<p>GoBlue81: What is the name of the college book written by ex-adcoms?</p>
<p>I KNEW there was going to be a catch...</p>
<p>But doesn't matter for me, I'm an 09er!</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>This discussion brings to my mind a question that has occurred to me before: don't you think that most admissions decisions are based on broad strokes rather than subtle differences between students? That is, highest scores, grades, impressive ECs, etc., make the most difference. How often could it really be that a subtle impression based on number of times the test was taken makes a difference?<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>I think for the vast bulk of college decisions the "broad strokes" is true. But at the high-end, say HYPSM and a few other schools, when you've got nearly 30K applicants for 2K highly-coveted spots. And of those 30K perhaps 10K are extremely highly-qualified, high-stat kids -- you can't help but wonder if whether it doesn't indeed come down to a knife edge in many cases. Two kids with straight A grades, 2300s and great essays & ECS. But one kid got his 2300 in single sitting, and the other cherry-picks his together by super-scoring from three different sittings. That just may make the single sitting kid shine slightly brighter and thus get the nod.</p>
<p>Just to voice my opinion (I'm "that Dartmouth lady" author of A is for Admission that GoBlue81 refers to - at least call me by name!), I think it's a crime for College Board to announce a new policy (really an "old" policy as they always used to have score choice!) to compete with the ACT without having checked how colleges will view it. I am miffed by many things -- the Pomona director says in the Newsweek article "how much more financially well-off kids could play the selection and score reporting game." Come on -- Pomona costs $45K or more a year - it costs $45 to take the SAT -- so even if you go crazy and take it 5 times, you're talking about $225. But if your scores are good and you get into Harvard and make under X amount, you'll get free tuition - a gift worth more than $225K. It's not just rich kids who want to use score choice - immigrants, anyone trying to get ahead - they want PRACTICE and if the College Board says they have score choice, colleges should honor that policy just as they have with the ACT for YEARS! Some kids are nervous test takes and it's definitely better to take the test under real conditions for practice -- you shouldn't have to worry that you'd have to send that score.</p>
<p>And as a former admissions officer at DArtmouth, it's a lie to say that "colleges don't care how many times" -- we did roll our eyes if someone took the test 8 times. And how can you count that student's 780/780/780 if on the majority of his other tests he was only a high 500/low 600 scorer. ANd then he spent $25K on test prep? It casts doubt on how he did it. I think the poster who said Stanford wants to count other sections for the Common Data set is exactly right -- colleges want what benefit THEM, not the students, and that's a sad reality.</p>
<p>I spoke directly with the head of score choice in October who told me that there was NO way for colleges to request scores -- only the student can send scores and elect score choice. However, what if the CG caves into pressure and only "let's" you send all your scores from a dropdown menu for schools like Stanford and Cornell. They need to decide NOW and announce the policy. And colleges need to announce their plans. Otherwise, there was no need to make a big deal out of putting back score choice if there are some who won't honor it.</p>
<p>ClassicsGeek, Thank you very much for posting!</p>
<p>My DS took the SAT this Fall when we first heard about the new policy. We were "what the heck, let's go ahead and try it now to get a feel for it" with nothing to lose. If we had known now about the "opt out" option, DS would have waited till Spring or next Fall for a single setting and be entirely focused on this one test. We do not have the means to pay for test prep or tutoring, so this was a great way to take a "practice test" without pressure. Of course DS still did the best work s/he could on this attempt. It's just the fact that we didn't know there would be an option. That's what bothers me.</p>
<p>1980collegegrad,</p>
<p>The book I was referring to:
The New Rules of College Admissions, Ten Former Admissions Officers Reveal What It Takes To Get Into College Today</p>
<p>And there are others, like:
Admissions Confidential - An insider's account of the elite college selection process, by Rachel Toor (Duke)
Fat Envelope Frenzy, by Joie Jager-Hyman (Dartmouth)</p>
<p>and the two books by Hernandez (Dartmouth):
A is for Admission
Acing The College Application - How to Maximize Your Chances For Admission To The College of Your Choice</p>
<p>
[quote]
My DS took the SAT this Fall when we first heard about the new policy. We were "what the heck, let's go ahead and try it now to get a feel for it" with nothing to lose.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why wouldn't you feel exactly the same if you knew that colleges </p>
<p>a) see all scores from all tests </p>
<p>and </p>
<p>b) consider a student's highest scores when making admission decisions?</p>
<p>Classicsgeek.....Thank you for your opinion and thank you for your honesty regarding the fact that colleges DO care about the number of times students take the tests.</p>
<p>Do all schools care about the number of times students take these tests, or do only the "most cometitive schools" care? It seems that that at info sessions for 2nd and 3rd tiers that I have attended, admissions counselors did not care how often a student takes these tests.</p>
<p>Though it varies school to school, we're mostly talking about the most competitive schools. Some competitive schools like Williams have always cherrypicked the best scores, but some schools don't - like everything in admissions, every school does it their own way which is why it is SO damn confusing - after all, we wouldn't have all these discussion forums, nor would my books have been so controversial if admissions was a clear on open process. I suspect it would be easier to penetrate the CIA!</p>
<p>Thanks for posting, CG. </p>
<p>As you point out, it's just not as simple as saying that all colleges will consider a student's highest subscores in making admissions decisions. There are humans sitting on the other side of those applications folders. Multiple sittings, large variations in scores over several sittings, etc. may have an impact on how a student is perceived, and that impact may be the difference between acceptance and rejection. BUT this assumes that the admissions people see all the subscores. The common wisdom on CC is that clerical workers sift through application files to cull appplicants' highest subscores before the admissions committtee sees them, so that all they get is a pristine list of a particular applicant's three highest subscores and one composite. Can you shed light on the accuracy of that belief, Michele, or again, does policy vary from college to college?</p>
<p>I also want to echo that CB is in the business of making money. ACT has made substantial inroads into the SAT market share. And that is why Score Choice is rising from the ashes. CB reinstituted Score Choice to try to stem the market share loss to ACT-- not to benefit students. So it doesn't surprise me that they didn't determine whether colleges would accept Score Choice before implementing it. (IMO, the profit motive is also why CB implemented Readi-Step, the 8th grade pre-pre-SAT.)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why wouldn't you feel exactly the same if you knew that colleges </p>
<p>a) see all scores from all tests </p>
<p>and </p>
<p>b) consider a student's highest scores when making admission decisions?
[/quote]
The problem is that pesky word "knew" in there.</p>
<p>^^Yes. Applicants have no way of knowing for sure whether a given college admissions committee will see all scores and/or disregard lower scores in making admissions decisions.</p>
<p>ClassicGreek, thank you for your help. This makes sense to me. My son and I attended an info session for a school that is ranked much lower than Williams; a school that is in the "more selective" category. I felt that admissions had no problem with applicants sitting for numerous standardized tests. I am not going to name the school, but what I will say is that this was the only school that actually said that they encourage all test scores to be sent, and that they encourage taking the SAT and ACT. They stated that not only will they superscore the ACT as well as the SAT, but they will mix and match the SAT and ACT scores, for the highest scores! That surprised me. I had never heard of superscoring between 2 different standardized tests. This signals to me that they are interested in logging in the best scores possible to increase their rankings, but that was just my opinion as a parent. I am kind of curious as to how many other schools are doing this, and how that gets reported in their CDS.</p>
<p>Here is relevant information directly from the Yale admissions website:</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <blockquote> <p>In evaluating SAT or ACT results, does Yale consider scores from previous test dates?</p> </blockquote> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Readers of your application will see all of the test results that are in your file, and they will supply the admissions committee with the highest scores you attain on each section of the SAT I or on the composite score for the ACT. However, if you take a particular test more than once, the readers may note for the committee that results have been achieved from repeated testing, and committee members may ask at any time to see all testing data.>>></p>
<p>As wjb says, "there are humans sitting on the other side of those applications folders". And if this forum illustrates anything it illustrates that different humans have different priorities and biases. And these humans will make decisions that may defy the stated policies of the admissions office. Some will disregard the scores entirely, others will use the scores as a screening tool, and yet others will carefully scrutinize the scores for all sittings, and perhaps make statistically unsupportable distinctions (like considering 740 better than 730 and inferior to 750). You simply do not know which of these types of individuals is going to be looking at your particular folder. That is life.</p>
<p>"I direct the jury to disregard the testimony you just heard."</p>
<p>Well put, Hunt! </p>
<p>Yale could simply leave out the 'inadmissible' testimony if it wanted to. It doesn't.</p>
<p>The common wisdom on CC is that clerical workers sift through application files to cull appplicants' highest subscores before the admissions committtee sees them, so that all they get is a pristine list of a particular applicant's three highest subscores and one composite. Can you shed light on the accuracy of that belief, Michele, or again, does policy vary from college to college?</p>
<p>Wouldn't you know it varies from college to college. If it were ALWAYS just "systems" people or clerical people who picked out the scores, no one would worry about score choice. But at Dartmouth for example, all the scores from 9th grade on were printed on a piece of computer tape from the College Board (that is the standard way most schools receive scores), so we could always see lower scores and early sittings. And yes, it very much depends on who reads your file, where you are from (a kid from Greenwich, CT who took the test 8 times might be penalized, but a kid from the Bronx who did might not be...), what school you go to, your teacher comments (love of learning), etc... It's funny how the CB is now putting back an option that for YEARS was there -- the real question is, why did they ever take score choice away????</p>
<p>I don't think it's fair that CB would announce the new policy without consulting with college admission offices</p>