Assorted Afflatuses

I have long held the College Board at least partially responsible for my current situation. After all, it is the College Board who sold me a misleading test prep book that duped me into taking the Mathematics SAT Subject test completely unprepared. The first time I took the test I managed a rather unimpressive 650, or something to that effect. Naturally, I took the test again, which meant I had, at that point, paid the College Board twice to take the test and once for their misleading preparatory materials: certainly more than if I had bought a third-party test prep book and taken the test once. I find it difficult to believe that the College Board actually cares about any facet of my well-being.

But, more than the test prep book incident, I have never entirely understood how I managed to score a five on the calculus BC Advanced Placement test, yet failed to break 700 on the mathematics section of the SAT despite having thrice taken the test. I doubt anyone would — or could — argue that integral calculus is easier than finding the area of two circles.

At the same time, however, I have wondered whether that one small blemish on my otherwise gleaming CV spelled my downfall in the ultra-competitive college admissions race.

So, at my interview yesterday with a University of Chicago admissions officer, I asked about the University's policy vis-à-vis SAT scores in the admissions process. According to her, the University of Chicago does not give students' SAT scores a great deal of weight, which initially allayed my fears.

But, in the ensuing discussion, she also noted that most selective colleges strive to have, as she described it, "the best class ever," in order to maintain their sterling reputation. For obvious reasons, it would be difficult to categorically state that the class of 2011 wrote better essays than the class of 2010. A college would have no trouble, however, in qualifying one class as better than the one before it by citing an increase in average SAT scores.

In other words, some colleges deny admission to highly qualified students simply to ensure their average SAT score continues to rise. Not exactly the most well-reasoned logic. It seems to me that an institution would better attract qualified applicants and maintain its reputation for excellence by citing its students' actual achievements. As my interviewer pointed out, SAT scores are, by and large, terrible predictors of a student's ability to succeed.

Though, perhaps I am deluding myself. I am very bitter.