<p>"I’m curious as to why you thought there would be a bias in the first place. "</p>
<p>The OP cited the common mis-reading of the ACT/SAT issue and drew false conclusions. More kids with SATs get admitted to top schools. Therefore, is there a bias for kids who take the SAT? That’s the false assumption.</p>
<p>What is not known is how much of the applicant pool only submits the SAT? Are kids being accepted at a lower rate who only submit the ACT than the SAT? If that were the case, then the schools would be showing bias. Of course, this is not the case. </p>
<p>But the myth holds on. You’ll see this question come up regularly here on CC</p>
<p>My S1 took the SAT because in 2006 most of the colleges in the east and I think the CA colleges still required them. My S2 chose not to take anything past the PSAT which is administered in the high school and he was not merit scholarship qualifying. If your child is National Merit qualifying material on the PSAT then it is required to take the SAT but barring that there is no compelling reason other than preference. My S3 did not take the SAT and with his LD and accommodations in place for the ACT he didn’t even think twice about not taking the SAT. Times have changed and now it really doesn’t matter although if you look at SAT results it is still a prevalent test in the NE high schools which continues the myth on these boards which still tilts toward a NE college preference dominance.</p>
<p>I think it would be most telling to know both the submittal numbers AND acceptance numbers of each test to see if there is a true bias - not sure if any report on both. </p>
<p>I do also believe an unfortunate trend is developing that students feel compelled to submit both. </p>
<p>All of my son’s classmates are laser focussed on SAT prep but when i discuss the ACT with other parents the response is usually oh yeah we will take that also. Since I grew up in a SAT region I am not that familiar with the ACT. As a parent however, I will go forward feeling the ACT is sufficient, and happy to not give college board even more $.</p>
<p>A friend’s daughter was accepted to Stanford with only her ACT score (31).
No SAT or subject tests. However, she is a double legacy with impressive accomplishments in the arts.</p>
Students from coastal states tend to take the SAT, and students from central states tend to take the ACT. Students are generally more likely to apply to colleges in nearby states than colleges in other sections of the country, so it follows that the SAT/ACT percentage is expected to follow the college location. I’m guessing that the high ranked universities you are referring to are in coastal SAT-dominant areas, such as Ivies. If you instead looked at selective colleges in central states, you’ll see a different pattern. For example, 80% of the admitted class at Northwestern submitted ACTs. At Michigan, ACTs outnumber SATs by more than 2:1.</p>
<p>When the selective colleges came to our school and did their song and dance they all said they did not care at all whether you submitted ACT or SAT scores - so just send whatever is better and don’t worry about it. Historically kids on the coasts tended to take the SAT and perhaps were also more likely to apply to private colleges, but that has changed a lot. All the Ivies I’ve heard talk on the subject have no problems with the ACT. Princeton was the last holdout, and that was ages ago.</p>
<p>Can we please just think for a moment here? Historically, the SAT has been prevalent on the coasts. Historically, the ACT has been prevalent in the Midwest. Every single college out there accepts both. They KNOW that what you take is influenced by where you live. If they wanted / preferred the SAT over the ACT, they’d say so and require you to submit it.</p>
<p>I grew up in an SAT-heavy area. I never took the ACT. In my mind, it was for people going to “lesser” schools or big Midwestern state flagships. But so what? That’s 30 years ago and times have changed. These colleges have all said, repeatedly, that they accept both. Take it at face value. Like I said, if they believed one test was “better,” they’d require it. </p>
<p>Why would you think they would actively disadvantage students who live in the Midwest? Does that make any sense to you whatsoever?</p>
<p>DS took the ACT and SAT, did very well on both, but better on the ACT. In fact, he got a 36.</p>
<p>There are some top tier schools that say SAT plus some SAT Subject tests or the ACT. And there are several that say that and say that if you are submitting the ACT you can submit subject tests if you want.</p>
<p>DS hasn’t taken any subject tests but was thinking of doing so for such schools. I’ve said he shouldn’t bother, but what do you think?</p>
<p>My younger son took the ACT his sophomore year and scored a 36. It seemed to be a waste of time to take the SAT, even though he got a 240 on his PSAT. He was accepted to Brown, Amherst (early write), Williams (early write), Northwestern (including the ISP program) and UIUC with a $15,000 a year scholarship. He chose Brown and is very, very happy there.</p>
<p>No school is going to hold not taking the SAT against your child these days. My son did, however, take a couple of SAT subject tests in Physics and Math II to demonstrate his technical strengths.</p>
<p>Most (all?) the Ivies require SAT Subject Tests whether the applicant submits SAT I or ACT with Writing.</p>
<p>However, some schools require SAT Subject Tests (SAT II) only if the SAT is used - Duke is one example. This can be an advantage for the ACT - you can complete all testing in a single day. This advantage can be huge especially for ED applicants who want one more chance to improve their scores in the fall, but would need to decide which to SAT to take.</p>
<p>An advantage for the SAT is that most schools will superscore results from multiple tests. Very few will superscore the ACT - they only accept the highest composite from a single sitting. However, this can backfire for the handful of schools that require the submittal of all tests taken - UPenn is an example of this policy.</p>
<p>Our state requires ACT testing for graduation, but this state-mandated test is only offered in the version WITHOUT writing. My kids couldn’t use this score since most of their applications required ACT with Writing.</p>
<p>Also, my kids had to take the SAT to complete their NMF application. Unfortunately, since the state mandates ACT, there aren’t any SAT Test Centers nearby. We had to drive over an hour to take the SAT. Not the best testing environment when the day has to start that early.</p>
<p>Perhaps most Ivies require SAT subject tests, but it’s not all.</p>
<p>Penn says SAT and 2 subject tests or ACT with writing.
Brown asks for the same as Penn.
Columbia wants the SAT and 2 subject tests or ACT with writing but says that if the student is submitting the ACT, he or she can send in subject tests if he or she wants.</p>
<p>To cover all your bases and allow maximum flexibility in the college list, I’d suggest putting up a couple of good SATII scores. If you plan ahead just a little, a kid can take one sophomore year–typically a science they take that year-- lessen the testing pressure junior year. Sounds like the OP’s kid has already done this. </p>
<p>Combined with the ACT with writing, you’re all set, no matter what. (The only caveat is that a few undergraduate programs require specific SATIIs.)</p>
<p>While it’s nice to be an NMF, in my experience the likelihood is that you won’t get money for it. Yes, some schools have significant automatic $$ for NMFs. Most don’t. And at many places, such as the U of C, if you are getting need-based aid and you also get their NMF scholarship, they just subtract it from your need-based aid.</p>
<p>In any case, it is simple enough for your kid to take the PSAT at school. If he does well enough to be a NMSF, he can always choose to take the SAT. But at the most selective schools, where high scores are the norm, I don’t think the designation makes any difference in admissions.</p>
<p>After SuperScore we will have UberScore, combining SAT & ACT scores (well duh I have a 790 Verbal SAT and a 35.5 on Math ACT and a 700 on TOEFL reading and a 6.5 IELTS verbal…</p>
<p>Most college kids I know took both ACT and SAT, and hoped for the best. If the Rapture happens on SAT in a couple years that may convince even more people to hedge by taking the ACT assuming it does not change…</p>
<p>D did better on ACT so she did not submit SAT scores. She was accepted to WUSTL, UChicago, ND, Wesleyan, USC and U of I at Urbana. (She did not apply to any Ivies). ACT is stronger in Midwest…</p>
<p>This is no longer true. The ACT has been gaining in popularity for years and in 2012 for the first time more students took the ACT than the SAT. But there’s still a heavy regional skew. The SAT is dominant on the coasts, while the ACT is the dominant test in the Midwest and parts of the South. The reason many highly ranked schools in the Northeast report more SAT-takers than ACT-takers is that even the top schools in the Northeast draw a disproportionate percentage of applicants–and matriculants–from their home region, where the SAT is dominant. Same is true of the California schools. But the most highly ranked schools in the Midwest report more ACT-takers because they, too, are drawing disproportionately from their home region, where the ACT is dominant. Even at the most elite levels, college admissions is still a much more regional affair than is commonly supposed.</p>
<p>The colleges themselves say they will accept either test without prejudice. There is no reason not to take them at their word.</p>
(well duh I have a 790 Verbal SAT and a 35.5 on Math ACT and a 700 on TOEFL reading and a 6.5 IELTS verbal…</p>