(06-27-2017 11:38 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 05:18 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  The way this is set up seems to level the playing field for a student from a weaker school/system. If they come from a school with fewer AP and honors courses with straight A's the standardized tests can legitimize them as students. They would take the "option'' of including them. A student from a tough Nova school with a rigorous course load who makes straight A's has already proven their ability and work ethic, but a less than stellar showing will not harm them as much.

Am I missing something?

Yes, you've missed everything.

You're off the mark with your assumption that the admissions office can't (or doesn't) distinguish between the academic rigor of different schools and school systems. The admissions office has a complete profile of the strengths of different individual schools (not just a system or district) dating back to the beginning of time. We know if a high GPA at one school is the equivalent to another school.

You missed his point.

(06-27-2017 11:40 AM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 11:38 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 05:18 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  The way this is set up seems to level the playing field for a student from a weaker school/system. If they come from a school with fewer AP and honors courses with straight A's the standardized tests can legitimize them as students. They would take the "option'' of including them. A student from a tough Nova school with a rigorous course load who makes straight A's has already proven their ability and work ethic, but a less than stellar showing will not harm them as much.

Am I missing something?

Yes, you've missed everything.

You're off the mark with your assumption that the admissions office can't (or doesn't) distinguish between the academic rigor of different schools and school systems. The admissions office has a complete profile of the strengths of different individual schools (not just a system or district) dating back to the beginning of time. We know if a high GPA at one school is the equivalent to another school.

You missed his point.

No, sorry, you missed it. My response was on point

(06-27-2017 11:38 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 05:18 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  The way this is set up seems to level the playing field for a student from a weaker school/system. If they come from a school with fewer AP and honors courses with straight A's the standardized tests can legitimize them as students. They would take the "option'' of including them. A student from a tough Nova school with a rigorous course load who makes straight A's has already proven their ability and work ethic, but a less than stellar showing will not harm them as much.

Am I missing something?

Yes, you've missed everything.

You're off the mark with your assumption that the admissions office can't (or doesn't) distinguish between the academic rigor of different schools and school systems. The admissions office has a complete profile of the strengths of different individual schools (not just a system or district) dating back to the beginning of time. We know if a high GPA at one school is the equivalent to another school.

That's good to know.

Can a person apply as an undergrad to W&M or UVA without submitting aptitude scores?

I think no, please correct me if I am wrong.

If I am correct, are W&M and UVA not getting the same research data as JMU or are the flagship academic schools taking a different route than JMU...ask yourselves why?

as someone who has a degree in math.... and works in the testing industry...and a graduate degree in I/O psych....I'd love to see that actual data for this:

"curriculum and grades were the best predictor of success in college"

how did the averages / sample size / r^2 / probability / etc stack up against ACT/SAT?

FOIA! :)

(06-27-2017 10:42 AM)Potomac Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 08:09 AM)PhillyDuke Wrote:  What concerns me even more than this, perhaps, is the policy the university has with certain community colleges, where automatic entrance is granted to students with pre-set academic requirements. Maybe things have changed in the last 20 years when I took a few summer classes at a local CC, but those courses were easy peasy compared to what I would have had to do at JMU.

I know for a fact that even UVA has automatic acceptance through PVCC. I know someone who went to PVCC, had a minimum GPA and certain courses, was automatically accepted as a UVA undergrad for a junior year (excuse me... third year).

correct, that is why they call it guaranteed admission. It is a good deal and a good program. It shouldn't be discounted.

(06-27-2017 11:47 AM)JMU Wrote:  correct, that is why they call it guaranteed admission. It is a good deal and a good program. It shouldn't be discounted.

Yeah. This individual chose to go to CC just to save on tuition costs with student loans, but he was smart enough to easily get into UVA on his own I'm sure.

It's a good alternative option for someone that may not have gotten into the schools they wanted outright and needs to improve their standing.

(06-27-2017 11:51 AM)Potomac Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 11:47 AM)JMU Wrote:  correct, that is why they call it guaranteed admission. It is a good deal and a good program. It shouldn't be discounted.

Yeah. This individual chose to go to CC just to save on tuition costs with student loans, but he was smart enough to easily get into UVA on his own I'm sure.

It's a good alternative option for someone that may not have gotten into the schools they wanted outright and needs to improve their standing.

True and also a good program for those who are not ready or mature enough to go to college right out of HS. Gives them some time to "season".

(06-27-2017 11:45 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  Can a person apply as an undergrad to W&M or UVA without submitting aptitude scores?

I think no, please correct me if I am wrong.

If I am correct, are W&M and UVA not getting the same research data as JMU or are the flagship academic schools taking a different route than JMU...ask yourselves why?

You can submit a letter to the appropriate UVA or W&M office and ask for their take on why they think standardized tests are still appropriate for their school.

JMU has decided for purposes perfectly explained in a rational manner by the VP of admissions why the change has occurred at JMU.

In the end it's a "To each their own" type situation as changes are evaluated. I have no problems with the change, especially as the impact of the change at JMU will be evaluated on a yearly basis. The only thing that is constant in life is change, and in the end it's quite likely UVA and W&M will change too, by dropping (or modifying) the need for a standardized test score.

We may need to keep separate subjects separate...

Admission at W&M/UVA/JMU after completing a 2yr program is not the same subject as incoming freshman not submitting an SAT score.

If W&M and UVA are following the same path as JMU, fine, if JMU is allowing students to take the path of least resistance, we are moving backwards as a university. In this is the case, W&M and UVA are protecting a reputation and JMU is not.

I don't give two ***** what an lifer academic claims as support for watering down a diploma. You are the peer group you keep.

(06-27-2017 11:57 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  We may need to keep separate subjects separate...

Admission at W&M/UVA/JMU after completing a 2yr program is not the same subject as incoming freshman not submitting an SAT score.

If W&M and UVA are following the same path as JMU, fine, if JMU is allowing students to take the path of least resistance, we are moving backwards as a university. In this is the case, W&M and UVA are protecting a reputation and JMU is not.

I don't give two ***** what an lifer academic claims as support for watering down a diploma. You are the peer group you keep.

* a SAT score...whoops, bad test taker here...

(06-27-2017 11:56 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 11:45 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  Can a person apply as an undergrad to W&M or UVA without submitting aptitude scores?

I think no, please correct me if I am wrong.

If I am correct, are W&M and UVA not getting the same research data as JMU or are the flagship academic schools taking a different route than JMU...ask yourselves why?

You can submit a letter to the appropriate UVA or W&M office and ask for their take on why they think standardized tests are still appropriate for their school.

JMU has decided for purposes perfectly explained in a rational manner by the VP of admissions why the change has occurred at JMU.

In the end it's a "To each their own" type situation as changes are evaluated. I have no problems with the change, especially as the impact of the change at JMU will be evaluated on a yearly basis. The only thing that is constant in life is change, and in the end it's quite likely UVA and W&M will change too, by dropping (or modifying) the need for a standardized test score.

UVA already tells applicants that they are looking at strength of transcripts and the grades achieved. SAT scores are important but not as important as the performance achieved over a four or five year period HS curriculum. They will tell you that a one day SAT score may be misrepresenting the student's abilities - good or bad. In the end, they still require it but it has lost some of its importance in the admission process. Maybe a tie breaker kind of thing.

(06-27-2017 11:57 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  We may need to keep separate subjects separate...

Admission at W&M/UVA/JMU after completing a 2yr program is not the same subject as incoming freshman not submitting an SAT score.

If W&M and UVA are following the same path as JMU, fine, if JMU is allowing students to take the path of least resistance, we are moving backwards as a university. In this is the case, W&M and UVA are protecting a reputation and JMU is not.

I don't give two ***** what an lifer academic claims as support for watering down a diploma. You are the peer group you keep.

And exactly how does this change "water down" your diploma?

Admission decisions at JMU have never been solely determined by SAT or ACT scores, and all applicants must meet rigorous college prep standards for Highschool coursework. Your comment regarding "path of least resistance" is laughably ignorant.

(06-27-2017 11:58 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 11:57 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  We may need to keep separate subjects separate...

Admission at W&M/UVA/JMU after completing a 2yr program is not the same subject as incoming freshman not submitting an SAT score.

If W&M and UVA are following the same path as JMU, fine, if JMU is allowing students to take the path of least resistance, we are moving backwards as a university. In this is the case, W&M and UVA are protecting a reputation and JMU is not.

I don't give two ***** what an lifer academic claims as support for watering down a diploma. You are the peer group you keep.

* a SAT score...whoops, bad test taker here...

* "an SAT score" was right

"S" is pronounced "es" which begins with a vowel so you use "an"

(06-27-2017 11:57 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  I don't give two ***** what an lifer academic claims as support for watering down a diploma. You are the peer group you keep.

TOTALLY AGREE

(06-27-2017 11:57 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  We may need to keep separate subjects separate...

Admission at W&M/UVA/JMU after completing a 2yr program is not the same subject as incoming freshman not submitting an SAT score.

If W&M and UVA are following the same path as JMU, fine, if JMU is allowing students to take the path of least resistance, we are moving backwards as a university. In this is the case, W&M and UVA are protecting a reputation and JMU is not.

I don't give two ***** what an lifer academic claims as support for watering down a diploma. You are the peer group you keep.

Agreed. If JMU were not already trending in the wrong direction, I doubt I would see this change as a big deal. But we have been slipping in the US News rankings for years now, and also slipping in competitiveness in admissions as well (we are clearly behind VT now in terms of competitiveness), so you'll have to forgive me for being a bit skeptical as to the motivations here. If our President weren't a diversity attorney, I'd be a little less skeptical as well.

The list of "testing optional" schools from the Washington Post that was posted above did not read to me as a "who's who" of schools an aspiring state-funded "national university" would want to be lumped in with. Basically, with a few rare exceptions it's private liberal arts or religious colleges, and crummy state schools. Our in-state peers on the list include ODU, CNU, MWU, Radford, Hampton and Marymount. Sorry, but that's pathetic company to keep. Reminds me of the schools on the "no COA" letter our esteemed President penned a while back.

It seems to me that JMU, under Alger, has a crisis of confidence.

(As an aside, did anyone notice that ODU is listed as a "National University" on that WaPo list? I wonder what they could possibly have going for them that we don't.)

(06-27-2017 01:12 PM)91Alum Wrote:  (As an aside, did anyone notice that ODU is listed as a "National University" on that WaPo list? I wonder what they could possibly have going for them that we don't.)

ODU has been a national university for decades (at least). It's because they offer the minimum number of docotral degrees that US News looks for. That's it.

why haven't we hit that National U goal yet? Alger has had 5 years.....

(06-27-2017 11:42 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 11:40 AM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 11:38 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 05:18 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  The way this is set up seems to level the playing field for a student from a weaker school/system. If they come from a school with fewer AP and honors courses with straight A's the standardized tests can legitimize them as students. They would take the "option'' of including them. A student from a tough Nova school with a rigorous course load who makes straight A's has already proven their ability and work ethic, but a less than stellar showing will not harm them as much.

Am I missing something?

Yes, you've missed everything.

You're off the mark with your assumption that the admissions office can't (or doesn't) distinguish between the academic rigor of different schools and school systems. The admissions office has a complete profile of the strengths of different individual schools (not just a system or district) dating back to the beginning of time. We know if a high GPA at one school is the equivalent to another school.

You missed his point.

No, sorry, you missed it. My response was on point

Only OP can confirm, but I believe they were saying that SAT scores aren't needed when a high performing student comes from a tough school. SAT scores are helpful when looking at a straight A student from a weak school. A high SAT can help show that they are a qualified applicant that happens to be at a bad school (aka "leveling the playing field"). You mentioning that JMU knows tough and weak schools is true'ish but doesn't contradict what OP stated.

Let me know what I supposedly missed. I'm very interested.

(06-27-2017 01:47 PM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 11:42 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 11:40 AM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 11:38 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 05:18 AM)jmutoml757 Wrote:  The way this is set up seems to level the playing field for a student from a weaker school/system. If they come from a school with fewer AP and honors courses with straight A's the standardized tests can legitimize them as students. They would take the "option'' of including them. A student from a tough Nova school with a rigorous course load who makes straight A's has already proven their ability and work ethic, but a less than stellar showing will not harm them as much.

Am I missing something?

Yes, you've missed everything.

You're off the mark with your assumption that the admissions office can't (or doesn't) distinguish between the academic rigor of different schools and school systems. The admissions office has a complete profile of the strengths of different individual schools (not just a system or district) dating back to the beginning of time. We know if a high GPA at one school is the equivalent to another school.

You missed his point.

No, sorry, you missed it. My response was on point

Only OP can confirm, but I believe they were saying that SAT scores aren't needed when a high performing student comes from a tough school. SAT scores are helpful when looking at a straight A student from a weak school. A high SAT can help show that they are a qualified applicant that happens to be at a bad school (aka "leveling the playing field"). You mentioning that JMU knows tough and weak schools is true'ish but doesn't contradict what OP stated.

Let me know what I supposedly missed. I'm very interested.

Yes, the highlighted statement from your last post is correct. Because JMU can distinguish between the straight A student from a weak school, and an A-B student from a strong school, the weak school student taking the test who does well can help themselves. People on here seem to forget that the test is only optional now. Students from any school are still free to submit their test scores, but it doesn't necessarily hurt them if they don't, and JMU admissions doesn't need them to make admit decisions.