<p>UCB, have you bought a Zap car yet? :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have said many times that the classroom teaching survey has as much validity as the PA survey.
[/quote]
Yes, but you don't seem to have any qualms in mentioning the survey when it supports your claims.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Does this subset of students at the highest ranked publics get a lesser education than students at the privates?
[/quote]
Hawkette would claim yes, because this subset of students is swamped and dragged down by the numerous "inferior" students with which it might share a classroom.</p>
<p>I mean, if I scored an average of 100 points higher than my peers on my awesome SAT, I would never be able to get a good education, let alone carry on a respectful conversation or exchange of ideas because my classroom is full of dummies...:rolleyes:</p>
<p>UCB when I read your posts, I am very happy you went to UCB. :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
UCB, have you bought a Zap car yet?
[/quote]
Nope. Still driving my paid off 2000 SUV. I did a cost benefit analysis on purchasing a used Honda Civic. Gas prices would have to remain above $3.50/gallon for 4 years for me to break even. Besides, I'm saving money for other priorities.</p>
<p>
[quote]
My wife loves the car.
[/quote]
And that would be the most important factor. ;)</p>
<p>Sorry. I deleted that post. </p>
<p>I like this post better.</p>
<p>Although a Zap car gets better gas mileage (because it is an electric car), than a Prius, my wife bought a Prius.</p>
<p>One of the reasons she bought a Prius instead of a Zap car is the Prius has one of the highest rankings of all cars (if not the highest) in peer assessment.</p>
<p>My wife loves the car. :)</p>
<p>uchchemegrad,
Your car analogy is appropriate. People like different types of cars and different things will appeal to them. But there are statistical comparisons that are legitimate to make when comparing the nature and the quality of a car. Personal preferences may override all of the empirical comparisons for the individual buyer, but that does not render the comparisions broadly useless. One can still make judgments that a certain car will have more interior room space just like one can make judgments about class sizes at a college. You may not care about interior room space or about class sizes and thus this is not an issue for you individually, but that does not mean that it is inappropriate to consider such factors when making broad comparisons with other cars or with other colleges.</p>
<p>I am surprised that cc never changes their top universites. it really should include gt and william and mary. both are great schools and it surprises me with the rankings that they don't update?</p>
<p>For the UF class ENROLLED in fall 2007 the average SAT is about 1250, not 1300. 1300 is the score for admitted and some of the best admitted kids will go elsewhere.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But there are statistical comparisons that are legitimate to make when comparing the nature and the quality of a car. Personal preferences may override all of the empirical comparisons for the individual buyer, but that does not render the comparisions broadly useless.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And in Berkeley's case, the breadth and quality of its academic programs, for me, trump the average lower SAT scores.</p>
<p>Hawkette, what my experience tells me is that there is no way of comparing universities statistically. That's because statistics are almost invariably manipulated, particularly by private institutions, and because statistics are almost always black and white whereas real life is more a shade of grey.</p>
<p>I find it ironic that people who have experienced both private and public institutions of equal quality generally agree that there is no appreciable difference. Those who claim there is a difference are the ones who have not experienced one of the two types. </p>
<p>And Hawkette, tell me, why are you so quick to support the USNWR ranking of institutions acccording to classroom teaching but are just as quick to dismiss the PA score?</p>
<p>This is the reason why I don't think average SAT scores should be weighted that much...</p>
<p>From another thread on CC:
[quote]
Took the SAT three times
Verbal Math Writing Total
1. 11/2007- 740 780 760 2280
2. 10/2007 720 650 720 2090
3. 01/2007 710 680 700 2090
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The scores are too easily improved with multiple test attempts. Do you think this person is smarter and more capable as indicated by the score difference achieved over a 1 month period?</p>
<p>You can attack me all you like about SAT scores, but that won't change the fact that college admissions offices seem to like the data and consider it important. And many others, like me, use it as a proxy for student strength as it is the single-best, measurable, standardized data point that we have. As a reminder, here is how college admissions counselors consider various pieces of the application:</p>
<p>Importance Assigned by College Admissions Counselors to Application Items </p>
<p>Considerable Weight , Moderate Weight , Limited or No Weight </p>
<p>75.9% , 17.4% , 6.7% , Grades in college prep courses
61.5% , 25.3% , 13.2% , Strength of curriculum
60.4% , 27.9% , 11.7% , Standardized Test scores (SAT, ACT)
51.2% , 36.4% , 12.5% , Grades in all courses
27.9% , 30.6% , 41.5% , Essay and/or writing sample
23.1% , 38.6% , 38.3% , Class rank
21.2% , 40.7% , 38.0% , Counselor recommendation
20.8% , 31.2% , 48.1% , Student's demonstrated interest
19.5% , 41.1% , 39.3% , Teacher recommendation
10.4% , 23.1% , 66.5% , Interview
7.6% , 37.0% , 55.4% , Extra-curricular activities
7.6% , 23.5% , 68.8% , Subject test scores (AP, IB)
6.3% , 13.4% , 80.4% , State graduation exam scores
5.2% , 8.5% , 86.3% , SAT II scores
2.9% , 21.5% , 75.5% , Work</p>
<p>Alexandre, what is your experiences about recruiting at the schools, which you attended. Did you have a chance to compare those schools (i know which ones you attended) in terms of recruiting (undergraduate) by banks? Thanks.</p>
<p>Hawkette, </p>
<p>Yes, like you said it's a data point. ONE data point. And this data point is easily manipulated via multiple test attempts and test prep courses. Come to think of it, the SAT is like the single value PA score you disdain - with the PA score measuring academic reputation and SAT measuring student strength - and wrapping it up in a single number with a big red bow.</p>
<p>Note that more colleges give considerable weight to grades in college prep courses AND strength of curriculum.</p>
<p>I completely agree with Hawkette and here is why:</p>
<p>1) You can change your score on the SAT by studying, no doubt. However, the SAT is basically an IQ test and you can only study your way to the ceiling of your intellectual potential. If your potential is a 1350, you can under prepare and score a 1200, but you can never score over a 1350, no matter how much studying you do.</p>
<p>2) To go with point 1- schools with higher SAT scores have student populations with a higher IQ. I'm not going to open up a debate on what that means, make your own conclusion, but SAT, LSAT, GRE, GMAT test scores have as high a correlation with IQ as different versions of IQ tests have between them.</p>
<p>3) Standardized tests are fair and the only standardized metric available to measure EVERY student in an applicant population against each-other. Grades certinally won't do the trick. Standardized test scores are the great netutalized against grade inflation, differences in rigor of coursework and even cheating.</p>
<p>4) SAT scores are to colleges as Horsepower is to the automotive industry. Will a low horsepower vehicle get the job done? Definitely. Can it get the job done efficiently and be more reliable? You bet. In the end, though it's a competitive world and high horsepower, while not always selling the most cars, is sexy and sets an image that people are enamored with. Want to bet Dodge sold more neons when people came on the lot to see the upgraded viper?</p>
<p>Pacman, I have recruited heavily at my undergraduate institution, but not so much at my graduate institution because by the time I attended my graduate institution, I was changing careers altogether. However, I did recruit at elite private and public institutions. It is hard to tell how the overall student bodies at those schools compare because the career offices at the schools screened the applicants so we only got to see the candidates who made the cut.</p>
<p>Tomslawsky, I do not question the validity of the SAT. My issue is with comparing apples to oranges. If you compare the mean SAT score and SAT ranges at schools that weigh the SAT equally (in terms of importance), attract students who approach the SAT the same way and that report the SAT the same way (superscore vs best score in one sitting), then you truly can draw a conclusion.</p>
<p>However, if you compare the SAT mean and range at one school that does not superscore, that places much less weight on the SAT and where the students who attend never really prepared for the SAT to those at a school that does superscore, that places more weight and emphasis on the SAT and where the students who attend prepare heavily for the SAT, the comparison will be seriously flawed. </p>
<p>For example, take my two institutions. The state school I attended, as you well know, places much more weigh on GPA and curriculum than on SAT. In fact, it does not differentiate between a 1350 and a 1600 (old score) and places more weight on a 0.1 point on the GPA scale than it does on 400 points (old SAT) on the SAT. Most students attending that state university don't really prepare for the SAT and take it once just to get it out of the way. They have no intention of wasting time preparing for it or spending money taking a prep course when they know the university will not weigh the result heavily. To the typical student at that public university, the SAT was a very minor part of their high school education. The private university I attended places as much weight on GPA and curriculum as it does on SAT. As such, most students who attend that University prepare heavily for the SAT. Many take it multiple times and go through some sort of prep course. To them, the SAT is a significant part of their high school education. To make matters worse, the public university I attended does not superscore whereas the private university I attended does in fact superscore. Comparing students at those two universities based on SAT eams ans ranges would be pointless.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If your potential is a 1350, you can under prepare and score a 1200, but you can never score over a 1350, no matter how much studying you do.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I disagree. With even more studying, you could get above that. Practice makes perfect. It's a matter of perseverance.</p>
<p>
[quote]
schools with higher SAT scores have student populations with a higher IQ.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, but ask yourself, does the difference have any real effects? For example, two of my friends could have IQs of 140 and 150; am I really going to notice a difference? No.</p>
<p>Same with the SAT.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Grades certinally won't do the trick. Standardized test scores are the great netutalized against grade inflation, differences in rigor of coursework and even cheating.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yet, it's been shown that GPA is much, much more indicative of success in college than scores are.</p>
<p>
[quote]
SAT scores are to colleges as Horsepower is to the automotive industry.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, because the SAT is a perfectly accurate measure, right?</p>
<p>(Bad analogy.)</p>
<p>Alexandre,
Not sure which institutions you are accusing of manipulation related to their statistical data (# 51) such as is commonly found in the CDS or via IPEDs. Do you really mean to make that charge? If so, do you have any proof? If you’re talking about the websites operated by some admissions departments, however, I would probably agree with you and I wouldn’t limit it to private universities. </p>
<p>I think we can agree that statistical comparisons notwithstanding, the best individual choice may not always be to attend the higher achieving institution. But that individual choice should not render the statistical comparisons invalid. You may prefer a Honda Accord, but I think most objective observers would conclude that there is plenty of statistical data to support the view that it is not as good an automobile as a Lexus. </p>
<p>Ucbchemegrad,
Re your preference for UC Berkeley’s breadth of academic offerings and your perception of good faculty, that is great…for you. Others might prefer to have stronger classmates as much of the learning in college comes from one’s peers. Swap the professors at UCB with those at UC Riverside and I suspect that most folks would prefer to stay with the stronger student body at UCB rather than follow the faculty to UC Riverside. Maybe you see it differently, but I know that I would. </p>
<p>Re SAT, I completely agree that it is but one data point that adcomms will use in their decisions. Individual decisions should always consider the entire application. However, I hope you will agree that for observers like you and me, there is no better proxy for evaluating student strength. I say this both for the value of the SAT test alone as well as for the very high correlation that SAT scores will have to other parts of a student’s application.</p>