<p>Chessie ... Yours is a fair and good question. Let me respond initially by asking you, others a more appropriate question ...</p>
<p>In all of our decades of hearing, taking, requiring about SATs, ACTs, and the discourse accompanying them, have you EVER seen any published research telling the adoring public about the validity of using these tests in predicting collegiate success? Of course not. There is none. We simply ASSUME because it's pervasively with us, that it's gotta be "true."</p>
<p>And you may be absolutely certain that if there was any substantial evidence, Princeton and Iowa City would be bombarding the media with confirmation of their keen insight and importance to aiding colleges and universities in sorting out and segmenting those outstanding collegiate prospects from their lesser brethren and sisters. </p>
<p>Furthermore you must ask ... why no substantial, widely publicized research findings on something so obviously important? (At least to those candidates and their parents who struggle with them. And the u's that use them to admit, wait list, reject, and remediate deficiencies.)</p>
<p>Well, who does this kind of research? Yep, 2 groups invest heavily in this kind of thing: 1 - the professoriate and 2 - agencies like the SAT, ACT and others that generate huge revenue from their cottage industries.</p>
<p>Now ask yourself: Who would pay either to really learn the answer to your question? If you come up with an answer and some real $$, let us know. </p>
<p>You see, this is one of those PC questions, that those that COULD find the answer about correlation, predictability, etc. ... CANNOT AFFORD to know the answer. Thus there is NO RESEARCH. It's not unlike studying intelligence among the ethnic or racial groups. Doesn't happen, and won't happen. It takes $$ and none will invest in that. </p>
<p>So, back to my origninal premise. Why do so many higher ed institutions continue to use it? Because it gives them a tool that they need not "defend", helps to level playing fields, assists in gatekeeping (especially among the elite, highly selective institutions), can be useful in determining placement (THIS has been shown in research), assists in ranking kids for scholarships and other financial aid, and more. </p>
<p>But it does NOT give any direction about collegiate success. And even more so, it gives zero indication of professional success. With one major exception. What profession might that be, you may wonder?</p>
<p>You got it. The PROFESSORIATE! And why would that be? Because the test is created and evaluated by THE PROFESSORIATE and reflects much of what is important to them. But not to the Navy, to civil engineers, to accountants, to nurses or doctors, and on and on and on. And this too has been substantially researched, i.e. collegiate success (which cannot be predicted based upon SAT success) is no indicator of professional success, unless you want to be a Ph.D and become a professor or researcher.</p>
<p>One footnote: Many college admissions offices have done proprietary research on this issue. They confirm there is virtually no value in predicting collegiate success. Many aside from the most selective, as we are now seeing are discontinuing requiring these exams. But even knowing what they know, there is risk for them. What is that risk? How students and their parents ... like us ... will PERCEIVE them. "What kinda college doesn't require my kid taking the SATs!" For virtually all of the 3,500 colleges and universities (The Carnegie Council has confirmed there are only 30-40 truly selective colleges) perception of prospective students and their parents is EVERYTHING. So they are extremely fearful of doing something so "radical" as eliminating standardized testing for fear of appearing like a trade school, or at least less-than-selective. And rarely, for reasons earlier noted earlier, is this research published or even publishable. It's not done by math or psych professors developing research for refereed journals.</p>
<p>Now one final thought. Your point of being highly useful of predicting those SAT 800 math students from the 300 scoring students is, probably valid. But that's all hypothetical. The USNA and every other selective institution is not measuring students who have 800 or 300. They're measuring students who have 730 or 690 or 640 or 800. It is an ADMISSION tool. Not a predictor of success between the 630 or 800. Both, once admitted have an equal chance of graduating #1. At that point, it's all about other things.</p>
<p>And on the next level, graduating #1 or #1001 in the class is not a general predictor of who's gonna make admiral. </p>
<p>ADMISSIONS does not equal GRADUATION success does not equal PROFESSIONAL success.</p>