<p>does anyone know what I should do?</p>
<p>tokenadult: The reason why there are no more than two testing organizations (CB & ACT) is simple; high barriers to entry. You have to do the following:</p>
<p>-- win credibility with colleges as a testing organization
--have the logistical ability to conduct nationwide tests
-- convince students to take tests, which depends on how many colleges are willing to accept a brand new test from a new testing organization
-- any new organization will have to have a new value proposition that in some ways is unique, different, if not superior to CB & ACT</p>
<p>The only people who could create a new testing system are the colleges, the ultimate consumers. Nothing prevents them from organizing a blue-ribbon panel and designing a new organization from scratch. to do so, they will need the ability to work cooperatively, and probably permission from Congress, to avoid running foul of anti-trust issues.</p>
<p>
[quote]
"Younger D will be ACT exclusive....even if it means a comparatively lower score." </p>
<p>Each family can decide as it wishes, but to me that sounds like biting your nose to spite your face.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So why is that biting your nose to spite your face? I have been convinced over and over again on CC that the ACT is treated equally to the SAT for admissions! Why are you saying one should take the SAT?</p>
<p>According to this article, College</a> Board Salaries Soar Despite Test Problems | FairTest, the President/CEO of non-profit College Board made more than $600,000 in 2006. Nine VPs made more than $300K, and 16 others made more than $200K. CB's President is also on the boards of several for-profit corporations, for which he made an additional $660,000 in 2008.Gaston</a> Caperton Profile - Forbes.com</p>
<p>^^--^^</p>
<p>Why would any of the information reported by the FairTest sensationalists be a problem? Aren't salaries at a non-profit organization set by the Board of Directors and compensation committees? In addition, don't we (and the colleges that are the members) want the very best and most competent people? In addition, should the salaries paid to the The College Board executives not be compared to the extremely high salaries paid to administrators in education? </p>
<p>From my vantage point, the salaries paid to Caperton are perfectly legitimate, especially when compared to the ridiculous $300,000 salaries and superior benefits paid to public school administrators in failing districts. </p>
<p>Had we similar people in charge, the tests would cost 250 bucks and half the students would never receive their tests back.</p>
<p>How much do the staff of FairTest make?</p>
<p>tokenadult, I really would like to know why you believe it is biting your nose to spite your face to only take the ACT. Please refer to post #63.</p>
<p>
[quote]
So why is that biting your nose to spite your face?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The phrase that elicited that reaction from me was "even if it means a comparatively lower score." </p>
<p>Personally, I don't have a brand name preference among the two major brands of college entrance examinations. There is a VERY limited opportunity for Americans to take British A-level tests, but I think all American applicants to most United States universities have to take either the SAT or ACT, except at a minority of colleges that are truly test-optional. (When a college truly doesn't care about test scores, it often doesn't care either about any other academic qualification, but rather is an open-enrollment college.) </p>
<p>My advice to students who are concerned about test scores as one element of their admission file is to take both brands of test, and see which they do better on. I believe colleges when they say that they give students the benefit of their best scores. I wouldn't advise missing the chance to get a better score by switching brands of tests, if that is indeed the issue.</p>
<p>One might be able to evaluate which test is best for them by taking the PLAN as sophomore and the PSAT as a junior. One can also buy or borrow the real SAT and ACT books and take a test at home to see which test might be better for them.</p>
<p>I never thought I would be defending the College Board but....the decision to see all scores is being made by individual schools, not the College Board.</p>
<p>Also, in the case of Stanford, they say they want to see all scores, even of the ACT. I'm not sure if this has been their policy in the past, or not.</p>
<p>Well, I don't think that it is proper if schools ask for "all tests" after students have taken the exams. I think that they should know in advance which schools will not allow score choice and which ones will allow it. I can tell you that I attended an info session at school xyz. XYZ said that they are in favor of students taking SATs and ACTs as often as they like, they encourage students to try both exams, and that not only will they take highest subscores, but they will mix and match between the ACT and SAT to superscore! None of this information was on their website the last time I checked. They did not state that they requiring applicants to send in all scores.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why would any of the information reported by the FairTest sensationalists be a problem?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I did not present the information as a "problem," but rather as a piece of the overall picture of the College Board machine. Earlier in this thread, someone presented the fact that CB is a "non-profit" organization, intimating that they are not motivated to make a profit in pricing their services. I am merely buttressing my earlier post that "non-profit" does not mean no profit, and profits earned by non-profits may go to increase the salaries of executives and officers, which in CB's case appear to be quite generous.</p>
<p>I don't know how much the FairTest people make, but as far as I know, I have never paid for any of their services, so it is not germane to me at this point.</p>
<p>I just have no clue what to do with this terrible 1480 out of 2400 score on my report when I send it to Cornell. I took it as a SOPHOMORE!!!! Will that accout for anything? Will they notice this? Could I add an addendum stating that I didn't do the whole thing and that I wasn't prepared and that halfway through I just blew it off because I was tired, etc.???? Or am I just straight up screwed and shouldn't bother???</p>
<p>
[quote]
I took it as a SOPHOMORE!!!! Will that accout for anything?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Don't worry about that at all. Not one bit.</p>
<p>-- Don't worry about that at all. Not one bit. --</p>
<p>So I wont have to send that score?</p>
<p>You won't have to worry about that score. You shouldn't worry about that score. No college will do worse to you in the admission process with you having that score than if you didn't have that score.</p>
<p>
[quote]
So I wont have to send that score?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If you send any SAT score, then yes, you will have to send that score, because scores of ALL tests you have taken are sent together.</p>
<p>Does Cornell require SAT II Subject Tests? If not, you can take and send just your best ACT score instead, and they will never see your sophomore SAT score.</p>
<p>for them to count against you a test that you took almost 3 years before an average college student is ridiculous...besides, I assume that this was for duke tip? </p>
<p>so seriously, there's no need to stress about that as long as you have a good score in the end</p>
<p>now my question:
are the ACT takers now forced to submit all ACTs at some schools?</p>
<p>I think we need to wait for the colleges to post their statements of their policies on websites they control before we can be sure of all the implications of colleges asking for more complete lists of previous scores. A journalist report like the interesting Newsweek article we are all discussing here doesn't include the level of detail we need to compare one college's policy to another.</p>
<p>See, I think stating that one must submit all scores after students thought that they had score choice available is wrong. JMO.</p>
<p>I cannot see how schools can require a student to send all ACT scores. The reason is that it would be far too expensive for students to do so. Each seating is a different report and each report is $9 per school. If someone sat for 4 ACT dates (not to mention the SAT dates) and applies to 10 schools, wouldn't that be $360 for 4 seperate reports to 10 different schools (just for the ACTs)? That does not make any sense! It is far too expensive for many students.</p>
<p>One other thought, if a student were required to pay $9 per report per school, then the lower income students might only sit for one seating. That would not be fair to a student from a lower income family.</p>