@Alumon I agree that the AP exams and Subject Tests are the true tests of specific subject knowledge, but I think even more so than the regular standardized tests, those students that live in higher socioeconomic communities have an unfair advantage with those tests because they could be held back by having a really bad teacher, and typically, the stronger teachers are in the stronger schools.
You are completely right though…the schools with grade inflation are giving A’s out in AP classes where students can barely get 3’s on tests. And get 500’s or lower on the subject tests.
But I do think a lot of the top schools agree with you and either require or, as of more recently like Penn “recomomend” them. But let’s face it, if you have no hook and you apply to Penn without subject tests, you are really shooting yourself in the foot.
Georgetown, where my daughter happens to be starting at next week as a freshman, still requires (or maybe now “strongly recommends”) three subject tests. My daughter really had to teach herself the material from the test prep books she bought on her own because our schools really didn’t prepare her well. I used to think Georgetown should lighten up on the subject test requirement, but after going through the application process with my daughter I actually respect them for maintaining the requirement. Their rationale is that they don’t want to be flooded with applications by students that are just applying to as many top schools as possible…they want to keep their applications down to those that are truly interested in the school. At a time when many schools are making it easier to apply in an attempt to make their stats look better, Georgetown is resisting this temptation and keeping their standards high.
And, for what it’s worth, I think if two otherwise equal candidates are applying to the same elite schools, the one that submits higher subject tests and AP scores (especially the subject tests because not everyone sends their AP scores), the person with the higher subject tests has the advantage, for sure.
Do you think that a new method of teacher evaluations and a universal grading scale should be implemented, then, in order to maintain consistency in terms of GPA?
That might be a good solution.But the scale may not be the issue…I think the whole process if just so subjective, and probably needs to be. That’s why we have these standardized tests, I suppose, to begin with.
I think students are just getting too psycho about grades, and the teachers grade easier to avoid rebellion.
I recently read Alexandra Robbins’ book “Overachievers” and it told stories about students going to teachers and asking for their grades to be bumped up to an A. I was appalled.
This is going too far. We just need to re-adjust how we view success in the classroom
@collegemomjam Hey I’ll be a freshman at Georgetown next week too! Actually, I’m currently looking up lists of things I need to pack. Congratulations to your daughter, this is so exciting- I know I personally could not be more eager to be on the Hilltop!
It is insane and we are causing these kids a lot of stress. I’m not sure how we can turn that around. I have three teenagers that are stressed about grades, getting in to college, and keeping grades up in college so that they have good career prospects. It’s not even about being the “best”…it’s about just doing enough so that they have career options so that they can one day support themselves.
I don’t want to take this thread in the wrong direction. I just know in my community a lot of the fuss is about just making opportunities for themselves, not because all of these kids all want to get into Harvard. But I think @Otter517 you are right that things are going too far.
FInland is a predominantly white country of @ 5 million people, no real military, average maternal age of over 25, and 53% taxation, social safety nets, educated majority, unemployment rate over over 8%. Pick a nice white rich state in the northeast and then compare,but only when you exclude lower SES and minority numbers. It is as much about what happens before school, before birth, as anything. It is completely incomparable to a country like the USA
I never said anything about Finland’s other aspects; I was only talking about their education system. Sure, I understand that you believe Finland is incomparable as a country to the US, but that is a totally different argument than disagreeing about the quality of Finland’s education system.
This article squares up to my gut check that I experienced this past admission season. My son had a weighted GPA of just over 4.0. To my old time thinking, this was great! But to my surprise, my son was only average. He did not qualify for the higher end scholarships. There was a whole sea of kids who had much higher GPA’s. It was quite an eye opener.
I think @Alumon raises a good point about Finland. We all know there are differences between all countries and that there is probably no apples to apples comparison to any country. But there is no denying that we could make some changes to improve our educational system (regardless of what that would do to our traditional grading system which seems to be inflated). Just like we can improve our health care and other things. There are always ways to improve and looking at a country like Finland might help us fix some of our own problems.
The poor and minorities have, on average, lower standardized test scores, hence the objection towards it. That being said, it is one of the few objective measures out there, and unfortunately if a student can have a better quality of education, they will inevitably score higher on a single standard applied to everyone. I feel like this is the same anywhere across the board - the wealthier you are the higher chance you have to succeed.
If there are tests of intrinsic ability - say something like admissions test for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge instead, it could potentially better control for class/race differences. Even then, if a student is wealthy, goes to a top private school and is nurtured in critical thinking and testtaking, they’ll still do better.
I also want to note that poor childhood nutrition and education could affect IQ scores, which could in turn affect standardized test performance.
Of course, we can get rid of standardized tests. Then of course, we have as the article states, grade inflation. How can an admissions officer tell an A from one school to another? Some schools are deflated, others inflated.
There is really no good solution that works for everyone. You can either have a single standard that inevitably benefits the rich because of better opportunities+schooling or remove any semblance of objectivity from college admissions.
We can spend hours talking about hypotheticals, and sure, there might be a solution down the line. What I stated, and what I’m trying to state is that as things currently stand, standardized tests are the only objective measure available to colleges, but many complain about the test being unfair to the poor and minorities. As things CURRENTLY stand, unless we can fill two mutually exclusive demands (with basically all standardized tests hurting the poor and minorities), we will never have a solution for all stakeholders in this issue.
There is data showing that colleges take lower score ranges for certain racial / ethnic groups than other groups.
The test is fair and objective. Anyone who wants to do better can use a variety of free resources, which are just as good as those you pay for (ie, Khan Academy or self-studying from SAT book vs. attending a prep class).