Skip to main content

COVID and AP Scores

Every year, The College Board releases summaries of the prior year's AP program.  While I've visualized these before (here and here), I've been unwilling to update the visualizations or do longitudinal analysis, for a couple of reasons:  First, the data are in multiple tables in multiple spreadsheets, and they are so heavily formatted for printing that scraping the data out of them is quite a burden.  Second, of course, is that the scores don't change a lot from one year to the next.

That is, until 2020, when COVID completely turned the world of higher education upside down.  I was interested in seeing how much scores changed from prior years.  As you can see, the changes are interesting, if not completely surprising.

By the way, if you enjoy Higher Ed Data Stories and use it in your work, you can support the web hosting and other costs associated with producing the content by Buying Me A Coffee, here.  If you're a high school teacher or counselor, just ignore and read on for free.

In the past I've been critical of the College Board, and I thought they should have cancelled the tests in 2020, notwithstanding the loss of opportunity it would have meant for thousands of students. And the test results seem to suggest the product in 2020 was not up to snuff.  And, to no one's surprise, the students we thought would be most affected by the pandemic were, in fact, apparently most affected by the pandemic.

A couple of notes about the data: The breakouts of public and private school students are estimates, based on subtracting the public school data from the overall data (the assumption being all schools are either public or private, but not accounting, of course, for home-schooled students, who are most likely in the latter category.)  I've also grouped a few subject exams together (Spanish Literature with Spanish Literature and Culture, and others where there was an apparent name change that may have included some content.)  I used the ethnicity labels College Board supplied, and I kept the awkward ALL CAPS labels on the exams, because well, if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.

And finally, let's remember a lot of things come with race/ethnicity, and school types that are not measured in this data: Income, parental attainment, opportunity, and student investment.  Don't jump to easy conclusions about what you see here. (And send a note to College Board and ask them to provide this data in more granular and detailed formats, so we can show that, too.)

These views are all very straightforward, and don't require a lot of explanation.  The last view, however, does break scores into two chunks: A weighted average of 2017--2019, and 2020, so you can see the comparisons of before and after (during COVID).

As always, let me know what you see here.


Popular posts from this blog

The Highly Rejective Colleges

If you're not following Akil Bello on Twitter, you should be.  His timeline is filled with great insights about standardized testing, and he takes great effort to point out racism (both subtle and not-so-subtle) in higher education, all while throwing in references to the Knicks and his daughter Enid, making the experience interesting, compelling, and sometimes, fun. Recently, he created the term " highly rejective colleges " as a more apt description for what are otherwise called "highly selective colleges."  As I've said before, a college that admits 15% of applicants really has a rejections office, not an admissions office.  The term appears to have taken off on Twitter, and I hope it will stick. So I took a look at the highly rejectives (really, that's all I'm going to call them from now on) and found some interesting patterns in the data. Take a look:  The 1,132 four-year, private colleges and universities with admissions data in IPEDS are incl

Freshman Migration, 1986 to 2020

(Note: I discovered that in IPEDS, Penn State Main Campus now reports with "The Pennsylvania State University" as one system.  So when you'd look at things over time, Penn State would have data until 2018, and then The Penn....etc would show up in 2020.  I found out Penn State main campus still reports its own data on the website, so I went there, and edited the IPEDS data by hand.  So if you noticed that error, it should be corrected now, but I'm not sure what I'll do in years going forward.) Freshman migration to and from the states is always a favorite visualization of mine, both because I find it a compelling and interesting topic, and because I had a few breakthroughs with calculated variables the first time I tried to do it. If you're a loyal reader, you know what this shows: The number of freshman and their movement between the states.  And if you're a loyal viewer and you use this for your work in your business, please consider supporting the costs

Yes, your yield rate is still falling, v 2020

I started doing this post on a regular basis several years ago, in response (if I recall) to a colleague talking about their Board of Trustees Chair insisting that "all we need to do" to bring enrollment back to its former level is to get the yield rate up.   That's the equivalent of saying all you need to do is straighten your drives and cut ten putts from each round, and you'll be a great golfer.  Moreover, it's based on the assumption that a falling yield rate is based on something you're doing or not doing.  The challenge is much larger, and a lot harder to address.  It's not a switch you flip. So we've got this: A look at applications, admits, and enrolls over the last twenty years, and three key ratios that are based on those numbers: Admit rate, or the percentage of applicants offered admission; yield rate, or the percentage of those offered admission who enroll; and the lesser-known draw rate, which is calculated by dividing the yield rate by t