College Board releases conversion tool comparing old and new SAT

There’s lots of news coming out of the College Board this week. As promised, scores for the first administration of the new or “redesigned” SAT are on track for release tomorrow.

But to get ahead of questions that are bound to crop-up about how the new SAT compares to the old SAT and the ACT, the College Board needed to generate concordance tables to provide comparisons families and colleges could use to determine achievement relative to the existing tests.

And so today, the College Board announced the creation of 16 different concordance tables covering the span of relationships between the new SAT and the old SAT as well as the new SAT and the ACT (for ACTs given prior to September 2015). 

To support the tables, the College Board also produced what they are calling the “SAT Score Converter” mobile apps available for free in in the iPhone and Android app stores. And if you don’t want to install an app for the purpose of comparing test scores, the tool is available online on the College Board website.

For those not familiar with the term, concordance is a way to compare scores from different assessments. Because the new SAT is a different test from the old SAT, it’s not possible to perfectly compare the two test scores. A score of 630 on the Critical Reading section of the old SAT will almost certainly not be equivalent to a score of 630 on the Evidence-Based Reading and Writing (EBRW) section of the new SAT because according to the College Board, “each assessment tests a different domain of knowledge and skills.”  Used properly, concordance tables can offer estimates­ of score correspondence from one test to another.

The new tables come with an astonishing amount of verbiage, a good deal of which is not terrifically useful for simple understanding or explaining why the scores are they way they are. The most obvious take-away, however, is that the new scores look significantly higher than the old scores.  

For more visual learners, Jon Boeckenstedt, associate vice president for enrollment management at DePaul University, used Tableau to produce a really useful “visualization” of the relationships between various tests.  Each of the 16 tables has been converted into a separate “dashboard,” and by “hovering” over individual dot points, you can see associated scores. But it’s the pattern of score separation that’s most interesting.

And the test results certainly “appear” higher. In 2015, the national means were 500 for Critical Reading, 510 for Math and 480 for Writing. On the new tests, those scores relate to 550 for EBRW and 540 for Math--or 100 points higher when combined!

In fact, a quick and “uneducated” review of the new test scores could easily lead to the conclusion that a student did much better than anticipated on the SAT—similar to what happened with the new PSAT in the fall—as the difference between the old test and the new approach 100 points when combining the math and verbal scores.

Most admissions professionals feel confident that colleges will know the difference between the two tests and will most likely install software that will automatically convert scores during the reading process. They’ve been comparing SAT and ACT scores this way forever.

But where there may be a problem is how families and applicants could possibly misinterpret scores from the new test. A family that accepts results from the new SAT at face value and either doesn’t know about or doesn’t care to use concordance tools to convert the scores may come to the conclusion that the test-taker has done much better than originally anticipated.  And this could result in unrealistic college lists and some disappointment down the road.

“We just have to pound the drum that this is a totally different test. New SAT scores are no more directly comparable to old SAT scores than SAT scores are to ACT scores,” said Adam Ingersoll, of Compass Education Group. “Students—and colleges—will HAVE to use the conversion tool to make sense of it.”

What counselors are thinking about ‘Prior Prior Year’ (PPY)

Cornell College

Cornell College recently asked college counselors, both school-based and independent, how they were preparing for the changes the Department of Education is making in the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA).

In a nutshell, FAFAS is backing up the timeline for filing federal aid applications by three months to support a new policy enabling students to use “prior-prior” year (PPY) tax data to qualify for aid. In other words, a high school senior planning to enroll in college in fall 2017 will file FAFSA using tax information from 2015—the prior prior year.

PPY is scheduled to debut in October, for applications for the 2017-18 award year.  This means that the high school class of 2017 will be the first group to use the PPY FAFSA. It also means that colleges, along with the Department of Education and the Internal Revenue Service, are scrambling to figure out what impact this change will have on basic application mechanics as well as on the overall admission cycle.

To get a handle on what counselors working with next year’s seniors are thinking about these changes, Cornell College published a poll on their website and invited counselors working with high school students and their families to respond.

Of 60 respondents, 67 percent said they were either not ready or did not know if they were ready for PPY. About half of the school counselors expect earlier requests for letters of recommendation and earlier requests for transcripts. Less than 10 percent of counselors anticipate college fair dates moving.

One-third of independent educational consultants plan to advise clients to apply earlier, and one-third plan to advise students to move college visits earlier. Half of the consultants didn’t see PPY as changing the college decision-making process.

While many of those responding to the Cornell College poll either didn’t know how PPY would affect their workloads or didn’t think it would, there were some individual responses worth noting:

• We have already scheduled a financial aid night for the class of 2017 for this May.
• The biggest difference will be educating parents to engage in the Financial Aid process earlier.
• We are preparing a letter to go out to the members of the Class of 2017 and their parents before the end of this school year.  So, to that end, we’ve already had a shift to our workload this spring while we prepare this communication.
• With this, the pressure students will face to complete their college admissions process AND apply for aid in the early months of fall of senior year will be tremendous.
• We will have to balance the opening of school and settling schedules with financial aid night and FAFSA presentations. This is going to be a BIG challenge.
• We will couple our Senior Parent meeting in the fall with our Financial Aid Night, which will make that meeting longer, but will keep us from having programs on two different nights.
• I think the date shift and the PPY is a good thing, but this fall will be a bugger to get through.

In response to requests for additional information, Cornell College put together a one-page PPY worksheet to share with students and families. This simple handout can be supplemented by other more detailed materials available from the U.S Department of Education or the National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC).

No luck—what to do when the admissions well runs dry

It’s not an outcome anyone really wants to consider.  But every so often, a college applicant reaches the bottom of the admissions well with nothing positive to report.

The most chilling result is one in which there is total rejection or a series of rejections complemented by a handful of wait list offers, none of which seems very promising.   

Or possibly, the admitting colleges came with insufficient financial support, rendering them not feasible. 




And sometimes, the applicant has changed focus and simply doesn’t like the options as they currently stand.

After months of planning and anticipation, how could this happen?

Unfortunately, there are lots of possibilities. Even the most qualified and conscientious candidate could be a victim of rotten luck—a bad draw or stars out of alignment.  

Most likely, however, there is an explanation.

Often it’s a question of shooting too high—loading the college list with too many reaches or too many colleges in the ‘random’ category of predictability.  

There could be a fundamental problem with the application itself—an unengaging essay or too many typos seeded throughout a form dashed off at the last possible minute. 

Maybe individual application components were missing, incomplete or never submitted at all. Possibly supporting documents, like test score reports or transcripts, got lost in transmission or never got submitted in the first place.

Or perhaps one or more of the recommendations was less than stellar.  This, by the way, is the most difficult of all the scenarios to trace, as applicants almost never have access to what others have written.

So how does a student in this situation go forward?  Here are a few suggestions:

Get a second opinion
Before going much further, call in an expert to thoroughly review your application.   This can be a school counselor, an independent educational consultant (IEC), or someone working in a college admissions office.  Provide them with a sample of your completed application including personal statement, a copy of your transcript, and all standardized test scores—SAT, ACT, Subject Test, and AP. Ask for an unbiased review of your college list relative to your credentials, but more importantly ask if there are corrections or things you can do to improve the overall quality of the application itself.  This may mean rewriting your personal statement or revising sections of the application.  Be open to any suggestions.

Accept wait list offers
While not always predictable, wait lists are a lifeline you can’t afford to ignore.  Follow-up with letters underscoring your interest and updating admissions on any awards, achievements or accomplishments since the original application was submitted.  If permitted, have an additional recommendation sent or ask your school counselor to call on your behalf.  Try to revisit the campus, and if at all possible, meet with an admissions representative (local or on campus) to make your case in person.  This is not a time to passively wait for a decision.  Wage a campaign to the extent allowable and make a compelling case for your admission.  And if you can truthfully say it, tell everyone involved that “if admitted, you will definitely attend,” as this single college is your top pick among all the schools you are considering.  This is a one-time offer, by the way.  You can’t say it multiple times to multiple colleges.

Launch an appeal
Colleges make mistakes—but not often.  And they won’t always admit a mistake even if one has occurred.  That should not stop you, however, from looking into an appeal process.  Such appeals usually are only successful if you can show that something essential wasn’t considered or received with your application or that a misunderstanding occurred which affected the decision.  Even if an appeal process is not ordinarily available to applicants, it may be worth a phone call to obtain an explanation of why your application was denied.  You may find a reason to appeal, but it’s more likely you’ll simply get feedback which could be useful in improving applications you send in the future.  Note that this kind of call must be handled diplomatically and with a great deal of respect.  Venting will get you nowhere.

Submit additional applications
Once you’re convinced your application is in tip-top form, begin researching colleges with openings for fall 2016.  You’ll find literally hundreds opportunities on the Common Application, the Universal College Application, and the College Board websites.  Feel free to call admissions offices in which you might be interested to see if they would entertain an application from you, especially if deadlines have just recently passed.  The National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC) annually publishes a list of colleges still accepting applications in early May.  You don’t have to wait.  In fact, a number of colleges have deadlines you can still meet.  Just make sure you arrange to send all required supporting documents and recommendations as necessary.

Research nontraditional or off-cycle admissions

Some colleges may have nontraditional admission options. For example, you might be able to enter college for the spring 2017 semester rather than starting in the fall. Or you could be admitted conditionally until you prove your ability to handle college work. Do your research and call admission offices of the colleges that interest you. Note that you can use both the Common Application and the Universal College Application to search specifically for colleges with spring admissions.

Consider the community college option
There are several different ways to approach community college.  First, you can consider it as a sort of ‘holding pattern’ by taking potentially transferable classes for credit for a semester or two while you regroup and restart the application process for January or fall 2017.  Or you can take advantage of various “articulation” agreements negotiated by community colleges which guarantee admission to 4-year programs once certain stipulations have been met.  Often this involves completing an associate’s degree within two years and meeting specific GPA and course requirements.  Note that this option has the potential of giving you a little time to rethink the process as well as saving some money.

Think about a gap year
Gap years offer wonderful opportunities to learn more about yourself and possibly do something constructive to enhance your admissibility to college.  Once you have established a plan with or without the support of an organized gap year “program,” take steps to put the application process back in gear.  Contact your school counselor and let the school know of your plans, so recommendations and transcripts will be readily available when the time comes.  You may need to track down teachers who wrote on your behalf and ask for their support a second time.  The process won’t be too different from the one you just went through, but the outcomes can be much more satisfying if you plan carefully and make the best use of your year. Don’t expect colleges that denied you once to necessarily change their minds.  It’s fine to reapply with the benefit of gap year experiences, but be sure to also open your list to new schools.

Apply for a post graduate year
For some students, a “post graduate year” (PG) at a boarding or independent school can be a means of improving credentials and the likelihood of admission to college.  Under this plan, the student essentially repeats the senior year of high school and restarts the college admissions process.  A year spent on academics and structured independence often results in a more prepared and mature college student, which college admissions offices tend to appreciate.  But this is an expensive option, and not feasible for everyone, although some financial aid may be available.

As you consider your options, remember this is only a temporary setback.  Stay positive, remain focused, and accept all the support available to you.  The worst possible outcome is to simply give up.  And that shouldn’t be an option. 

IECs provide early reviews of new Coalition technology

The University of Washington will be Coalition exclusive next year.

Without fanfare or press release, last Thursday the Coalition for Access, Affordability, and Success quietly launched the first two components of its new online technology—the Student Locker (a portfolio development tool) and the Collaboration Space (a platform for sharing materials).

And so far, the initial response from independent educational consultants (IECs) has been largely positive.

“After seeing the Locker and then using it, this may be the most important part of the Coalition’s work. For those students with unstable educational, economic, and home lives, they now have a place to store resumes and graded papers as well as perhaps other information—a teacher recommendation,” explained Jeana Kawamura, an IEC based in Newport Beach, California. “I thought that the Locker was the weak link. I was wrong. Not every student has College Planner Pro, a well-run, thoughtful CBO [Community Based Organization] or an IEC.”

Many of the consultants who have taken the time to explore the Locker agree.

“I was pleasantly surprised, actually,” said Pam Shor, an IEC with offices in Washington State. “I appreciate the college research capability—particularly as some schools appear to make understanding application requirements a little easier. If schools continue to develop the information on these pages, I feel it will help students research schools and connect with them more effectively.”

A demo posted on the coalition website and led by Colin Johnson, interim executive director, walks the viewer through registration, profile completion, document sharing, and college search.  With all the advantages of being “newer,” the coalition platform has much to like.

 “I had a minor glitch when creating my account and signing up. The interface did not prompt me to check my email before logging in again—students will have to be reminded that the verification email could land in spam,” explained Archana Sudame, a northern California-based IEC.  “But after that, completing the profile and uploading stuff in the locker was a breeze—50 MB is substantial. In fact, the best feature about the Locker is that it accepts files directly from my Google Drive or Drop Box, so I can work on a computer that has no hard drive, like a Chrome Book.”

According to the coalition demo, the locker will accept Word Docs, JPEG, MP3s and MP4s.  “If you can drop it in Drop Box or upload it to YouTube, you can store it in your Locker.” Students have the choice of using drag-and-drop or uploading individual files into their lockers.

And the contents of a student’s Locker are not visible to any outside person or organization. Individual documents or files may be “shared” with an invited mentor, but that mentor will not have universal access to the Locker. No changes or edits to a document will be possible through this process—only comments, which are restricted to a column located on the side of the shared document.

In addition, the list of student mentors will not be universally shared. Only the student will know who all his or her mentors are.

Down the line, the Coalition will be expanding the student “profile” to add a self-reported academic section and a standardized testing section. Between 60 and 95 percent of an individual institution’s application will be contained within the student profile, depending on how complex or detailed member questions are. 

In the meantime, questions inquiring about ethnicity and dual citizenship, as well as the ability of students to rate level of interest in different academic areas or the status of investigations into individual colleges, received high marks from IECs.

“I was encouraged by the ease and intuitiveness of the student section. I found it very easy to navigate,” added Kawamura.  “I think that this will be very helpful to students. Maybe in the future it will be an art teacher or English teacher that suggests to a student to place work in the Locker. I could see that as a real possibility.”

Additionally, a student developing a college list for the Locker, which can include coalition as well as non-coalition schools, can decide on a school-by-school basis whether or not to allow sharing of basic information with individual colleges and universities. With each decision, the student is reminded that the college will have access to name, mobile phone number, email, home phone number, mailing address, and other information that can serve to facilitate communication or demonstrate interest. The student can opt out of sharing at any time for any coalition member college, although once sent, it’s hard to take back.

But despite all the positive reaction, not everyone was totally sold.

“I did notice that there is no designated place for independent educational consultants (IECs) to log in,” said Rachelle Wolosoff, an IEC with offices in New York and Florida. “Since there is an increasing number of IECs helping students these days, I would think it would have been, at a minimum, courteous to have provided the particular login for IECs.”

Another IEC added, “I think this locker/app is going to increase stress and work for students (and high school counselors and IECs)…Many underserved students do not have computers, which is another hurdle (so their papers may not even be typed), not to mention they often lack scanners. Unless teachers/counselors help the students upload to the locker at school, on school computers, I do not see the vast majority of this population taking advantage of this application.”

And Jeana Kawarmura cautioned, “In California, the student to counselor ratio is obscenely high. I don’t see how the majority of high school counselors are going to be able to mentor students through the locker collaborative space. I also want to make sure that I am not doing anything on my end that places more responsibilities on them.”

This would be particularly true of schools and counselors working with Naviance, as that system will not be fully integrated with the Coalition platform until year-two.

 

It’s clear that the Locker is still a work-in-progress, and the full application will not come on line until July. Between now and then, however, coalition staff members have indicated a willingness to accept and consider comments on any element of the technology. 

Already changes were made between the time the demo was produced and the technology was launched last week. For example, the required question asking for the “Gender” of the applicant was changed to “Sex” and a note added that coalition members would be asking for information about gender on their individual applications.

In the meantime, school-based and independent college counselors are considering if and how to introduce the coalition application to students, with many opting to take a wait-and-see position.

“Of course, we will review all the options including the coalition application, but my thinking is that in this first year of the new coalition platform, many students will want to keep it simple and do the Common Application for all colleges on the Common App, rather than have multiple apps to complete,” said Mary Spiegel, a Connecticut-based certified educational planner.

Others are getting ready to jump right in.

“I emailed my juniors and told them they could start,” said Wendie Lubic, an IEC located in Washington, D.C.  “It will be interesting to see who starts…and what their experience is.”