I think that the movement to eliminate tests such as in the UC system are mostly driven considerations of equity among demographic groups. However, it is destined to ultimately fail. It’s like a game of whack a mole. If you ban tests, families and groups that really value college will focus more on grades, or extracurriculars, or whatever springs up to take up the vacuum left by eliminating tests. It is true that certain groups as a whole (such as Asians) tend to value college more than other groups and therefore they concentrate their focus and resources on this goal. This is not to say that one group is better or smarted, just that this is more emphasized (at a group level). Therefore, whatever new metrics come out, it is highly unlikely to eliminate disparities unless a straight up lottery system is instituted.
Really? There are many intangible, nonacademic traits that go into success, academic and otherwise. Foremost: drive. But also, perseverance, creativity, good time management, true leadership, curiosity, resilience. Sure, you need the academic record, but kids who have some/all of the listed traits – in addition to good high school grades – are going to do way better than kids without them. The “rest” of the application is where a kid can show they have these qualities, or not.
Yes, there’re many attributes that make a person a success. These attributes and academics aren’t mutually exclusive. Moreover, demonstrating any of these attributes won’t make someone a mathematician, a scientist, an economist, etc. that these colleges are supposed to produce. Besides, I’d argue college admissions have relied too much on so-called “leadership quality”. Haven’t they lately produced too many charismatic yet opportunistic political leaders, and too many charismatic yet short-sighted corporate leaders?
It depends on the college. If we are talking about highly selective colleges, they almost never just look at GPA + scores in isolation. For example, it’s relevant what courses were taken how they relate to the proposed field of study. A 4.0 that involves the highest level of courses at the HS + external classes/learning at a higher level than offered by the HS is not the same as a 4.0 with few honors/AP/IB… courses. It’s also relevant how harshly/leniently the HS grades, which can be inferred to some degree from the school profile and past history with the HS.
It’s also relevant what the teachers and GC say about the student. For example, a LOR from a subject that is critical to planned field of study that gushes about being the best student they’ve taught in years means more than a LOR that doesn’t say anything besides being generically a good student, even if both students get the same “A” grade in the class. GC comments can separate students in a similar way.
It’s also relevant what the student accomplishes outside of the classroom and how that relates to their planned field of study. Out of classroom accomplishments can be more meaningful that receiving an “A” grade in showing passion and/or ability in planned field of study.
It’s also relevant if the student appears to be a good person who will make the college a better place when attending, both due to relationships with community/students/professors and due to being involved with activities on campus or within the community.
I could continue. The point is that there is a lot of things to consider besides just small differences in GPA-SAT stats. Even when tests were available, these non-stat factors were still considered and usually had notable influence at highly selective colleges. At some HYPSM… type highly selective colleges, the majority of applicants with a perfect 4.0 + 1600/36 were rejected prior to COVID.
I think it’s hard to design a single test that accomplish this while also serving as a general purpose achievement test for a typical college. Schools like Catech/MIT/Harvey Mudd/CMU SCS could design their own tests to accompish their specific goals.
It’s probably easier for specialized schools, especially highly selective STEM schools, to not rely on standardized tests. To get into those schools, it also takes a record of advanced courses, accomplishments in EC’s, competitions and other forms of recognition to show passion and talent in a STEM field(s).
The schools that need a standardized testing benchmark more are the selective schools which seek to have diversity in student interests and demographic profiles where there is some type of common measuring stick between the poor kid in rural Mississippi and the the NE prep school kid. The AO can make internal adjustments as to score expectations, but at least there is a known common baseline.
Lol, look at it as comparing hundreds or thousands of A students. As ever, I mean elites.
I like Data’s last post, except that passion is better replaced by a view of actions actually taken, visions pursued and how. The experience is telling, with or without some claim to emotions.
…
Adcoms don’t have the time or inclination to figure out who’s got grade inflation. At some point, you have to deal with what is, what’s been offered in the app, rather than speculating. (Yes, that’s an issue.) Yes, they may know some (or so many) schools or trends in certain areas. But they aren’t scrutinizing every School Report. There’s huge variation among SRs and what they do provide. Sometimes, you need it, eg, to verify courses offered. Or, for a less known hs, to get some demographics. But it’s not the fine-grade analysis some think. And btw, there are other public sources for demographics, performance, and etc.
We all know our kids and their high schools. What’s much harder is to know the competition. I know we assume all the best about our kids. But when adcoms are looking at those hundreds or thousands of applicants (and year-in, year-out,) they get a much broader perspective. A picture of what kids are capable of. etc. After you pass the basic academic and stats bar, you can leave so much of this metrics-focus behind. That includes class rank.
Now, it’s the applicant’s thinking, awareness, maturity, how they’re a formed, thinking individual or not. This is all the same stuff I play and replay all the time. The app package is a self-presentation. (And unlike hs, you’re not summarizing for a teacher who knows you.) How they lean in or not, decisions they make/made, what commitments, what challenges they take on- even how they often overestimate what challenge is or what impact is-- what’s impressive in a large pool of top performers versus what’s same old/same old. Or, sorry, small potatoes. This applies to the writing, as well.
All this is pretty indicative of a kid’s thinking, energies, willingness, and more that a top college looks for. Various traits. The sorts of individuals a top college wants. After you get past the academic/stats bar, It’s very, “Show, not just tell.” Unfortunately, how you present is in your hands. Kids make mistakes, reveal things or traits better left unspoken. That can cost.
That’s not to say a kid needs to be “unique” in the ways CC sometimes suggests. Not at all. It’s more about conforming to the expectations those adcoms have than standing out for some oddity. Not about blowing their minds.
Btw, “Be yourself” is fine. Just understand that the college wants what it wants. Your “yourself” may not be it. Maybe, before applying, you need to try to figure out if there IS a match in there.
AND, yes, it’s vague. Don’t dismiss the effort it takes to learn, plan, find where you do meet expectations. Or just apply to colleges easier to satisfy.
@Mwfan1921 @homerdog Retention data can tell us a lot more than retention rates. It is a vehicle by which colleges can track student profile with progress.
I would agree that for math this would be the way to go, I would even urge making the scale 1000, or something to show the difference. However verbal and writing would need a similar but maybe not as extensive overhaul as that’s a pretty hard test to get 800s now.
" Foremost: drive. But also, perseverance, creativity, good time management, "
Initially colleges will look at academic record and scores, to figure those things, then the other parts of the app.
I agree. I also think those poor but smart kids who don’t have the “rest” but only great test scores will be the ones most disadvantaged by the elimination of test scores.
Agree that academics have been and will still be of primary importance. For me, a student makes the cut based upon grades, courses, the school, maybe AP tests and maybe rank. I have never been confused whether someone is strong enough or not academically for a particular level of college. I think the challenge sometimes is the applicant and his/her parents do not appreciate the differences among good students. It’s hard for some to look at themselves with complete objectivity. Reminds me of the athlete who was one of the best little leaguers at his age in town. If the parents think that kid is going to the “Harvard of baseball,” based upon that fact - they are wrong. It should not take an expert to point that out, but some are blinded by their own hopes and situations.
Not sure anyone is disagreeing that getting a high score on an AP is meaningful.
I believe there’s some confusion because many colleges claim AP scores aren’t part of admission evaluation. These claims seem misleading. Applicants are asked to enter their AP scores and test dates on Common/Coalition App. For what? Fitzsimmons also testified in the Harvard lawsuit that AP scores were more indicative, than anything else, of college “success” based on Harvard’s internal data.
Lol, CC declares often that AP scores don’t factor in admissions.
Where I’d disagree is that academics are of primary importance. Maybe it’s just word choices, but I think it leaves possible confusion. I see them as the first hurdle to clear. But not primary as in, by themselves, sufficient. After that, the focus is on the rest. Your academics can be stellar and not outweigh problems with the rest.
Applicants are not asked to enter AP scores on the common app. It’s just an option that is there. No colleges require them for their application.
It has always meant something to me. I was not aware of the confusion.
I get the nuance, trust me I do. But the truth is, we are splitting hairs. If the grades are not at the level… We don’t truly disagree.
I treat everything on a college application that claims to be optional to mean “it’s required”, or at least “highly recommended”. 
Most colleges don’t even call out AP scores as optional. Many times they aren’t on their list of application materials. On every one of D21’s portals, there’s a list of required items on a checklist and then there’s also a drop down menu for optional additions. Not one drop down menu has AP scores an an option.
Not saying that strong AP scores don’t look good but I’ve heard a number of AOs say, with my own ears, that they do not move the needle.
My son had a great interview with a nice guy from Dartmouth a few years back. He was rejected. The interviewer told my son no one he interviews gets in. Your daughter may get into Dartmouth but i doubt the interview will play a huge part. All of the qualified kids that apply to these schools can probably do fine at an alumni interview.