Boston Globe: SAT's losing its clout as an admissions factor

Applying to College
1

<p>
[quote]
The SAT (formerly known as the Scholastic Aptitude Test and Scholastic Assessment Test), that longtime teenage bugaboo and pillar of the college admissions process, is under heavy assault on several fronts.</p>

<p>Earlier this year, Smith College and Wake Forest University decided to drop the standardized test as a requirement for admission. The colleges, two of the most highly touted schools to take the step, cited studies that the test favors wealthier students, and voiced growing concern that SAT results are not valid predictors of college success.</p>

<p>This fall, the country's leading college admissions group, led by Harvard's admissions dean, urged colleges to downplay test results in their acceptance decisions and to consider ending the SAT requirement. Coming after a year of study, the National Association for College Admission Counseling's report marked the most far-reaching critique of the role of the controversial test thus far and has rekindled the long-running clash over the proper use of the test in admissions.</p>

<p>At the same time, a new College Board policy that allows students to show colleges only their best scores drew criticism that it would mainly help wealthy students who could boost their scores with high-priced tutoring.</p>

<p>People who believe colleges place too much weight on test results say the renewed scrutiny could mark a tipping point in the debate.

[/quote]

Once-mighty</a> SAT losing its clout - The Boston Globe</p>

2

<p>Yaaaaaaaaaaaay!</p>

3

<p>One week it's this, another week the NYTImes has an article how higher SAT standards increased SUNY graduation rates....</p>

<p>on another note though, not sure IMO I agree with the following:</p>

<p>"But David Hawkins, director of public policy and research for the National Association for College Admission Counseling, said high school grades are more accurate than they used to be, making the SAT, once seen as a way to "find jewels in the rough," less valuable."</p>

<p>High school grades are more accurate? In what lifetime is grade inflation where one could have close to a 4.0UW and not be in the top 10% of a class accurate...?
Unfortuntely, until HS grades are TRULY accurate, the SAT/ACT is the only common factor...and that, too is a problem....</p>

4

<p>Dammit! The only objective measure of academic ability gone! :(</p>

5

<p>^^ It isn't gone yet. Test critics have been reporting the impending death of the SAT for decades now. I'll believe it when I see it.</p>

6

<p>We have severe grade deflation at our school, I was sort of hoping standardized tests would help :(</p>

<p>Although I'm basically at a pretty good disadvantage (immigrant, first generation college student, don't speak english at home, low-income, not-white) according to the data, I still test pretty well.</p>

7

<p>Its the only test which is unifrom worldwide. Bad decision to remove it</p>

8

<p>Do the NYTimes companies (includes Globe) have nothing better to do than make up stories to fill columns?</p>

<p>At least they add the data that refutes their own headline. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Yet Harvard "could never be SAT-optional," he said

[/quote]
</p>

9

<p>I agree with Rodney and bluebayou. These articles pop up and make some bold, sweeping statement that have very little basis in reality. And they frequently contradict themselves.</p>

10

<p>I heard academics is most important in admission, but SAT is the last consideration in academics. It's the last of the most important and then ECs, essays follow. So, SAT is considered in light of situations/grades/recommendations, etc. It's a predictor, so they say high grades/low SAT and low grades/high SAT people should still apply to top schools. Though, I think high grades/low SAT people are slightly more disadvantaged. SAT still does matter.</p>

11

<p>WHOOO! DOWN WITH THE SAT!!!</p>

<p>LoL. That said, I don't think it should be done away with altogether, because it can help fill in the gaps in cases of a high school that is not very well known, or it can help out someone who, due to some circumstance or another, doesn't have the best grades, but has a decent SAT score.</p>

<p>However, I still think it should be weighed far less than it is now. It is nice to have such an "objective" factor in admissions, but at the same time, I think we can all agree on the relative merits that it has -- not too terribly much, to say the least.</p>

12

<p>Thanks to bluebayou for already pointing out the part of the story that puts the lie to the headline: </p>

<p>


</p>

<p>I also note the correction at the end of the story: </p>

<p>


</p>

<p>The simple fact is that the great majority of colleges that have ever been selective at all continue to use an entrance test (either the SAT or the ACT) as one basis for evaluating applicants for admission. Most colleges that are listed as SAT-optional might just as well be described as high-school-grades-optional or college-preparatory-courses-optional, because they admit nearly everyone who applies. This article looks more like wishful thinking than careful, nuanced journalism. When a student getting ready for college is described this way, </p>

<p>


</p>

<p>one question a careful reporter might ask is how four years of work at a selective high school could result in only "so-so performance" on the SAT, which is a test of reading, writing, and secondary school mathematics? A student whose hard work in school includes thinking about how all the subjects fit together and what they mean after high school should be able to expect a reasonably competitive SAT score. </p>

<p>P.S. What Tufts is doing in revising its admission process is rather different. It is actually giving students MORE tests as part of the admissions process, but they are differently designed tests, designed based on the research of psychologist Robert Sternberg. I heard him give a speech about his efforts at Tufts last year. It's one thing to say that the SAT is an imperfect test--he and I would both say that--but it's another thing to say that trusting high school grades alone from the thousands of different high schools around the world produces better admission results than having some standardized test for all applicants at a truly selective college.</p>

13

<p>Too bad its not happening for class of 09.</p>

14

<p>I wonder why they didnt talk about schools like Bowdoin that haven't required scores for a long time now</p>

15

<p>"Most colleges that are listed as SAT-optional might just as well be described as high-school-grades-optional or college-preparatory-courses-optional, because they admit nearly everyone who applies"</p>

<p>If only that were true.....not sure that rash generalization would apply to Smith, Wake Forest, or even Muhlenberg.....</p>

16

<p>These same cookie-cutter stories keep popping up over and over again. Sat optional...blah blah blah...Wake Forest...blah blah blah. So one top 30 National University dropped the requirement (with possibly questionable intentions mind you...) and these stories keep appearing over and over again about how the SAT is losing it. The rest of the top schools in the country still use the SAT and considering the high score ranges, the test is very much in play.</p>

<p>And lol at the Harvard dean trying to downplay the SAT considering Harvard's 50% range is ~2100-2380, coincidence?</p>

17

<p>Smith: </p>

<p>College</a> Search - Smith College - At a Glance </p>

<pre><code>* 63% in top 10th of graduating class
* 92% in top quarter of graduating class
* 100% in top half of graduating class

  • 51% had h.s. GPA of 3.75 and higher
  • 32% had h.s. GPA between 3.5 and 3.74
  • 12% had h.s. GPA between 3.25 and 3.49
  • 4% had h.s. GPA between 3.0 and 3.24
  • 1% had h.s. GPA between 2.5 and 2.99 </code></pre>

<p>Wake Forest: </p>

<p>College</a> Search - Wake Forest University - Wake Forest - At a Glance </p>

<pre><code>* 64% in top 10th of graduating class
* 91% in top quarter of graduating class
* 99% in top half of graduating class
</code></pre>

<p>(Grade averages not reported. Percentage of students who submitted a class rank not reported.) </p>

<p>Muhlenberg: </p>

<p>College</a> Search - Muhlenberg College - Berg - At a Glance </p>

<pre><code>* 47% in top 10th of graduating class
* 80% in top quarter of graduating class
* 98% in top half of graduating class

  • 17% had h.s. GPA of 3.75 and higher
  • 23% had h.s. GPA between 3.5 and 3.74
  • 25% had h.s. GPA between 3.25 and 3.49
  • 15% had h.s. GPA between 3.0 and 3.24
  • 17% had h.s. GPA between 2.5 and 2.99
  • 3% had h.s. GPA between 2.0 and 2.49 </code></pre>

<p>I agree, by the way, rodney, that these are among the more selective of the colleges that have announced an SAT-optional admissions policy. But organizations that decry the SAT unabashedly list such colleges as </p>

<p>Academy College (Bloomington, Minnesota), a proprietary trade school; </p>

<p>DeVry University (various locations), ditto; </p>

<p>a variety of Bible colleges where religious affiliation is the chief admission criterion; </p>

<p>a variety of community colleges and four-year colleges with long-standing explicit open-admission policies; </p>

<p>ITT Technical Institute (various locations), yet another proprietary trade school; </p>

<p>and many other colleges for which the chief criteria for admission are the proverbial "a heartbeat and a check." </p>

<p>That's why I said that MOST SAT-optional colleges are also optional as to all other admission criteria employed by genuinely selective institutions of higher academic education.</p>

18

<p>I really hope this doesn't happen soon because I have a lowish GPA (3.7) but test very very very well, this could ruin my chances.</p>

19

<p>The SAT does have its problems in that wealthy students have something of an advantage. They can get tutors, but tutors can only help your score so much. It's more significant that wealthy students can take the test multiple times. Some people improve their scores quite a bit by taking the test again. (Statistically, many don't improve that much, but hey, mine jumped over a hundred points the second time I took it, and I didn't study...there's something to be said for different versions of the test, different days, different locations, maybe getting used to the timing.)
Perhaps the number of times one can take the test should be limited.</p>

<p>Yet the SAT is objective. A right answer is a right answer (excluding the essay, which is too subjective/pointless and should be abolished) no matter what high school you go to. That's what's most important about the test. But there are still a few problems...time is a big one. I imagine that for a lot of people who do poorly, time is the issue. It introduces too much pressure. Obviously you can't have a test go on for a whole day but it would be nice to relax some of the constraints--for example, someone like me who finishes all the reading sections ten minutes early could just go on to a math section, where he or she needs a lot more time to complete the questions. Instead of rigidly structuring each little section of the test, put them in groups of three or four and give the students a chunk of time to complete all of them, kind of like the essays on AP exams, where you have to structure your own time. Something like that.</p>

20

<p>among Ivy league schools, it's gaining clout. they need a way to sort through high numbers of applicants and scores are helpful.</p>