My kids were both excellent math students, two years ahead in math, although both of them are stronger in humanities than in math. And YES, they DID need to review their math before the SAT/ACT. It made a big difference for them. The first time they took the test or a practice test, they said, “There were a lot of things on there that I recalled having learned in 7th and 8th grade, but I’m not up to speed on them now.” A few hours of review beforehand greatly improved their scores.
2 Likes
The students who stop taking math after algebra 2 (or only take statistics afterward) are unlikely to be the same as the strong students who take algebra 2 in 9th grade.
Also, while the advanced students in math certainly have a wider range of dates to take the SAT or ACT due to having completed the prerequisite math earlier, they also need to consider their English skills based on progression through high school English courses in choosing when to take the SAT or ACT.
Not always true, it’s really not a one size fits all recommendation and that’s why I felt it was bad advice. D18 went to a Perfoming Arts HS where higher level math classes were not always offered every year. The counselors advice that everyone should wait does not work for all. It is good advice for some, but not all. It would not have worked for my kids.
S23 plays competitive sports and weekends are very busy most of the year. He will be taking it early as well.
Choose to take it early or not…the choice is really up to you and your child.
I agree that students who know what they want in college at the time of their applications are more compelling for SOME colleges. Students who apply to Caltech or MIT better have some idea of what they want to do in college. Those who don’t know what they want are generally less likely to succeed (Yes, there’re many exceptions, but that’s not the point). Schools like Harvard also want some portion of their students who have a clear idea at the time of applications for the same reason.
Worst College Advice? Search MassPE…
I think many kids who are really advanced in Math (Scienece and even languages) can actually forget small sections of things they covered years ago. This is especially true for a kid who is two or more years ahead. Might be a good reason that all kids need to review sections beforehand. They know it but have to remember where it fits. Often there is only one question and it might not even come up on every practice test. These are tricky for kids who need to jog their memory on something covered a long time ago.
1 Like
@MichaelCShort, it’s not clear to me if you are (or have been) an AO at a US college or university, but I am having trouble squaring your post with the reality that rather a lot of colleges (right the way across the selectivity spectrum*) have student advisors particularly for the undecided student- to help the student figure out the best classes to test their interests while staying on track for meeting GE requirements.
Your post rings truer for the UK. It certainly rings true for graduate school. But it doesn’t reflect a lot of what the colleges themselves put forward as to what they are looking for in potential students.
1 Like
Michael is a former adcom at Stanford. I do agree with him that most applicants to competitive colleges should “package” themselves so it’s easier for the adcoms to go to bat for them in the committee meetings. All of the kids I know that got into to Top 20 colleges showed a passion, have pursued it in their ECs and the essays/LORs confirm and complement this. It’s not good enough to do well in rigorous classes, high GPA, and test scores. They are looking for that something special and you should be telling the story of why you should be accepted over the other qualified applicants.
5 Likes
I agree, one million percent. I will never understand this logic for any student, elite or not!
I was not suggesting they retake Algebra 2, I was suggesting it could be advantageous to take the SAT for the first time their sophomore year. That way they can study the topics they may need more work on and take the SAT a second time in the beginning of their junior year.
1 Like
Most sophomores in our school take the PSAT sophomore year just for practice, then in April of sophomore year they take the SAT 10, while not the full SAT it does give students an idea of what’s to come. I remember my daughters friends telling them there was stuff on there they had never seen before. Those were kids that were never going to learn what would be required to know. Then in the summer after soph year kids usually prep for the ACT/SAT whichever one they prefer to take. My kids all took the ACT in Sept of Junior year. My son was done then and did take the SAT just before the Junior PSAT but his ACT was better. My daughters took the ACT one more time in Dec of their Junior year and were done. Juniors are also required to take the SAT in April for our State “standardized” test so they get one weekday SAT free so my daughters did that, but for last year’s juniors they didn’t take it until this year.
Fortunately for our students there are ample of free opportunities for practice. Our school also offers a free test prep course for those who want it.
The problem really with math is either you know it, you need a review, or you’re never going to know it. My daughters had two friends who could’ve taken it a millions times but were never getting their math score over 23. Their junior year math was Alg 2 and their senior year was going to be pre calc, so that was going to be it for them.
Those that may not remember something like Heron’s formula because it’s taught for about 1 lesson but it might be on the ACT/SAT may not remember, but as someone did say, a quick review will refresh it and it comes back to them.
Your point isn’t necessarily inconsistent with what @MichaelCShort is saying. For elite students in STEM (especially in engineering and CS), they’d put themselves at a serious disadvantage if they don’t have an idea of what they want to study in college. Stanford has a significantly higher concentration of STEM students compared to the Ivies (and other general purpose elite colleges). CS and engineering are also so popular (and they’re unrestricted) that Stanford probably doesn’t want too many “undecided” students to choose to major in those areas. So it isn’t surprising that Stanford would favor applicants who are more certain of what they want to major in and show “passion” in it.
Thanks, @socaldad2002 and @1NJParent
As it happens I agree with the substance of the piece- but find some of the argumentation problematic. For a start, there is a lot of ground between ‘here’s a vague warm fuzzy about me’ and ‘here are the philosophical underpinnings of my approach to the vocational sub-specialty I will be pursuing in grad school’. And, in practical terms, it is entirely possible to write a compelling essay about where a student is heading, and even how they plan to get there and still tick ‘undecided’ in the major box on the application form: there are many paths where the precise major is not a limiting factor.
The advice was stupid (‘shows you are open to learning?!’) especially in an “elite private school”, which is likely stuffed with students who not only have detailed plans for their future, but have had the academic resources to have been exposed to the Socratic method.
Still, imo the ‘get the brand name at all costs’ advice is substantively worse when it results in a student having their post-college options materially limited by college debt. The students at that ‘elite private school’ are going to have a lot of choices either way; the student with a mortgaged future may not.
Agree with the comments above that there is more nuance about indicating a major/field(s) of interest vs “undecided”. My comments come from interviewing students applying to Yale for over 25 years and lots of interactions with senior AO’s in discussions about what they are looking for.
Important criteria that AO’s look for are intellectual curiosity, focus and persistence in addition to academic accomplishment. The strongest applicants according to Yale AO’s are ones that tell a compelling and consistent story about themselves that indicate that they will make best use of Yale’s resources and will be community contributors. They come to this conclusion based on applications that tie academic achievements (transcript/test scores), with essays, LoR’s and EC’s – there needs to be a consistent narrative that is supported by facts/action. In that regard, an applicant can certainly present a picture of someone who is curious about multiple and disparate areas – could be both STEM and humanities/social science based, but the successful applicant needs to show something beyond high grades, like EC achievements in STEM as well as say in debate or political cause involvement beyond just being a participant or “volunteer”. I also don’t think a successful applicant needs to define the exact field or subfield they want to pursue. They do need to articulate areas of interest which may lead to related fields of study. The best interviews I have had involved applicants who had a pretty clear vision of their direction(s) that were supported by activities/accomplishments and the directions could be diverse as long as it was backed up. The worst interviews were of applicants who took bad advice of choosing a perceived less competitive major who had nothing to back up their interest when I dug into them.
I recommend those interested in the process and the way AO’s look at components listen to a series of podcasts put out by current Yale AO’s. The discussion includes the impact of Covid on their process. Inside the Yale Admissions Office Podcast | Yale College Undergraduate Admissions
3 Likes
“We should encourage students to use the college admission process to do the hard work of thinking through what they might want to study and do with their life.”
They should do work to understand themselves, but definitely not plan what they might do with their life. Most will change majors and careers, not only in undergrad but in their jobs. I agree that checking undecided because you think it’s an advantage is not advisable.
My kids work in careers which didn’t exist when they started college, at companies which had not yet been created. I think it’s limiting to suggest that a high school kid is supposed to know what they want to do with his/her life.
12 Likes
No one says that students won’t likely change their minds, their majors, or career goals later in life. The college application process is only a snapshot in time in presenting your 17YO self to adcoms; so my advice would be to “package” yourself (i.e tie-in your passions, ECs, LORs cheat sheet to your teachers, and personal essays) the best you can to date as that is the only thing that will matter right now for getting an acceptance or not. It’s a lot like a job interview, focus on the present even if the job (college) is a stepping stone to your ultimate career. It’s ok to embellish…
Here’s what my D20 did even though she doesn’t know exactly what she wants to do when she graduates from college. She positioned herself as a public policy/social action advocate, went to Washington D.C each year (for 3 years) to meet with congressional aides to do oral arguments / state her position on current topics; she was elected to a HS student rep position to the local school district to be a liason between the students and school board, and she tied this all in when she applied to college as a Public Policy major.
The bottom line is that when adcoms read her application, they could make a strong case that she would thrive at their college and take advantage of the specific public policy programs offered by the college.
You need to give adcoms “ammunition” to advocate for you on your behalf. This is critical to the process when applying to competitive undergraduate colleges. Pick a major (or at least core area of study) and sell yourself.
2 Likes
I agree with BK but rather than just look at the resume as a sort of tick sheet, we tend to look for the sorts of energies and thinking behind it. Again, the traits.
So not just focus, but how has he/she explored (and experienced) both depth in the possible field and then breadth (outside the main area of academic interest.) Not unilateral. A pretty good “show, not just tell” of the range of interests and the energies to pursue more than just your in-the-box interests. That’s a way this elusive concept of “intellectual curiosity” or willingness to treat your education as more than a path to a career can manifest.
Worst advice, imo: apply because you can. “You won’t know unless you try.” That implies it’s an even crapshoot. For top colleges, the most competitive and highly competitive, not.
Not only is it not an " even" crapshoot- it’s not even a true crapshoot if that implies random, like throwing a dice.
I’ve heard versions of “why does it matter that she can’t get into Harvard? Let her pursue her dream-- and once she gets rejected she can pivot”. Sure. Nobody shows up in Cambridge with their suitcases and laptop if they’ve been rejected- so eventually there is that pivot. But wouldn’t it be great if the kids who truly are the “crapshoot” applicants spent all that love and time falling in love with Wesleyan or Brandeis or Rice or Emory-- colleges that will turn cartwheels when they see the application-- instead of pining away for something that is both statistically unlikely (that’s what that tiny percentage means) AND not going to happen based on the 10 kids from that HS with better grades, scores, more interesting profiles, and stronger counselor endorsement?
True, from an insider perspective who can see and compare many applications.
However, to outsiders (which means most students applying to colleges and parents, teachers, counselors advising them), it can look like a crapshoot, since they have no visibility in how any one applicant compares to the overall pool of applicants, particularly in subjective matters like essays and recommendations. So all of the subjective stuff gets thrown into the “appears random” category by most outsiders, even though it really is not random to insiders.
3 Likes