Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's because they know what happens behind the scenes. They also know that colleges especially elite ones want to protect their brand. Until one of the Big 3, (Harvard, Yale or Princeton) give up tests they'll be in business. To date no sign that is going to take place.
ETS is based at Princeton. So they're not going anywhere for quite awhile.
I thought that this graf from the original story says it all. SAT scores frequently don't accurately predict college performance. People who believe they do either have an overly rigid view of what constitutes academic excellence, or they they tend to be conservatives unwilling to consider new ways of assessing academic talent, or they're simply race-baiters who cannot view any change in admissions policies at schools without invoking affirmative action and Al Sharpton. (Hey, for these folks Al always makes it into these discussions eventually!)
Temple, which began considering the change nearly a year ago, reviewed experiences at other schools, such as DePaul University in Chicago, which made standardized tests optional in 2011.
The nation's largest Catholic university, DePaul has found that students admitted without ACT scores have performed almost as well as the others. There was only a 0.07 percent difference in GPAs, and nearly the same percentage came back for a second year, said Jon Boeckenstedt, associate vice president for enrollment management and marketing.
That's despite the fact that the two groups of students came in with widely different ACT scores. The group whose scores were not used for admission had scored at about the 49th percentile nationally, compared to the 83d percentile for the others...T
Sometimes it really is mainly about education and finding good students that may have been overlooked with traditional admissions metrics. This is case at moderately selective schools like Temple and some super selective ones, like test-optional Amherst College. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. And ETS will do just fine. High school kids who do test well will still take those tests, while ETS has a plethora of other standardized tests they get into the marketplace,
The only thing the SAT actually still had going for it was that it was reasonably good at assessing a certain type of student - it's a test that rewards cynical thinking, the use of creative endruns around the "right" way to do something, and the ability to think on your feet very quickly. I've had many students (I'm a tutor that specializes in SAT) that have greatly benefited from their SAT scores in terms of admissions because their grades aren't the best, but a high SAT score got them into schools that otherwise would have been out of their reach.
The new changes to the SAT, in my estimation, are the death knell for it. It's now going to be a dumbed-down version of the ACT, which students will go for in spades for the first few years (because they've already been flocking to the ACT since it's more like what they learn in school), but elite universities will start preferring the ACT because it's harder, or eventually develop their own methods of evaluation. The new SAT is pretty much completely irrelevant.
The only thing the SAT actually still had going for it was that it was reasonably good at assessing a certain type of student - it's a test that rewards cynical thinking, the use of creative endruns around the "right" way to do something, and the ability to think on your feet very quickly. I've had many students (I'm a tutor that specializes in SAT) that have greatly benefited from their SAT scores in terms of admissions because their grades aren't the best, but a high SAT score got them into schools that otherwise would have been out of their reach.
The new changes to the SAT, in my estimation, are the death knell for it. It's now going to be a dumbed-down version of the ACT, which students will go for in spades for the first few years (because they've already been flocking to the ACT since it's more like what they learn in school), but elite universities will start preferring the ACT because it's harder, or eventually develop their own methods of evaluation. The new SAT is pretty much completely irrelevant.
They added a writing portion several years back, making the max score from 1600 to 2400 now right? That still has nothing to do with the SAT being dumbed down?
They added a writing portion several years back, making the max score from 1600 to 2400 now right? That still has nothing to do with the SAT being dumbed down?
I'm not sure what you mean - that the addition of the writing section made it dumbed down already? The writing section that was added in 2005 was not new. They simply took the old SAT II Subject Test in Writing (that most colleges at that time already required) and tacked it on to the SAT I, changed the name to New SAT and made kids sit for 4.5 hrs instead of 3, taking it all in one go instead of two separate sittings. They made this move because the UCs were talking about dumping the SAT, and they wanted to keep those customers. Colleges subsequently stopped requiring SAT IIs, and last year or so, for the first time, ACT testtakers outstripped SAT. Lo and behold, new changes announced! It's all about following the money, not about improving the test or more accurately reflecting students.
I'm not sure what you mean - that the addition of the writing section made it dumbed down already? The writing section that was added in 2005 was not new. They simply took the old SAT II Subject Test in Writing (that most colleges at that time already required) and tacked it on to the SAT I, changed the name to New SAT and made kids sit for 4.5 hrs instead of 3, taking it all in one go instead of two separate sittings. They made this move because the UCs were talking about dumping the SAT, and they wanted to keep those customers. Colleges subsequently stopped requiring SAT IIs, and last year or so, for the first time, ACT testtakers outstripped SAT. Lo and behold, new changes announced! It's all about following the money, not about improving the test or more accurately reflecting students.
I meant that the non-writing portion of the SAT was dumbed down, having nothing to do with whether or not the writing portion got added on.
Interesting to hear of why the writing portion got added on though.
I just finished reading, "How Children Succeed" by Paul Tough, and they mention how studies have found that the best predictor of how well students will do in college is their GPA in high school, not SAT or ACT scores. So, perhaps colleges finally realize this and are moving away from those scores.
I just finished reading, "How Children Succeed" by Paul Tough, and they mention how studies have found that the best predictor of how well students will do in college is their GPA in high school, not SAT or ACT scores. So, perhaps colleges finally realize this and are moving away from those scores.
I seriously think that depends on the school. Some gpas are overinflated. My son (chemical engineer) went to University of Washington at St. Louis. His GPA was good, but not great, but his school was so much better than some of the schools other students came from. He tutored kids who were valedictorians who had straight As, but he was only in the top 20% at his school.
Not that these others were exactly unsuccessful, but they were struggling.
I just finished reading, "How Children Succeed" by Paul Tough, and they mention how studies have found that the best predictor of how well students will do in college is their GPA in high school, not SAT or ACT scores. So, perhaps colleges finally realize this and are moving away from those scores.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nana053
I seriously think that depends on the school. Some gpas are overinflated. My son (chemical engineer) went to University of Washington at St. Louis. His GPA was good, but not great, but his school was so much better than some of the schools other students came from. He tutored kids who were valedictorians who had straight As, but he was only in the top 20% at his school.
Not that these others were exactly unsuccessful, but they were struggling.
The SAT is used to compare students who attend a wide array of schools. While the SAT is not the best predictor of how one will do in college it's still a predictor. Someone that scores an 800 on the SAT is going to have a hard time at Harvard, there simply is no way around that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
