2 ms·
I'm picking on you specifically because a lot of people are making this mistake. "Not requiring" is not the same as "eliminating". Not submitting scores will
by slg 5y ago
I'm picking on you specifically because a lot of people are making this mistake. "Not requiring" is not the same as "eliminating". Not submitting scores will no longer be a reason someone is rejected. Someone who did well on them can still submit them and it will help their application.
- PaulMest 5y agoI haven't followed this closely, but have seen a few headlines and tweets in passing. This is the first I've heard that people can optionally add test scores to help them stand out. Thanks for highlighting this.
- pc86 5y agoI don't see how this can work in practice. At some point, you'll have an application with an SAT go up against an application without one for the same seat. Either a really good SAT score will push that one up (meaning not submitting an SAT score hurts application #2) or the score is ignored, meaning it doesn't actually help to include it.
- lazyasciiart 5y agoExaggerating here for ease of description: it used to be that if you had 2 spots and these 3 applicants - applicant A: average grades, average SAT, no sports - applicant B: great grades, no SAT, great sports - applicant C: great grades, great SAT, great sports then B wasn't even considered. Now, B will probably get in over A.
- unclebucknasty 5y ago>I don't see how this can work in practice. That's because the admissions process is not the line-by-line ranking exercise you're implying. In some cases an SAT may help to complete the picture of an applicant. In other cases, other attribute permutations are enough. Maybe #1 was close and the SAT sealed it. But, it's not necessarily the case that applicant #2 was hurt by not submitting their SAT (or would have fared any better by submitting even a perfect SAT score).