Wake Forest Drops Requirement for SAT or ACT

Colleges and Universities A-Z Wake Forest University
81

<p>kentuckmom:</p>

<p>your assumption on high test scores being a hook at highly selective colleges is incorrect. Test scores are only a hook at those few, highly selective colleges that openly chase NMSF's and offer automatic merit money to those kids (regardless of test scores). And, no high test scores by themselves mean absolutely nothing -- genetics and parental education/income create those scores, not "hard work", which is, by definition, gpa. That is why a transcript is ALWAYS more important.</p>

<p>bartelby: point taken, and assumes that either of them will get in; however, that 2200 is a near lock to be admitted to USC, a college that openly covets high test scores. (btw: I wouldn't call anyone "dumb," but most colleges will see that kid as a 'slacker' -- assuming s/he didn't attend an elite prep or HS with an average SAT of 1400.</p>

82

<p>SATs are nothing. Any fool can study every available reference book on SATs for one year and score very, very high. SATs are about money. Money for those that produce the memory tests. Of course, their propaganda will push it as a good baseline tool. And, of course, publishers of the study materials will back them up.</p>

83

<p>Listen, you who do not have experience. Tier levels are b.s. You show me any one school that has every department superior to every other's school.</p>

84

<p>ps. If you liked the college before this change, by all means continue to consider it. This change will most likely increase WF's ranking, but increasing its selectivity and raising its test scores (low scorers won't sent them at all). It's a great marketing gambit, and win-win, IMO. Consider all the other colleges that have gone test-optional....hasn't hurt anyone of them, and it won't hurt WF or its prestige in the future.</p>

<p>Just my $0.02.</p>

85

<p>
[quote]
Only CB's 'research' indicates a large predictive determinant. But, for another pov, check out the research by the University of California, on literally, thousands of students over the past 20-30 years. Essentially they found that gpa alone is the largest predictor of Frosh succes. GPA+SAT score is only marginally better. SAT by itself was no better than gpa by itself. However, UC also found that Subject Tests, particularly Writing, are an even better predictor than SAT 1. (You can search cc for the numerous threads on UC SAT research.)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>yes, that university of california study, the BIGGEST anti-sat study out there, found that, in 1999, sat scores were a BETTER predictor of freshman year grades than high school gpa. as you noted, sat ii scores were best.</p>

<p>so if the sat is a poor individual predictor, surely high school gpa is, as well.</p>

<p>is there a strong correlation between family income and sat scores? yes. but there is also a strong correlation between family income and high school gpa. and, you guessed it, there is a strong correlation between family income and college gpa, too.</p>

<p>of course, that leads to the question of whether college gpa is really the best means of assessing admissions decisions.</p>

<p>i could go on, but i wont. instead, three simple questions:</p>

<p>as has been stated numerous times on this thread, why does a stated goal of increasing access to under-represented groups necessitate an sat-optional move, especially in light of bates data that shows non-whites are less likely to withhold scores than over-represented groups like... full-pay women? </p>

<p>similarly, what happens if the pell grant and financial aid numbers dont change much, as has been the case at holy cross? can administrators continue to argue that the sat-requirement needs to be dropped because of socioeconomic bias if admissions fails to admit a greater number of students in need of aid? </p>

<p>last, as posed earlier, is broad gpa-based evidence in determining the efficacy of an sat-optional program sufficient? given data that women are over-represented as non-submitters (women get higher college gpas than men) and that non-submitters have different tendencies in choosing majors (staying away from the hard sciences, for example), is it even particularly valid? if it is, what if gpas do not change but, in line with what joseph soares co-published in 2003, entrance rates to graduate and professional schools plummet?</p>

86

<p>
[quote]
so if the sat is a poor individual predictor, surely high school gpa is, as well.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, that conclusion cannot be made.</p>

<p>Whether or not FROSH gpa is the best means of "assessing admissions decisions" is a question for admissions officers. But, Frosh gpa is the ONLY thing that collegboard admits the SAT can "predict."</p>

<p>Your three questions are not relevant -- this is a marketing gambit, pure and simple. Test optional schools will continue to accept the applicants that they want. As mini frequently notes on cc, admissions offices are staffed by well-trained professionals, who do their job well.</p>

87

<p>kentuckymom:</p>

<p>I'm not writing to "laugh at you" but I do want to say that I think you are being fairly short-sighted in your generalizations about college admissions. I find it unfortunate that you would dismiss Wake Forest purely on the basis that you <strong>assume</strong> your daughter would not be accepted because she lost her "edge"...her SAT scores. </p>

<p>SATs, as almost every aspect of college admissions, both quantitative and qualitative, when viewed alone, are not an end-all. As numerous posters have commented, there are so many factors that go into an admissions committee's decisions, especially at Wake Forest, that the optional SAT policy at Wake Forest will have no affect on your daughter's chances of acceptance. </p>

<p>Furthermore, you seem to look past the fact that you can still submit SAT scores. The policy is now SAT <strong>optional</strong> not SAT prohibited. The admissions committee will certainly use a high SAT score as a favorable addition to anyone's potential acceptance. </p>

<p>Finally, the decision to be SAT optional is not a signal that Wake is only looking for diverse candidates in terms of racial diversity or nationality. While universities accross the nation express their desire for diversity, it doesn't mean average, midwestern females aren't going to be accepted. Average candidates are...well, average. They are statistically, however, the most commonly accepted student. It is a fact that the largest demographic of accepted students will be white, anglo-saxon, protestants. Yes, this also means there is more competition for an average candidate than a "diverse" candidate, but if your daughter is truly a good match for Wake Forest then don't "cross it off your list" simply because of an SAT optional policy.</p>

88

<p>where is it...
please allow my rudeness...</p>

89

<p>I had an interesting discussion with an adcom from one of the aforementioned prestigious schools which has already ommitted the requirement of SAT submissions. She told me that they were seeing too many kids whose parents made them give up something they loved and were good at (competitive sports, music, service projects) in order to take another test-prep course to raise their score 100 pts. This trend apparently was disturbing to the president of the school, and he wanted to encourage the students to pursue their true passions. Of course, most candidates still submitted their test scores, and they remain a major factor of consideration. I suspect that this policy change will be the norm (Whistle Pig's "pigs over the cliff" NT reference).</p>

90

<p>KentuckyMOM, since when is a Kentucky girl "midwestern"??? LOL. Having been born and raised in Kentucky, I consider it southern! Just a smile for the day.</p>

91

<p>I wish there was a place on applicatons re: the SAT's, ACT's that one might be able to designate that "I took this test cold. No test prep courses, etc." I think sometimes there's an assumption that just because you're middle class, college educated parents, etc. that you spend tons of time and money on test prep. My kids have taken everything without test prep. In my son's case ... he scored high SAT/ACT and had great, but not excellent H.S. GPA, with rigorous course schedule. It showed he was exactly as he was ... a student who had tremendous innate ability but was lazy about homework and had the work ethic of a gnat when it came to busy work. He's doing great in a college honors program now because he's "learned his lesson" and does it all (whether he wants to or not) because he comprehends high GPA/LSAT for future law school admittance. Excellent high school life lesson makes college frosh year a joy. On the other hand, my d has stellar standardized test scores and corresponding stellar academic GPA and course rigor. Looked at together these things also show her exactly as she is, a student with tremendous innate ability, who's a disciplined and motivated learner. But ... I fear as some others have said that devaluing this aspect of test scores because of an assumption that all kids who can afford to automatically take prep courses and the like .... takes away another aspect of evaluation in this "supposedly" holistic approach that I keep hearing about at every admissions talk we go to. My d's a worker bee when it comes to EC's, but she's a behind the scenes leader. She's one that folks know they can count on ... and they come to her to get things done. There's no place to list that "leadership" position on an application. And schools are beginning to not want rec letters because "they all say glowing things." As Ktymom says ... without a value on some of these test scores (ACT, SAT, AP, etc.), it's difficult for some kids to stand out among the crowd.</p>

<p>zebes</p>

92

<p>Thanks zebes. My daughter did zero prep and got 2200 and 34.If you knew her, these are exactly what you would expect.She sounds a lot like your daughter. Doesn't have the highest rank because she didn't manipulate the system like some, and her comparatively higher scores tell the real story. EC's are "normal" (marching band, leadership positions, missions...) Wish one college we visited would come out and say "we want kids like you". Planning on lots of apps to selective schools to see who wants her! (where she should be qualified and needs to be because she thrives in challenge.)</p>

93

<p>^^congrats to your D on those fine scores, ky-mom. Instead of looking at WF's policy change negatively, may I suggest you look at the glass half-full. The alums and donors (even bond rating agencies) of all colleges are interested in test scores, ghe higher the better. Thus, it stands to reason that WF will still want to maitain as high as test scores as possible. I would suggest that for every one new acceptee with 'low' scores (however defined), WF might try to balance that kid with a 2200+ just to maitain their average.</p>

<p>Good luck to your D.</p>

94

<p>My youngest D has high test scores, high GPA, lots of ECs, etc… and is going to WFU this fall. When I first read about this “testing optional”, I couldn’t believe it. Why should anyone have an easier road than my D?
Then I thought of my older D who didn’t test well, but is a hard worker and pulled out a 4.1 GPA at a very difficult high school. Because of her average SATs, she was turned down by several schools and finally “settled” for a mid-sized school in Mich that is known for working it’s students hard but is by no means prestigious. She’s worked hard and earned good grades and finally decided on a major: Occupational Therapy. As it turns out, the school she’s at has a 5 year Master’s program (3-2) and an outstanding relationship with Washington Univ. in St. Louis. In case you’re not familiar with that school (I wasn’t) it’s ranked #12 by USNWR for undergrad and #1 in the nation for the grad program she’s pursuing.
So after wrestling with this for a while now, I guess I’m going to back WFU on this one. My older D is having success in college DESPITE the SAT’s. Now I know some of you SAT fans are thinking to yourselves; “she probably had poor essays or lacked ECs”. I’m certain that’s not the case but that’s too subjective to argue. I believe that she’s worked her way into a grad school that would have rejected her as an undergrad based entirely on her SAT scores. Just my opinion.</p>

95

<p>EarthWake ... you provide an intriquing case for this. And illustrate perfectly the illusion or "mirage" of it all. Let me explain, recognizing that like your point, mine's purely speculative and difficult or impossible to "prove" in the end.</p>

<p>My speculation is that your daughter is precisely the prototype who would boost the app numbers ... and lessen the acceptance rate. No doubt she'd be an ace in the WFU deck, or that of virtually any other institution. She's bright, diligent, and disciplined as a student, I'd project. But does not have the testing "gene" and probably never would. And she's one who'll go to OT at Wash U Med School and knock their sox off, have profs dying to write her a recommendation to a Ph.D. program or potential employer, and will eventually be one of the great shining stars of her profession, community, and world. I'd bet on it and her. Wouldn't you?</p>

<p>But from one perspective, important to only 2 arenas on the face of the planet ... academe/campuses and government (with the major exception of the military). In neither case is merit more valued than "diversity." And truth be told, your eldest remains boringly undiverse, and portrays that she'd NOT be a Rhodes Scholar (based upon the mystical aptitude tests we've come to fear and hold in some undeserved heavenly status.) So, my point? </p>

<p>I'd forecast that like last year, next year would be no different for your wonderful offspring. In either case. The younger would be admitted, the elder would go to Michigan. For if they wished to accept her before, they easily could have. She's obviously not cat scat. </p>

<p>So, while I concur with WFU's "courageous" decision, and believe it will enhance their position in virtually every way, it will NOT aid the likes of your older child. She fails to fall into any of the right groups, and be sure that this is intended to address groups, not individuals. That's the fallacy. It will not recognize unique achievements but rather merely validate and increase the decisions that currently are so painful and rare.</p>

<p>So again, why perceive it to be a wise move? Because of where it will lead in the longer run and bigger picture, i.e. forcing the hand, just as Davidson's FA move has, of other quality places that remain too insecure/fearful to lead as WFU is doing, and have too much palm-greasing relationship with the SATers in Princeton. Insitutions must find ways to walk away, and regain the power from the bogus picture that's been contrived by that bunch over the past 50 years. The SAT (and increasingly ACT) are power-brokers and hold some chits. This is an evolution vs. revolution strategy, allowing them to keep dating, even if one partner is anticipating a break-up. But I digress.</p>

96

<p>This point may have been made already. If so, I apologize for not reading the whole thread before posting. Schools like Bowdoin and Wake can dispense with requiring the SAT, in large part, because most other competitive colleges require it and as a result most students interested in competitive colleges take it. This allows schools like WF and Bowdoin to use the scores from a relatively unknown HS to assess its competitiveness. And the students grades and curriculum to assess his/her competence in the context of that HS. If everyone dispensed with standardized tests admissions officers would be flying blind when evaluating students from schools that they were unfamiliar with.</p>

97

<p>It also needs to be said that Wake Forest is still requiring SAT scores for matriculation, just not admission (that information is provided on the same webpage I linked to earlier in this thread). So there wont be any apparent (but not actual) rise in SAT scores because only people with good scores submit them. Everyone going to Wake has to take the SAT and has to submit their scores which will then, I assume, be released to all the companies that collect that data. They just don't need the SAT score for admission.</p>

98

<p>ginnyvere ... I believe there may be some assumption in your point. The WFU statement says ...</p>

<p>
[quote]
Wake Forest will ask students who chose not to submit scores during the admissions process to provide them after they are accepted and before they enroll at Wake Forest.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It does not indicate students will be required to submit them simply because they are asked. And of course privacy laws would not avail those scores or even the fact that students had taken the exam unless the students chose to provide that information. I'd speculate some will, some won't provide.</p>

<p>The sole reason for saying this now ... and saying it the way they have ... is to appease the anxious College Board folks who are seeing their long time dam beginning to crumble. And for now, Wake wants to keep these influencers ... who impact all the Princeton Review, US News, etc. stuff read and believed by so many college-bound students and their fams ... happy.</p>

<p>As WFU's release notes ...</p>

<p>
[quote]
“... recent research suggests that standardized tests are not valuable predictors of college success,” said Wake Forest Provost Jill Tiefenthaler, the university’s chief academic officer whose office oversees admissions.</p>

<p>Some studies indicate performance on the SAT is closely linked to family income and education level, while others suggest a possible testing bias against certain minority students.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And the AP article notes ...</p>

<p>
[quote]
Alana Klein, a spokeswoman for the College Board, which owns the SAT, said there is not a trend toward schools doing away with standardized tests. She said smaller schools are opting not to weigh SAT or ACT scores because they can take a more holistic approach to admissions, not because of concerns that, as some critics contend, minority and low-income students are at a disadvantage.</p>

<p>"The SAT is a fair test," she said.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So ... who ya gonna believe? I'm siding with WFU vs. she who gets paid big $$ as a result of this make-work, contrived measure of alleged predictable success upon matriulating. Really, who when you really stop to think about what it is would believe the latter? Sadly, many over the past 5 decades.</p>

<p>But why do so many, notably among the mega institutions retain it? Because it's a very longstanding, credible exam that levels an impersonal playing field that the Michigans, Penn States, UNCs, and many others, alleviating them of responsibility for genuine individual assessment (let someone else do it and give us the outcome), and enabling them to streamline admissions assessment. From THAT perspective, the tests have some genuine value for sorting and rank/ordering.</p>

<p>My guess: WFU will NOT press this issue. If they get them, they'll add them to their report. If they don't, it will be to their advantage as mean scores will go up, not down, absent the lower tiered scores.</p>

<p>Political Science 101 and Economics of Higer Ed 400</p>

99

<p>But they also (in the answer to question #12) state the following:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Because we will gather scores from all admitted students, even those who did not want them considered in the admissions process, we do know we will provide data to U.S. News and World Report that reflects the true range of scores represented in the entering class.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You may be right and that I'm reading something that Wake wants to imply rather than absolutely state, but the way I read it is that they are going to require SAT scores from all students before they enroll.</p>

100

<p>Good for Wake Forest.</p>

<p>This is going to boost up its ranking in US News a little bit (SAT 25th-75th percentile goes up.. since high scoring students will still send in test scores and low scoring students will happily NOT do so), sure US News will put a little * that says (only 50-ish% sent in test scores) but still this can only help Wake Forest. </p>

<p>As someone who respects Wake Forest, I am happy to say that I think this will also give the school more applicants.. make it more selective.. and give Wake more prestige in the long run. It's a wonderful school. Wake just needs more people outside of the Carolinas to know that.</p>