What are you hearing? Will top colleges cap the number of students they accept w/o a test score?

[homerdog]

@havenoidea

The Webinar on the changing landscape at highly selective colleges wasn’t that helpful because no one knows how all the newly TO schools will handle this. Here’s a summary:

Normally, schools look first at grades/rigor and scores, those that pass that get to the next level review, where they look at everything else (and for the highly selective schools, they’re looking for ECs that show both initiative and impact, ie, independent research project that student then follows up with publication).

For a student who applies without scores, every other piece will be counted more (they said do send a score that’s within the school’s range).

Given Princeton’s move on SCEA, they expect to see other schools following/changing app deadlines, maybe changes to ED.

They did not think high scoring students would be disadvantaged by TO. Having a high score will still help you (except at test blind schools). This is especially true at schools that prioritize high scores: NU, Vandebilt, WashU. These are also schools where you get a big ED bump.

Re, the other topic on how many kids haven’t had a chance to test, our kids go to a high performing private school. Most kids tested fall or winter of junior year. One of ours got in one SAT and one ACT. The other got in one SAT. We know some kids who got in 2 of each test. We also know of a handful of very high performing kids who, for whatever reason, didn’t test yet.

But, from a small sampling of the public school population, many did not test yet. Though, the ones we know are not kids trying to go to highly selective colleges, who I believe know to test early to see if you need to retest. We have lots of kids signed up for the July ACT. The June ACT was cancelled everywhere here only a couple days before, so we don’t know if the July one will happen.

So, this goes back to why I believe the top privates have gone TO (not UCs, who were already considering it). One, I do think they are concerned about the underprivileged and/or underrepresented kids who may not typically test early. At this point, none of us knows if there will be more tests.

Two, not for the tippy tops, but below that, they know that lots of kids take these tests multiple times to get the high scores the schools like to report. There may be less of those scores this year, and I think they still want to admit these kids, especially who are full pay, who would otherwise be admissible but for the lower test scores (which they don’t want due to USNWR) due to lack of testing opportunities.

I may be cynical, but, to me, the whole situation points out what a money-making scam these tests are and that the colleges are complicit. I’m not saying there’s no value to the tests - with some schools giving everyone high As, how do you differentiate? - but if you know that kids are doing either self-prep or paid prep, and taking the tests multiple times just to get what you’re asking for, how much value is added to a student’s profile?

Yeah. I think there’s a difference between a student who studies on their own (or doesn’t study at all) and scores high in one sitting and a student who it tutored up and takes the test multiple times. BUT I’m not convinced that first student is “smarter” in a way that makes them positioned better to do well in college level courses. I know both of the tests well. The math is only up through trig and, even then, very few questions are trig. The writing section on both tests just requires learning a bunch of grammar and punctuation rules that either the kids learned in middle school or need to review. The reading sections require the kids to read really quickly and then the questions are written specifically to make them second guess themselves. How does doing well on these types of questions show the student is “college ready” for any particular school? Are these the kind of skills kids need to succeed in college? All it means when a kid can take these tests and nail it the first time without a tutor is that they are good at these types of tests.

S19 is an intuitive multiple choice taker and a strong math student. He reads fairly quickly with good comprehension. He could get every question correct on a practice ACT if he had ten extra minutes per section (we tried that and that’s what happened). When he had to speed up, his scores dropped. He did not want to learn the tricks to go faster for that test. Was all pissy that any college would think that’s required for him to be accepted. He liked the SAT marginally better because at least he had more time per question. Studied on his own, took it once and was done. So, this student, who couldn’t break 32 on the ACT, was able to study on his own and hit 1540 in one shot. He’s good at multiple choice - decisive, doesn’t overthink it.

D21 is likely a better student in the reading/writing category and, when taking extra time on the ACT in practice, would also hit 35-36 on reading and writing sections. She just could not pick up the pace and ended up with a 33 reading and a 32 writing after two real ACTs. She’s not as advanced in math as S19 who took BC math as a junior. She’s still in honors math, though, and will take AB Calc next year. Could get to 34 on the math section given a little extra time but couldn’t top 30 on the real test. She’s moved onto the SAT but all of her tests have been cancelled. She’s been studying on her own and seems she would top out at a 1450. She’s just won’t get near her brother’s score.

Have any of you ever watched a tutor work with kids on these tests? It’s rarely about content. It’s about how to crack the test, how to identify the tricks that are used to try to mess them up. Where in college or in the real world is that something that needs to be mastered?

This is a very long way to say that both of these kids are very strong students. They’ve taken many of the same classes at our high school and, since they are my kids, I can see their similarities and differences when it comes to how they work and study and perform at school. They are very very similar with the exception of S19’s math progression and D21’s love of writing. But look at their testing. I want to shout from the mountain tops that D21 would be successful at every school that S19 got accepted to…but she might not get in with a lower test score or no score for that matter. She would bring a ton of energy to a campus and she would likely do just as well in her classes as he has.

Clearly, I’m not a fan of these tests. If colleges didn’t have so many kids applying, they could take more time to understand an applicant’s GPA and where they stand in their class. They could take more time to understand each high school and what they offer. I blame the Common App. Kids apply to too many schools!

Everyone is going to have to make their own decisions about whether to send scores and whether to prep for fall tests. Some of this will become clearer as we see if July ACT and Aug SAT happen. Heck, I’m not convinced that Oct SAT can happen. If I’m wrong and those tests are go, then I guess it’s just another sucky thing happening for juniors who might now get one shot at a good score. I almost feel like colleges should ask the kids this year to describe their testing situation. Maybe ask for all tests? At least then, they could see the student who took a test in Dec and that ended up being their only shot. Or they could see the one test was in Oct of junior year. Some context. Or maybe not require all scores but at least be able to see the date they were taken. My understanding is that colleges do not see that info, just the score.