 scores per section, which may explain why schools show sections).</p>
<p>Thanks, everyone. I wonder if the SSAT search for schools data base more accurately reflects what you’d find on the school’s own website than BSR. If so, I’ll focus on the SSAT search for schools info until ‘the list’ is manageable enough to start tackling the individual school’s website for more in-depth info.</p>
<p>Last year we had a conversation with an AO at one of the schools mentioned. This person told us that when first arrived at the school, they were given the task of researching for the senior class the correlation between SSAT scores and College Admissions.<br>
They found none. Both high and low SSAT scorers were admitted to “top” colleges and both high and low scorers were not admitted to the same colleges. They searched for patterns and found none. Basically they concluded it is more about what you put into your high school experience, not what you score on your SSAT’s.</p>
<p>IMO, and experience, I think SSATs are a reasonably good indicator of student success at the BS–not perfect or course, because hard work, drive and luck all factor into a high school record, but don’t ignore a student’s test results vs. the averages at the schools. If you are admitted but fall well below the school average, you may be in for a very rough ride at the school. If you are in the range of the school average, consider this another indicator that the school is a good fit.</p>
<p>It is a fascinating issue that goes way beyond the usual “whose son or daughter gets admitted to or rejected by which school”. Rather, what level of ability is desirable to make good use of the resources these schools have to offer?</p>
<p>Nobody would want their child to have a “very rough ride” (as erlanger put it above) at school; also, many students who have a tough time only do because they goof off, not because they are inherently incapable of handling the workload. Do test scores then indicate future success? And what is the level (if there is one) below which no hard work is enough to allow the student to succeed?</p>
<p>(Since neither test can meaningfully distinguish between high vs superior ability, I will not ask the above question about the top end of SSAT for boarding schools.)</p>
<p>It is not at all true that only kids who “goof off” won’t do well academically in BS. At academically competitive BSs, a majority of the class is highly motivated, highly driven and academically inclined–and yet there is still a top, middle and bottom of the class. In a class where the average SSATs are in the 90s, it is tough to do well even for the most capable. My point is that the SSATs is an indicator (and IMO a reasonable one) of where a D/S might fall in terms of the innate aptitude relative to other students at that school. None of us have a crystal ball to know how are D/S will do at the BS, so different inputs are valuable–the SSATs or ISEEs are one such valuable input.</p>
<p>erlanger - The AO who did the research about SSAT and College acceptances says that SSAT’s are not a good indicator of academic success. They found that many kids with “low” scores ended up in the top of the class (and thus the good college admits) and many kids with top scores ended up at the bottom of the class.<br>
The SSAT’s are just one, small part of the application. As are SAT’s for college. The Transcript is more important in both cases (by far). And, the transcript is a better indicator of how the student will do at the school.</p>
<p>^^Which AO and what research? Has it been mentioned in this thread or other threads earlier that I missed? I think it’s classicalmama who posted a link in another thread to a research that says SAT’s ARE a good indicator for academic performance in college. </p>
<p>From personal experience, very high (e.g. 97-99%) SSAT scores often go hand in hand with good grades in school, except for those testers who repeated the test a few times and/or have received extensive tutoring. There are some kids who have excellent grades but happen to be bad standardized test taker and they’ll do well in BS, but I don’t see how the kids with high SSAT’s on top of good grades can do worse than kids with good grades only. </p>
<p>I think - while schools tend to downplay the importance of SSAT (maybe to increase their applicant pools), it is not as “small a part” as some people think. It is a common “measuring stick” to validate grades from a wide range of schools. Imagine what a harder time AO’s would have when trying to make admission decisions among all these applicants with all A’s and A-'s, with no/little consideration of SSAT scores. In a competitive process, things that are smaller than SSAT’s can play a big role. As applicants, don’t downplay SSAT.</p>
<p>The academic expectations in public school A and public school B (nevermind private C and public B or even Algebra teacher X and Algebra teacher Y at the same school) can be hugely different. Grades alone are impossible to use to tell which applicant is best prepared academically because there is no context - unless, of course, the school the applicant is coming from is known.
Enter the SSAT. That’s it. I really think that all it’s used for. But that does not mean that I don’t think it’s important and should be downplayed as much as people here seem to think. These are SCHOOLS, after all. I imagine that the very first thing they will look at is if the kid is academically admissable. How can they tell? Grades and scores.</p>
<p>It’s really similar to how colleges use the SAT. The strongest indicator of academic success at college is when you take both GPA and SAT. It’s probably similar with boarding schools - just add an extra S. ;)</p>
<p>The reason they are downplayed at the top schools is simply because a large majority of kids apply with both high scores and grades.</p>
<p>are all subjective measures. As is any special consideration given to a candidate at a purely academic institution because of the color of his eye or the size of his wallet. Would you decry these adjustments, however, for a school building a functional community? Then why pass on someone merely because of 2, or even 5 less correct answers on some mid-range test (where this can make >10 or >20% difference)?</p>
<p>The purported correlation between academic success and performance on [formerly known as aptitude, i.e. testing something innate and unchangeable] tests could be strong, weak, or non-existent. Since grades in mainstream classes (we are not talking about Math55 here) have as much to do with hard work and rapport with the instructor as performance on exams, I would say the correlation is likely quite weak. I mean, has anyone ever looked at an SAT? It’s dauntingly easy! So much so that apparently chimps now get close to the mean (they may guess smart, or have an affinity for triangles, and they sure go bananas over bananas from their SAT coaches). So using S/SAT as some divining rod for geniuses is misguided.</p>
<p>I maintain that unless the academic path is extremely rigorous, the ability needed to do well in mainstream courses is not too high. Would anyone doubt that the top 10% of the overall population (which may be equated with the 75th percentile SSAT) would be capable (assuming they are motivated and given the chance to study) of A or B grades in an academic curriculum comprising math up to pre-calculus, intro lab sciences, extensive but not too strenuous literature, and conversational French, while also playing some lax or hockey here and there?</p>
<p>(It’s a different matter altogether if the student is already studying multivariable calculus in 8th grade while also revisiting Newton’s Principia in the original Latin. But I doubt more than a few handful, in any academic discipline, would be that advanced each class year.)</p>
<p>For healthy mind and spirit, the schools sculpt a student body based on much more than perceived aptitude.</p>
<p>(n.b. the SAT no longer stands for anything: it used to be Scholastic Aptitude then Assessment Test; now it is just a trademark.) Sure, it is reasonable to pose questions about a candidate if something is way out of range, but what is the range?</p>
<p>Research - mentioned in my post on page 2 of this thread.</p>
<p>
I’m sorry, I did not mean to imply that. There are lots of reasons why a kid might not be at the top of the class. </p>
<p>
They certainly have the POTENTIAL, but that is when a child is 14 years old. There are **lots **of kids who don’t score well on tests and get great grades. There are kids for whom academics comes easily and those who have to work hard. Things change for children when they are teenagers, it’s not that the high SSAT’ers don’t have the potential, but sometimes they simply don’t reach it for whatever reason.</p>
<p>Many colleges have gone to SAT-Optional. Two college AO’s spoke at a recent parent college seminar we attended and both said that if you don’t send in the scores, the transcript is more important. However, even if you do, the SAT’s are about 5th or 6th important on a list of 7 things they consider. </p>
<p>I know more than one student (non-legacy) admitted to a “top” school with SSAT’s below 60% (heck I know a couple that were below 50%). And I know many more all A’s / 99% SSAT who were not admitted to the same schools. When they decide between students they are not going to the SSAT as a tie-breaker for the most part. They are looking at which student - as a person - do they want at their school. Who would have a better impact on the school community. The essay for example, will play a much more important role than SSAT’s.</p>
<p>I think it’s naive to think SSATs don’t matter in admissions–I believe they do–but that was not my point. I was looking at this from a parents perspective: if you have a D/S who is not “in line” (you can decide your own standard deviation) with the school’s SSAT average, it could be an extremely challenging time for your student. On top of good SSATs, most of his/her classmates will be very motivated and driven students who also have a history of very strong grades, and who are also otherwise very capable. Can a student overcome/compensate? Perhaps, I just believe that the odds are against it. And with high school being tough enough, being honest about which school might have greater, relative academic peers can be the smarter decision.</p>
<p>All excellent points, and I hope every responsible parent thinks this way (and this far ahead!)</p>
<p>1) Objective standards should count when it comes to future academic challenges
2) Performing way out range can hurt your child, as well as the school community
3) Being honest about your child’s potential can only help</p>
<p>That stated, we are back to square one: what is an objective admissions test standard for predicting good performance at a fine secondary school? What range is acceptable, and what is not? Should parents and children aspire for a higher level, or accept that they are “not in the range” and give up their (perhaps unrealistic) aspirations?</p>
<p>Apparently, some kids (or their parents) don’t. And unless their is proof to the contrary, they graduate, and possibly even fare well in life! Surprise?</p>
<p>Non-accidental S/SAT scores in the 30s are undoubtedly out of range for top prep schools, though the student may become a phenomenal athlete or a world-famous pop singer, this is a school selection process, after all. </p>
<p>How about S/SAT scores in the 50s? 60s? 70s? 80s? 90s? </p>
<p>Are we putting on airs when we say Win’s 95 is meaningfully better than Mac’s 84 (not as a “prize” to be had, but as a pedagogical predictive tool)? For objective purposes, count the questions on the SSAT (all info available on this Forum) that the two scores are separated by.</p>
<p>As I wrote on another thread, in real life, unless the test is meaningfully constructed to be very, very difficult, the difference between getting 127 or 132 easy to medium-difficulty questions correct on a 150-question multiple-choice test is negligible. It can be sheer luck. An extra hour of sleep. A missed appointment two weeks before to a tutorial, or an overdue test prep book at the library.</p>
<p>Does each kid have a natural range, in which they will perform no matter how much preparation they get? Surely, but ours is not a science experiment. In real life, some kids get much more prep, some get much more aptitude (or whatever one calls the skill to get rudimentary math, vocab-list, odd-analogy and speed-reading questions correct in a short time with each proctor having a different idea about exam rules than the next). So where is it that do we draw the line and say a child is clearly out of his depth?</p>
<p>I referred to the general population in my post above. There is much more than basic aptitude that is required to perform well in school; even more to perform well in a school community. So while I welcome objective standards, I also ask the question where that standard really stands, and why.</p>
<p>Now:</p>
<p>If the admission test were really hard, then even 50, no, 20 open-end questions could differentiate students (even the SSAT99-ers, who - far from being geniuses - maxed out on a relatively easy test, which is not designed to measure superior achievement). So, on our wicked hard test, most of our test-taking student population would get none correct, some would get single digits…</p>
<p>…and you would have three kids nationwide with perfect scores. And so? We haven’t answered anything about building our successful and happy school community, have we?</p>