If your kiddo took the SAT or ACT, they were able to submit them. Test “optional” means just that. It’s optional to send the scores. But if you have ones worth sending…you should include them in your application.
3 Likes
I also want to point out that mine has also received some really good merit money, even going TO. Again, not sure why we feel so guilty about it but we do.
Rutgers is one of 3 mine hasn’t heard from yet. Test optional, business school as well. She applied to 14 (again, throwing a bunch of balls in the air not knowing how things would go) and so far has gotten into 11. Luckily being in state, I know Rutgers is going to be too much $$ so its not even in her top 5.
There is no question in our mind that kid’s big music hook was what got him in. The fact that the conductor was one of his letters (and kid had played in his youth symphony for three years) helped even more. I suspect that the way it went was, “Our conductor wants this kid. Oh, look! He’s in the top 5th percentile probably of his class, took challenging classes, and has a great ACT score. We can take him!” Without the music hook, it would have been, “We reject valedictorians with perfect records and perfect ACTs. Why take this one who’s not even the valedictorian?”
6 Likes
I don’t think not submitting low scores is cheating, any more than taking the test multiple times and superscoring is. Both work within a system as designed. Each method rewards a subset of kids arbitrarily (those who have the ability and resources to improve their scores v those whose applications don’t rely on standardized testing).
The problem is the whiplash for those who prepped for one system only to have it replaced with the other at the last minute. That sucks. But either system is as fair as the other in the abstract.
So the question is: Would the good testers prepare for college applications differently if they were all TO from the jump? Would they apply to any of the many pre-covid elite TO schools even though they have only great-ish scores?
Eta: for context, my kid (a junior) is enrolled in a test prep class, and knowing it is possible schools will stay test optional, I still want him to prepare. No change in his path, no matter which system applies.
7 Likes
We should know the answer to what kids will do if scores are not considered because the California publics are getting rid of testing. Not even TO, not considered.
Many top students will still take the exams because they won’t be going to Cal or UCLA, but there will be a whole group of students who know they are going to a UC or a CSU who won’t take them.
Wisconsin used to be like that. Those who knew they were going to school instate didn’t take SAT or ACT. A few students who were applying to T20 schools took the exams but they weren’t offered very often. We went to one of the biggest schools in the state and my sister had to travel about 45 minutes to another city to take the exam. She took the SAT once as a senior.
Yes, whiplash…great description!
For context, my son studied hard all summer, took the SAT in the fall with his senior class during the school-day SAT, and got a great score. We are happy for him. But, hearing that his classmates who didn’t score as well and are applying TO will not be disadvantaged is confusing. Would our son’s time have been better spent pursuing an activity, strengthening his essays, or working…rather than studying?
Yes, whiplash is the perfect word.
4 Likes
Just want to chime in after we received our daughter’s acceptance at Cornell University. She was able to take the SAT I test and received a score of 1550. She is ranked 1 in her tiny class of 45 students in rural NY with very few extra-curricular activities and no external awards. We made the strategic decision to apply to one of the test-optional colleges (Human Ecology), instead of CALS which did not consider SAT tests. This paid off- since we have seen students with more stellar stats get deferred or denied at Cornell. So, I guess if your child was able to secure the SAT test, then it was still an advantage over not having any SAT score.
3 Likes
An applicant whose SAT/ACT score is at the high end of the college’s range should have some advantage from that, even if the college is test optional.
3 Likes
If we’re talking elites, even if one submits a solid score to a TO, any contender still needs the rest of his/her app/supp to be spot on. (In the eyes of the college, not just the hs.)
And so do kids who don’t send scores.
That’s where kids do have some control. And again, that’s how it’s always been, with elites that can get 20:1 apps vs seats available.
2 Likes
Here’s a great example of SAT optional throwing kids off:
Early apps were up approx 60% at both Harvard and MIT. I see a lot of kids lamenting the fact that they put all their “early” eggs into one of these two overflowing baskets. Last year Harvard’s early admit rate was around 14%. This year it was down to 7%.
MIT releases decisions tomorrow with an anticipated acceptance rate far lower than previous years.
In years past, kids could at least look at previous years’ stats to make an educated decision about where they wanted to “spend” their early app chips. This year, that wasn’t possible.
3 Likes
I don’t see how this gives them any more useful data on which to make an admissions decision.
1 Like
I wouldn’t suggest drawing an adcom’s attention to prior low scores.
And they know covid screwed up test taking. It’s why they’re TO for now. You don’t somehow benefit from telling them.
You make your best decision, submit or not, and go from there.
3 Likes
I agree. I’d only tell AOs about prior lower test scores if there had been a specific and pointed question on the app asking why a student was not submitting a score.
Obviously that didn’t happen so kids just apply TO with no mention of previous attempts.
1 Like
I agree that having a high test score is usually better than having no test score. However, I do not agree with the reasoning. Admission to Cornell depends on more than stats. Kids with “more stellar stats” were regularly deferred or denied at Cornell long before going test optional even more so when comparing kids who applied to different schools within Cornell. Naviance for the upstate NY HS I attended shows a good correlation with GPA and admission decision, but far less correlation between admission decision and test scores. This makes it unclear how much the test score or lack of test score had to do with the acceptance or rejection, or if the decision to avoid applying to a test blind school “paid off.”.
There are also numerous reasons why a particular kid might have different admission results at CALS and Human Ecology besides just test blind vs test optional. For example, last year the acceptance rates to the 2 schools were completely different – 9% vs 23%. I expect the acceptance rates will continue to be completely different this year. One is a contract college (NYS residents may be favored and have ~$20k lower tuition than out of state), and one is an endowed college. The schools have different high school course requirements/recommendations and mention emphasizing different admission criteria in their decision. For example, Human Ecology has some special additional admission criteria including things like, “a clearly articulated connection to the college mission and an understanding of how the academic programs will support your interests in addressing contemporary human challenges” and special required design supplements for certain prospective majors.
The schools also have a completely different set of majors. Even the majors that sound similar (for example, Human Biology, Health and Society vs Biological Sciences) have numerous important differences. This can have implications of which college is the best fit – both from a chance of admission standpoint, and from a personal standpoint. It’s great that the plan worked out for your daughter, but I’d expect few students are an equally good fit for both Cornell schools, and which school to choose should depend on far more than wanting to avoid applying to a test blind school when scores are good.
2 Likes
In some ways, it’s hard to have this discussion without recognizing how many schools, including very selective ones, were already TO. My kid, who has graduated from college, had good test scores AND applied to several of them. Was he disadvantaged there by all those who submitted applications without scores? Possibly. Maybe not.
When schools change an admission standard, it is YEARS until they work out what the impact has been, if any. Faculty report back on student “quality” and they tinker further. Places like Bowdoin are coming up on a half century of TO!
But arguably, for lots of students - particularly those with the right resources- , test scores can be managed to the point that they don’t reveal much about the student. Many AOs are really slick at finding what they are looking for without explicit data. Just like they know
that the kid whose main EC is ski racing or sailing has a pretty low chance of needing FA.
3 Likes
If you son has a 504 I am not sure why you wouldn’t take advantage of the accommodations he is entitled to. For the ACT and SAT he can not only get extended time but he can also have the option of taking one part of the test a day over a two week period. You child has a 504 for a reason, it would be a disservice to not give him the help he needs. Look at it like this. Would you put a child with crunches to run a race and expect them to finish the race the same time as the child who wasn’t on crutches? Of course not.
There is absolutely no reason to not use accommodations for these tests if you are given them. It’s not like you get scored differently or a big red letter is on the score saying “he took it with accommodations”
2 Likes
I agree with the points you raised. Our strategy worked for us because of the different policies that those two colleges had. My daughter is pre-med and initially wanted to apply to CALS to be a Biology major. But, she considered majoring in Human Biology in CHE as a great option. We predicted that she would have a competitive edge in CHE since they accept SAT scores, while CALS didn’t, and she didn’t have extraordinary extra-curricular activities or awards since we live in a rural area. This ended up being a good decision. We saw a lot of students deferred or denied in CALS, which didn’t consider SAT scores and probably weighed other factors in their decision. Both CHE and CALS are SUNY affiliated and we are from NY state.
1 Like
We all know that TO (or even TB) is a necessity this year (and perhaps next year as well). So to me, the only remaining question is how TO affects admission outcomes. Up to half (or more) of all applicants to “elite” colleges didn’t (or won’t) submit test scores this year. Can AOs correctly discern most applicants’ academic qualifications in the absence of test scores? Should all colleges release data on the percentages of applicants who were admitted without test scores (like Bowoin and some others have done)?
Based on this year’s early admission results, it’s clear that many more applicants reached for those TO “elite” colleges than ever before. And many more applicants have been, or will be, disappointed in the outcomes of their early applications than ever before. How would this distortion affect how and where they apply (for RD, ED2)? And how would it affect different colleges?
3 Likes
I totally understand schools had to go test optional this year. My son was very organized and was able to take the test. He studied so hard and spent many hours on his own mastering the math section of the SAT. His friends took the SAT once, did not do well and are all going TO. They all had the option to take the test again via a school day SAT. They did not. The problem is they are all applying to the same schools in the Northeast. They are almost competing against each other for the same spots from their school. I just hope he isn’t too bummed if a friend gets in and he doesn’t (knowing he studied so hard for the SAT). I know he’ll be happy for a friend but will be a little pissed he put in all of that hard work. Thankfully his grades are really good.
3 Likes