<p>We were excited about some test optional schools for my S when he was looking, but we also discovered that while the schools don’t require the tests for admittance they certainly did require scores to get any merit aid.</p>
<p>Xiggi - I’m not an expert, just have 2 college kids. My youngest will be attending one of the test optional schools. The school does report the scores, at least for the ACT. I understand that not everyone has reported but this still gives us an idea of where our kid stacks up against the previous years class. My kids sent in their SAT and ACT scores to all schools.</p>
<p>US News ranking, average grades, 25/75 test scores, freshamn retention, 4 yr / 6 yr grad rates…all are data points that help get a picture of the school. Since the peer rating is weighed heavily for US News it is a bit a popularity test anyways.</p>
<p>Bates (ME) did a 20 year follow-up study on the results for kids who submitted vs those who didn’t. The differences in grad rates and gpa were essentially imperceptible. Bates also requires kids who didn’t submit scores for admissions to send them later, for this tracking. I believe there is a coda- that the kids with high scores had slightly higher grad school admissions rates.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Add to that list a candidate who brings to the table SOMETHING ELSE that the school is looking for … such as interest in an undersubscribed major, a quirky background, etc. Certainly the “outstanding grades in rigorous courses” will be a key consideration but if the candidate can fill other “institutional needs” as well (which might include the geodiversity you mentioned already), so much the better.</p>
<p>Want to reiterate the post above that many of these schools do require SAT’s for merit scholarships. If a student is getting financial aid that is adequate, then there is not so much of an issue though.</p>
<p>There are actually a lot of test-optional colleges that will award merit aid without scores, but it’s important to read the fine print carefully to be sure.</p>
<p>Submitting good test scores can help merit aid odds, even when $$ is awarded to some applicants without them. But, of course, if the scores are good enough to potentially sway a merit-aid decision, the student probably wouldn’t be applying as test-optional in the first place.</p>
<p>While “experience standardized tests are a relatively poor predictor of student success”, they are still by far the best predictor of student success.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[CSHE</a> - Validity Of High-School Grades In Predicting Student Success Beyond The Freshman Year: High-School Record vs. Standardized Tests as Indicators of Four-Year College Outcomes](<a href=“Publications | Center for Studies in Higher Education”>Publications | Center for Studies in Higher Education) says that they are not as good as high school grades, at least at the middle to upper end of selectivity (the University of California targets approximately the top 12.5% of high school seniors; the top 33% are those generally expected to be able to go to a four year university out of high school).</p>
<p>Some schools, such as WPI, request additional materials in place of test scores.
"Students who choose not to submit standardized test scores are required to submit alternative materials via the Flex Path option (see below for details) that they believe will better reflect their potential for academic success at WPI…Students are encouraged to submit examples of academic work or extracurricular projects that reflect a high level of organization, motivation, creativity and problem-solving ability. Examples include written descriptions of science projects, research papers, robotics or other mechanical design concepts, portfolios, or any other significant work undertaken independently or in school that the applicant believes is an appropriate reflection of his or her academic potential. "
International and home-schooled kids are required to submit test scores.
I believe the majority of kids at WPI do use test scores. But on a tour, our tour guide explained that she ended up using the Flex option because she had the flu the first test day and had broken her writing arm for the second test day.</p>
<p>Great thread. What is a “hooked” vs “unhooked” applicant?</p>
<p>“Hooked” = legacy, athletic recruit, etc . In other words, someone who’s got an extra advantage over the average applicant. These days, being full-pay is probably a “hook”!</p>
<p>Thank you! So let’s see: my d is a legacy at Barnard (grandma was class of 57, she’d be class of 17). How much benefit is this, if any? She’s also Hispanic, but not first-generation. And she’s a female science major. On the EC side, she is an accomplished athlete but doesn’t plan to skate competitively in college. Other stuff is quirky but not over the top – a capella, improv, and she got a scholarship to spend this summer in Italy apprenticing to an artisanal gelato maker. Her boards are not that high-she chokes on standardized tests-and her unweighted GPA probably 3.5 (weighted 4.1). She wants to major in chemistry, geoscience, possibly environmental science (though she likes neuroscience as well).</p>
<p>Sorry for the TMI – as you can imagine, we are having trouble putting a list together! So far NYU, Pitzer, Carleton/Macalester (reaches but it seems like the diversity might help), Oberlin, Rutgers for in-state. She’d go for Barnard or maybe Wellesley if she thought she had a shot. She’s liked some large and some small schools, no set preference there.</p>
<p>^ NJMom, there’s only one sure-fire way to assess your D’s chances at Barnard (or anywhere else with a “holistic” approach). She’ll have to apply.</p>
<p>Barnard’s average HS GPA, according to the US News site, is 3.8. If her SATs are below average, too, then I’d say it’s a fairly big reach, regardless of hooks. Barnard only accepts 28% of applicants overall (RD & ED combined). If she applies ED, then with good essays and LORs there may be a greater chance that the hooks will carry her over the line. But again, she’ll just have to apply to find out. </p>
<p>Bryn Mawr, Smith and Mt. Holyoke are somewhat less selective than Wellesley and Barnard (without adjusting for ED, hooks, test policies, etc.) Smith is test optional; Bryn Mawr and Mt. Holyoke are test flexible.</p>
<p>A “hook” describes some extra plus in the admissions process beyond good grades and test scores. The most common hooks include legacy status (parent, grandparent, or–at some colleges–a sibling attended); underrepresented minority status (usually means African-American, Hispanic, or Native American but will vary depending on the college’s enrollment); VIP status (i.e., your Uncle Fred is dean of the faculty or your father is Brad Pitt), athletic prowess (the coach actually thinks a kid is great … not just the parents ;)), or a truly outstanding talent (e.g., soloing at Carnegie Hall … not just being in the all-state orchestra).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>yes, that seems to be the case. It’s also understandable. If you only used GPA, it would be hard to determine who should get the merit since so many students today have really high GPAs. A school can have an average GPA of 3.8…so at that point, test scores are going to be used to separate “the men from the boys.” Test scores often reveal whether the high GPA is from a school that has massive grade inflation. </p>
<p>NJMom…will your D consider Mt Holyoke? </p>
<p>Does anyone know if having a grandparent as a legacy means much (unless the grands bought the school a building or something…lol )? Sometimes for legacy to matter, a student has to apply ED. </p>
<p>NYU will likely give horrible aid, so that school could be a “financial reach” as well unless you’re willing to pay the 60k to go there.</p>
<p>has your D taken both the SAT and ACT? If she’s only taken one type, she should take the other…she may do much better.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>it seems the relevant slides have been removed from the bates website (hmm), but the data on grad/professional school enrollment was not based on admission rates but rather enrollment rates. regardless, it was clear that the differences in enrollment in phd, md, mba and jd programs were not slight. heck, even the vp presenting the findings (and lauding the sat-optional decision) described there being ‘big, visible gaps’ in enrollment in these programs and my recollection is that even that understates the disparity: it was huge.</p>
<p>further, what gets much less ‘play’ in the bates study is the slide (also removed) that makes it abundantly clear that submitters and non-submitters major in different things. non-submitters arent majoring in things like math, physics and chemistry at nearly the rates of their submitter peers. thats not a problem in and of itself, but when those departments are awarding the lowest average grades on campus despite attracting a disproportionate share of the strongest students (based on not only admissions data but comparative performance in gen ed courses), one has to question whether simply comparing overall gpas for submitters and non-submitters is a productive exercise.</p>
<p>If we eliminate test scores in admissions decisions, what are we left with?
Look at the average entering HS GPAs at some of the following schools:</p>
<p>UMd-CP 4.0
UCSD 4.0
UC Davis 3.9
Florida 4.0
Pittsburgh 3.9
Clemson 3.9
VaTech 4.0</p>
<p>So which side of Lake Woebegone do we want to clean up first, folks?
Rampant grade inflation in the public schools?
Or standardized testing that may or may not be as predictive as it needs to be?</p>
<p>^^^You have to look up those requirements on a school-by-school basis. For example some schools will take two or three SAT II’s instead of the SAT, others require additional information/essays if you don’t submit standardized tests etc.</p>
<p>Side Note - I’m assuming that Clemson’s GPA has something to do with South Carolina’s “special” high school GPA scale</p>
<p>[South</a> Carolina Uniform Grading Scale - Darlington High School](<a href=“http://dhs.dcsdschools.org/for_parents/south_carolina_uniform_grading_scale/]South”>http://dhs.dcsdschools.org/for_parents/south_carolina_uniform_grading_scale/)</p>
<p>Many people, myself included, think test-optional or test-flexible is a cynical ploy on the part of some colleges to boost their US News rankings. If they really thought the SAT and ACT had no value in evaluating applicants, they wouldnt consider them at all, and they wouldnt report them. But by considering them where submitted but not requiring them, they set up a situation where applicants with strong SAT/ACT scores have an incentive to submit them, and applicants with weaker SAT/ACT scores have an incentive not to submit them. That way they can fill part of their class with kids with strong SAT/ACT scores, and fill the rest of the class with kids without reported SAT/ACT scores, and their median and average SAT and ACT scores go upas do their US News rankings.</p>
<p>Williams, where submission of either the SAT or the ACT is mandatory, reports SAT scores for 88% of its entering class and ACT scores for 33%; it adds up to more than 100% (113% to be exact) because some people submit both. Figures are similar for Swarthmore (87% SAT, 37% ACT) and Pomona (80% SAT, 43% ACT), both test-mandatory schools.</p>
<p>In contrast, at test-optional Smith only 69% of the entering class submitted SAT scores in 2010, and 22% submitted ACT scores. That adds up to 91%, but since its likely that some students submitted both SAT and ACT scores, its a good bet that somewhere between 10 and 15% of the class submitted neither. At test-optional Bates, the numbers are even starker: only 49% submitted SAT scores and 19% submitted ACT scores, so at a minimum roughly 1/3 of the class submitted neither. </p>
<p>And its also a good bet that those entering freshmen who did not submit SAT or ACT scores had actual SAT and/or ACT scores that were, on average, somewhere below the median and mean for the school. As one admissions officer at a highly selective test-optional school explained to us: We pretty much need to assume that an applicant who doesnt submit test scores has lower scores; otherwise, why wouldnt they submit them? That applicant needs to realize it puts that much more weight on the other parts of the application, which need to be that much more compelling in order for us to offer admission. </p>
<p>But if those not submitting test scores are generally those with lower test scores, then the reported middle 50% SAT and/or ACT scores at these schools will skew sharply higher than they otherwise would be if all applicants were submitting scores. So you cant fairly compare their reported scores to those at schools where everyone is required to submit scores; their scores dont tell you about the stats of the entire entering class, they only tell you about the self-selected part of the class that elects to submit test scores, presumably because their test scores are strong. Yet US News doesnt make this distinction, so in calculating its US News ranking Bates gets credit for test scores that come out looking pretty comparable to a Macalester, Barnard, or Kenyon, even though at Bates the reported scores probably represent roughly the 2/3 of the class with the highest test scores, while at the other schools they represent the entire class. And lets be clear: this counts for a lot. SAT and ACT scores account for a full 7.5% of a schools entire US News ranking.</p>
<p>Im not saying these schools shouldnt admit the students they admit; I actually think US News ranking methodology pushes in the direction of lock-step uniformity and an overemphasis on a small number of evaluative criteria (i.e., was this applicant in the top 10% of her class, and what are her SAT and/or ACT scores?). Nor am I faulting anyone for taking advantage of the opportunities presented by a schools being text-optional or test-flexible. I do want to suggest, however, that reported SAT/ACT ranges at test-optional and test-flexible schools may be far less informative than you (and US News) may think. And the schools actual motives for taking this tack may be far less benign than their soothing blather might suggest.</p>