This is how I understand it to be, in fact I am not sure if the scores are looked at after first screen. The idea is to use Transcript and scores to get you to holistic review and hopefully your child can shine with ECs, LoRs, Essays, at least that is what we have envisioned.
3 Likes
Does this mean what they are reporting in their CDSs is inaccurate? Hereās class of 2026 (2022-23 CDS), which it clearly states is for those enrolled in Fall 2022:
SAT Mid 50%: 1470-1560
ACT Mid 50%: 33-35
2 Likes
Interesting. I donāt know if the CDS data is inaccurate or if maybe they just assume that most people wonāt research the CDS. In my message above, I pasted the language from their admissions web site. I will admit that I rarely look at the CDS for colleges, and as far as I know, my children have not looked at it for any of their colleges of interest either. I suspect while many on CC do deep dives into college data and information, the average family is more like me and doesnāt do adequate research into the colleges that interest them (even though they really should). I think D22 and D24 have just applied and hoped for the best. They did listen to the college advisors at their schools for the most part. But in the case of colleges like Yale, I wonder if the college advisors are wrong because while my kids have been told to submit their (high) scores, they have told me that their friends with lower scores --and by this, I mean scores under 1500, have been told not to submit.
The 22-23 CDS states that 59% of students submitted SAT scores and 29% submitted ACT scores.
If you look at a year or two before CV, those figures were 68% & 54%. Some students submitted scores from both exams. The corresponding middle 50th % was 1450-1560āvery close to the most recent report during TO admissions. I am guessing that the scores reported in 22-23 are for the 59% and 29% who submitted scores.
My theory is that it doesnāt matter. I on the āIād rather show them a 1470 than have them wonder if I have a 1320ā camp, but that kid probably wonāt get in either way. The low end of the spread is driven by institutional priorities and an unhooked kid is unlikely to get in with lower, even if good, scores. They should not dwell on the āif I only had sent/had not sentā my scores.
7 Likes
I do wonder if there are limited cases where sufficient confidence in course rigor/evaluation can substitute for ACT/SAT scores. Things like IBDP, maybe some selective high schools with true college-level advanced classes, that sort of thing.
There are always exceptions to the rule, right?
Regardless, I from the podcast it sounded like a high score can make up for a not quite stellar grade but not the other way around. IMO he made it pretty clear that itās as I thought, tests matter not as predictors of ability but predictors of preparedness. They have no idea how hard or not to get an A.
I just read a piece on the Princeton paper where the author is urging for tests to be brought back because it is the thing where wealth matters the least - there are plenty of accessible free prep resources - and if colleges cared about equality theyād get rid of counselor recommendations and essays because that is where the wealthy truly have an advantage.
3 Likes
My take from the podcast is that a studentās test scores are evaluated in the context of the average scores from the studentās high school; for example, Yale would consider a 1400 outstanding if the average score at that high school is 1200.
1 Like
People always think the wealthy have an advantage. They also say test scores favor the wealthy because they have access to expensive prep courses.
You can spend $50k on prep courses but very few will get 1560 on their SAT. Thatās 99.5%. Money alone doesnt buy you that type of score.
Hereās the elephant in the room: a lot of top 10% income earners are really smart so their kids are too. Thatās way too controversial to admit.
5 Likes
Too bad the author didnāt pull test data by income (just a sampling of resources):
While hiring college and essay counselors, one-on-one test preps, etc. is certainly one (big) way that one can substantially up oneās odds at highly selective colleges, thatās not the primary way.
The money part comes into play much, much earlier - which neighborhood your parents can afford to pay taxes in, to support well-funded local school systems, or pay for preschool, enable you to many early-age enrichment opportunities, or possibly pay for private high schools that have strong connections with college admissions reps.
The money part comes into play, whether your parents work three jobs and wonāt have the ability/time to engage with you about your school work, model good study and time management habits, or even attend parent-teacher conferences, pay/take you to extracurriculars,ā¦
What made you seemingly āsmarterā by the time you take the SAT, is to a large degree a function of your financial household situation (long before you start adding the last-minute 50 - 100 points by affording intense personalized prepping.)
11 Likes
My point is anytime you see articles on the unfairness of SAT scores, or pretty much anything academic, the author almost always focuses on nurture when in reality, nature also plays a substantial role.
2 Likes
Agree with everything in your post.
Adding that even if one is getting one on one test prep, the student still has to do the workā¦the homework, the practice tests, over an extended period of time. Itās not magic where one uses a test prep professional and/or goes to a prep class and their score increases.
For those who think that free SAT resources like Khan Academy helpā¦sure they might at the margin but it doesnāt come close to equalizing things. IME a student must be highly motivated to do those online classes/videos, do the homework alone, teach themselves what they donāt know (using the videos), etc. Are some students successful doing that? Yep. But I think they are more the exception than the rule.
Agree. But it seems we donāt talk about that here. 
4 Likes
Yes, you start at the level playing field of ānatureā (which you canāt control), but then you add the deciding factor of ānurtureā (which many cannot control!), which most times determines who ends at the very top:
Those who are fortunate āby natureā, but only if they are also fortunate with their upbringing.
2 Likes
These donāt necessarily have to coexist, but I agree they often do. With that said, Iāve read apps from some low-SES and/or first gen students this year whose natural intelligence overcame their obstacles (to a large degree).
Thatās how I feel about this matter. S24 got a 1580 on the SAT and didnāt have a private tutor, attend a prep class or spend a ton of time self studying. What he has had is a privileged upbringing - parents who read to him from a young age, exposure to the arts, access to world travel, ability to participate in any activity that interested him etc. Kids from under resourced communities donāt get any of that. Iām not going to pretend my kid hit a triple when he started life on third base. Heās a wonderful kid and Iām not going to downplay his accomplishments, but heās been lucky on top of being extremely bright.
11 Likes
Besides wealth, the other elephant in the room in regards to nurture, are family values as they relate to education.
6 Likes
What about families who have multiple kids with the exact same reources, experiences, and opportunities? One kid scores a 1580 and the other 1370.
Nurture doesnt fully explain that.
3 Likes
Stuyvesant high school is an example where wealth is not the primary driver of academic success.
They had a study where 90% of the Asian students who were admitted to Stuyvesant high based on standardized test scores qualified for the free lunch program.
2 Likes
My S24 also got a very high ACT score on what was supposed to be a diagnostic test with pretty minimal preparation. I have made sure he understands that is in part a function of just a really privileged upbringing.
I agree, my S24 also has what I sometimes call a naturally fast processing speed. So do I, and I am pretty sure that was at least partially inherited. And among other things, it gives us a big advantage when it comes to things like time-pressured tests.
But I am also deeply skeptical about the real world academic value of that particular aptitude. Like, I donāt think it is particularly relevant to writing a good research paper. Or understanding and solving truly challenging math problems. Or participating meaningfully in a deep philosophical discussion. Or so on.
So yeah, that high ACT score he got with minimal prep represented a combination of a lot of privileged nurture and a high natural processing speed, and without both he would likely not have done so well under those circumstances.
But that observation does not persuade me the nurture part is not a big advantage for privileged kids. It just means exactly what that advantage gets them will also depend on things like their natural processing speed.
4 Likes