<p>Based on the new description, it seems like the essay will be like an AP English analysis essay. And overall the test seems to be more difficult, not easier, or maybe it’s just me</p>
<p>"I feel like the younger students have an advantage now. " What kind of advantage do you think they will have? The other kids they are competing against will also have taken this new, easier, test. Personally, I think it will be a disadvantage for my daughter. We already have 11,138 scores of 800 on CR and 13,316 scores of 800 on math. How many more do we need, and will we have a situation where 800 is such an expectation among applicants to top colleges (it must already be quite common given those numbers) that students who miss even one question can kiss their chances goodbye?</p>
<p>@neuroticparent—
“SAT morphs into ACT. Next up: Farewell to subject tests.”</p>
<p>My first thought when I read about the dumbing down of the content was that there will be a greater emphasis on Subject Tests so as to distinguish an applicant. Do you think that could be an interim effect?</p>
<p>I can’t believe that they are dumbing down the test</p>
<p>I think the stated intention of featuring “founding documents” sounds very strange. You’re not supposed to be familiar with the passages ahead of time, so that’s no big concern, but in this political climate any mention of founding documents sounds suspiciously to me like a play to the tea party; given that the market share they’ve been losing is mainly in the south and midwest, it appears to me that they’re trying to counter a perceived “East-Coast” identification. </p>
<p>MAybe someone could give a list of the “possible” documents… </p>
<p>offtopic, why some people’s avatar like Bouncer’s have bars/?</p>
<p>It will be interesting to see what sorts of shenanigans the test prep industry comes up with, particularly overseas, to help students game the system. If there is a limited universe of possible documents to analyze, then eventually there will be a prep unit on each one, and some list of generalizable observations that people will be capable of making for each document. </p>
<p>The College Board is looking to be fair and egalitarian by redesigning the SAT to ostensibly help low income students and by offering free test prep…BUT… they have chosen ONE company to benefit from all this change: Khan Academy…How UNFAIR is that!!! Welcome back the era of monopolies and capitalism veiled as socialism. Utter hypocrisy!!!</p>
<p>I hear you Jbalakhdar! There is something fishy about this whole change! They want to make the test more like the material taught in the school system but the inherent problem begins within the school systems. The SAT was the one way that students could rise above the inept, lack of or subpar teaching methods and material used in school and self study to master a test that was wonderfully unbiased in its actual material- how can subjective material based on subjective school curriculums be better than a visually clue based test. How does allowing one educator- Khan- access to the material make the test prep world a fairer place- that sounds like those who “have” trying to snow those who don’t… I don’t want to sound like a conspiracy theorist- but nothing is as simple or transparent as it seems. Maybe the IVY league schools should make their own standardized entrance exam as they do in England…All of the articles posted on the NEW sat are vague and confusing. The rhetoric is absolutely political. Why do the kids have to be dragged into this political mess…fire away anyone- I am open to be proven wrong and enlightened…for now frustrated.</p>
<p>YESSSS!!! Exactly. Before the change, if you come from a bad school system you can still even the playing field by studying for the SAT on your own (with easy access to books). After the change, only kids from prep schools will do extremely well on the SAT as they will have been appropriately schooled in the new material. If you come from an inner-city public school - you’re out of luck!</p>
<p>" If you come from an inner-city public school - you’re out of luck!" No, it’s not about wealth. My kid is also out of luck and she will be attending a largely middle class high school. Unfortunately, the curriculum is not aligned to this new SAT. The article mentioned a 3 day long lesson focusing on understanding every single word in one of these historical US government documents. Our kids don’t even read them until they take US gov–in 12th grade, too late for these SAT questions.</p>
<p>They are trying to put the Kaplans and Princeton Reviews of this world out of business. But the only effect will be to give them more business because the test will require way more tutoring on the side as a corrective to the enormous differentials that exist in the quality of high school education.</p>
<p>the irony of all of this- and what all educators already know- is that it is all about motivation not money- I don’t care how many free courses are available- an unmotivated student is an unmotivated student. A rich student who is unmotivated will still be unmotivated after thousands are spent on test prep…so this idea that we can even the playing field is naïve and harmful. </p>
<p>yes… a motivated student, no matter his income level always had a way to access books for free in any library to prep for the SAT. This whole “free prep for the world via Khan Academy” is a red herring. What we really needed was a test that was way less connected to what is taught in schools - a test that can be mastered through sheer determination (not prior knowledge). We already have a way to measure a student’s performance in schools - it’s called the GPA. Now the SAT is going to become another GPA - that’s redundancy. The SAT was a good balance to the school record. It was the only way to differentiate based on effort not income. (Throw a million dollars of tutoring onto a spoiled privileged entitled kid — no improvements will result) Making the test appear to be more fair to all income levels is disingenuous and politically motivated.</p>
<p>Any colleges that look at all parts of the SAT will still look at all parts. The essay portion is not going away, it is optional (I assume more money to take this “optional” test). Also the test prep folks will make a lot more money - They are telling you exactly what documents you need to know and the current HS doesn’t teach these until Senior year (if at all). </p>
<p>@CT1417</p>
<p>I think the Subject Tests will be history very soon. Only a handful of colleges still ask for them. And several top schools - including Yale, Columbia, Dartmouth, Penn and Duke - do not require Subject Tests for students submitting ACTs. </p>
<p>The SAT made changes because it was losing market share to the kinder, gentler ACT. Applicants (maybe not CC types, but everyone else) will continue to shy away from the SAT if it means also having to take Subject Tests.</p>
<p>I am completely perplexed by the direction the College Board is going, and I am wondering if you agree with me Xiggi? I mean why is David Coleman saying the SAT creates “artificial obstacles”? That is like the CEO of Pepsi coming out and saying Pepsi tastes bad. And why are they trying to make the SAT like the ACT? That’s like Pepsi saying they are going to change the flavor so it tastes like Coke. One of the great things about the SAT is that it isn’t the ACT. Having two types of tests gives students the option to choose the test they like the most. I think the College Board might loose a lot of test takers because of this move. In 2016 when they make the changes, I think many students will choose to take the ACT because the 2016 SAT will be much more of a mystery even with Khan offering test prep. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am not sure why you conclude the ACT is a kindler and gentler test, but that could be a matter of personal interpretation. The ACT mostly relies on an increased speed, and as a result a shallower reasoning ability. In my book, the gentler and kinder organization is the one that makes dozens upon dozens officially released tests available to the dedicated student who want to prepare. How many REAL ACT tests are there that were released legally? The differences are quite large. </p>
<p>As far as market share, the content and design of the tests have very little to do with the “success” in landing students. If that were the case, a subpar test that lacked the integrity and deep library of the SAT should never have emerged from the amateurish efforts in Iowa. The success of the tests are directly related to the political efforts to convince the states and colleges to favor one over the over. The ACT has done a masterful job in “gaining” traction by convincing a number of states to make the ACT the de facto test and foot the bill. </p>
<p>As far as the SAT turning into the ACT, I am afraid that people misunderstand that removing the guessing penalties or making the essay optional does NOT immediately equate to the tests becoming a copy of the other. The same could be said about the comments about “dumbing” the test down. It would be a cinch for the SAT to actually make the newer test immensely more difficult in the higher ranges and still maintaining a close to 500 average, </p>
<p>In the end, the changes will amount to a slight evolution versus a complete overhaul. The students who did well after preparing with dedication will continue to do so. The students who do well on tests or were active in competitions will continue to do well. And so will the voracious readers who developed the ability to read critically. </p>
<p>The fact that a few silly SAT words will disappear will have a minuscule impact, if any. And this because such words played a very small part in the final score to anyone who learned to approach the SC and CR with the right strategies. Many of those words were mere window dressing and irrelevant to find the correct answer. </p>
<p>The bottom line is that students should keep on doing what they have been doing in terms of the SAT. The 2016 version might look a bit different, but the core of the testing will remain the same.</p>
<p>I am not sure why people think this change means that the SAT will be “dumbed down.” The SAT people could just make the reading comprehension sections harder, and end up with the same score distribution as at present.</p>
<p>Jumping on the Khan Academy bandwagon is an interesting move by the College Board. It will, however, require a healthy dose of additional support to develop a truly effective library. And, alas, there is little to no financial support to bring a valuable and free SAT preparation course to the masses. To put it mildly, the large donors and foundations are more interested in pushing political agendas and making systemic changes than building a better SAT mousetrap. The original library of videos created by Sal in his closet was appealing, but has remained hopelessly limited as it reflects the technology used. The reality is that there are plenty of much better videos avaiable at no or little cost. Another reality is that most efforts have focused on the low hanging fruit, namely the Math components. Finding help for the Reading sections has been a lot more problematic. And for the good reason that it is quite hard --as the K-12 shows-- to teach reasoning and logic. </p>
<p>All in all, it will be interesting to see what Khan brings to the table, and how much of this selection amounts to mere lip service in the form of throwing a small bones to the rabid crowd. If history is a guide, one should not expect the College Board and ETS to offer preparation that truly helps acing the core of the test. One has only to look at the bulk of the first pages of the Blue Book and the content of the online course to understand that the advice given is superficial and not necessarily helpful to an advanced student. </p>
<p>To be clear, I have no doubt that Sal Khan could develop a truly state of the art program that runs circles around his own earlier version and the rest of the field. It is clear that he understands how to elevate the knowledge of people and help them. The real question will be in terms of limitations imposed by the College Board and the creators of the questions in Princeton. </p>