<p>Kids take more AP courses now because more are available. One could argue that at least at some schools, honors level classes from the 1980’s were equivalent to today’s AP classes. The AP exams that existed then were the ones that today are still accepted for credit at the broadest range of colleges - look at how many of the newer exams don’t qualify for credit at many of the top schools.</p>
<p>As for scores going up, that doesn’t mean a thing, because the scores were re-centered, and the tests are different (different, not harder). The tests formats also lend themselves to cramming - learn a formulaic style of writing and you do well on the essay section, for instance.</p>
<p>More opportunities does not equal more intelligent. Are students today more sophisticated than they were back in the day? Yeah, sure. But if the growth in popularity of AoPS tell us one thing about students today, what does “Jersey Shore” or reality programming in general or Rhianna tell us about those same students?</p>
<p>The fact that more people take AP exams is meaningless. An examination of average AP scores on exams that have existed for the last 30-odd years might be worthwhile, but the spread of AP exams could well be linked to many other factors, such as increased demand, increased marketing push by AP Central, etc. </p>
<p>Expectations have changed, dramatically. Intelligence? – Not so dramatically. Teasing out the changes, if there are any, will be complex. And that’s assuming we can agree on a definition of intelligence in the first place, and then on how to measure it.</p>
<p>My children are vastly more aware, more well-read and better-educated than I was at their ages. Does that mean they are more intelligent than I am, or does it mean that I was able to provide them with better opportunities and more information than I had as a child?</p>
<p>You are absolutely correct; I should have phrased my post better. My intent was to say that students today have access to much more information and are more capable at academics than the average student in the 80s or 90s was. Intelligence is of course subjective, but if we define the term “smart” to mean academic know-how, there is no doubt that today’s students are smarter than students from previous decades.</p>
<p>This question is kind of ridiculous. I don’t think any university is going to attempt to make inferences about a person’s character and worth because they took the SAT 3 times, and I don’t think any university will really make any decision regarding which applicant to admit based on whether they made a 2300 in 1 sitting or a 2400 in 3. </p>
<p>Just try to imagine a table of Stanford admissions officers:</p>
<p>“Yes Julia, I see that he has a 2400, but look at his other scores, it took him 3 attempts!”</p>
<p>“But Stephen, a 2400 is a 2400. The fact that this applicant was capable of a perfect score indicates an inherent superiority to that girl with the one-and-done 2300.”</p>
<p>It’s absurd: a difference in test scores that is explainable by simple statistical variation will not be the criterion that a school uses to pick one student over another, as if admissions were some all-play-all tournament of test scores.</p>
<p>The CC testing hysteria (and hive mind, generally) is getting to be downright comical.</p>