<p>It is actually not the College Board, but Educational Testing Services that is responsible for the snafu. ETS is contracted to provide testing services for CB. We experienced our own frustration with ETS last year, when they arrived at a test site less than 1 hour before the exam and pronounced the center closed. The test was rescheduled 2 weeks later, when we were to be in Europe. Fortunately an alternate center was just a few miles away, so DD was able to take the test on standby.</p>
<p>It was never clear why the original test center was closed, but it turns out that ETS issues permits for organizations to administer tests prior to conducting any sort of inspection or verification that the site is acceptable. I suspect they receive some sort of fee for granting test site status to an organization, plus they boost the number of locations to host their expensive tests. This tactic of granting test site status sight unseen, then revoking it at a later date is akin to health insurance companies retroactively rescinding policies due to “pre-existing conditions”. ETS has an obligation to verify the acceptability of a location BEFORE they provide their seal of approval. Regardless of what you think of a parent’s reaction to the situation, much of the blame lies with ETS.</p>
<p>The only issue which would remotely be annoying is the fact the retest location is located in Coney Island…which is a bit of a trip for many of the kids…especially via public transit. </p>
<p>Even then, the kids/families can possibly make lemonade out of that moment…by having a beach outing there right after the test to relax/unwind at the end of the test.</p>
<p>Pizza, that’s exactly what everyone is doing. Nobody is doing anything but complaining. Who wouldnt? The NYTimes also picked the story up, because Packer is a well-known school, but no one at the school is going crazy. Your previous post:</p>
<p>“These are the same whiny parents who complain that it’s not faaaaaaaaaair that their little darling only made it into Tufts and Vanderbilt, and not Harvard or Stanford. Spare me.”</p>
<p>You know nothing of the kids and the families involved, and are just making mean remarks. I don’t know why. What do you know to support the idea that parents are complaining that their kids are getting into top 25s instead of ivies. Nothing. You are making it up.</p>
<p>Nowadays our society is excusing too much mediocrity of performance, with rationalizations that place the burden on the victims, not the perpetrators. The victims must have the proper attitude about the wrong done to them and their inconvenience, putting into perspective. They must remember that it is not a big deal in the grad scheme of life and no one died, after all. That’s all well and good, but companies that deal with the public and essentially have a monopoly on a product people need, have an obligation to do their job very, very well. Claims of emotional trauma are absurd, but I am sure quite a few students and their parents will now have to miss graduations, confirmations, and various other spring events because of this mess-up. Someone should take responsibility, make amends right now, and make changes for the future.</p>
<p>Every student who takes the SAT has a vested interest in test security. Full stop. “Numerous infractions” were found, according to news reports. We cannot assume that the errors were harmless.</p>
<p>It’s an opportunity to teach young adults resilience. They are not “victims.” They should not be suffering “emotional devastation” over the Packard School’s errors. </p>
<p>If Valerie Frankel’s daughter has already taken the SAT three times, she already has scores to include on her college application. The SAT will be administered twice before the end of the year, so if the makeup date is inconvenient, another date will be more convenient.</p>
<p>I agree. Other than the hardship of getting to the testing center the kids only lose a Saturday morning. There I no “emotional devastation.” If they were ready on one day, then they’ll be ready a week or so later. If it were my kiddo affected I would say “Oh I’m so sorry you have to do this again, but these things happen. Look at the bright side, you might do better taking it again than you did at the original sitting.” It’s parents who have too much vested energy and suffer “emotional devastation.” I also suspect it’s many times the parents who are pushing the multiple practice tests and 3-4 sittings of this test…I would imagine all but a tiny fraction of those kids really have that much emotional investment on this one piece of the applications pie. It’s a good thing SAT is cracking now…they needed to crack down on testing conditions/security etc. And they are a huge organization generating tons of $$…they live at a macro level not at the “kid” level. They have the same problem the Big 3 automakers did when they lost quality…even when they gained the quality back in their manufacturing it took decades to regain confidence in the organization…College Board has been teetering on the quality/cost issue for a few years now. It will take awhile for them to get their s*it back together.</p>
<p>The main issue would be if students had scheduled around the original test date known months in advance, and the short notice make-up test date conflicts with something else important to the student (family trip to great grandma’s 100th birthday, school sports league championship game, etc.). It may not be that big a deal now when there are several other opportunities to take the SAT before college application deadlines (though any test fees should be refunded or a free sign-up for a future test date given if the student cannot take the test on the short notice make-up test date).</p>
<p>But it does mean that taking the SAT on the latest possible date before college application deadlines can be more troublesome if something like this occurs.</p>
<p>That is the correct appraisal. The College Board is FINALLY showing the desire to take a small tidbit of control. Let’s hope they push it even further with a no-prisoner attitude by prohibiting schools with repeated offenses to administer the tests. </p>
<p>As almost always, the weakest link of the entire college admission process is found right there … in the midst of the four corners of the school. That is where changes are most warranted. </p>
<p>Now, if ETS/TCB could clean up their huge mess abroad! But that is an impossible task that will solely be addressed by stopping to pretend those tests have much validity or integrity.</p>
<p>C’mon, as far as I’m concerned, the buck stops here. You can blame the individual schools all you want, but either there’s quality control or there isn’t. If there isn’t, that’s on ETS. And if ETS then sees the need to randomly “spot check” test administrations and throw out scores for violations that experienced test takers describe as “common,” then I’m blaming ETS and not the schools.</p>
<p>I have been surprised to find that getting from point A to point B in Brooklyn is not always as straightforward as one might hope, but this bit of hyperbole has me scratching my head. Unless I’m missing something … Is it that difficult to get to the F train? </p>
<p>Anyone who allowed (encouraged, possibly?) her kid to take the SAT nine times (counting six mock tests!) has a lot of nerve talking about the how the College Board is torturing kids.</p>
<p>The “experienced test takers” would be implicating themselves, were they to have admitted to anything shady. </p>
<p>After looking at the College Board’s site, schools sign up to be test centers. They accept the obligation to follow the rules. As the College Board isn’t specifying the violation(s), we really shouldn’t imagine that the test takers know all the testing protocols. </p>
<p>Were the tests properly stored?
Were there enough proctors?
Were all electronic devices properly stored?
Did kids exchange answers in the bathroom?
Did kids go back to earlier sections on the test?</p>
<p>After the Long Island cheating incidents, the College Board must tighten up standards. It could well be that the school’s implementation of testing policies were fine last year–but don’t pass muster this year.</p>
<p>As test centers are schools before and after testing dates, it’s not possible to inspect every center on the morning of the test. (Consider how much MORE expensive the SAT could become, if each test center needed its own inspector.) ETS is relying upon the school’s integrity. They’re also relying on the fact that throwing out an entire test center’s scores is a huge black eye for the school.</p>
<p>Blaming ETS for what? For doing the job they are supposed to do, and stop trusting the people who have repeatedly shown to simply going through the motion. </p>
<p>Rather than complaining, we should applaud that somebody has finally decided to hit the problem exactly where it exists.</p>
<p>There is nothing wrong with having your son or daughter do nine practice tests in advance of the SAT. That’s the best way to practice and the best way to get better. See what you struggle with, learn how to attack it, and improve your scores.</p>
<p>The SAT is certainly not an IQ test and it is certainly not a perfect measure of a student’s college readiness. But, it’s a legit measure of a students ability to reason and read and prepare - all skills that prove important in the real world.</p>
<p>Yes, it’s a stressful (overly so) experience for many, but if they got rid of the SAT and ACT then each school would have its own entrance exam and then things would get really ugly.</p>
<p>Look, LearningEdge, Frankel can have her kid take as many actual and mock SAT tests as she wants. So can anyone else. But it’s kinda silly for her to act as if one additional sitting amounts to “torture” inflicted by the “evil” College Board. Oh, but wait. I forgot. The kid has to go to Coney Island for this one. The horror!</p>
<p>No one said anything about getting rid of the SAT or ACT.</p>
<p>Standardized tests do serve (not always well, though) the useful purpose of checking against too much watering down of high school curricula and high school grade inflation. If US high schools maintained consistent high standards (so that a specific grade in a specific course at one high school meant the same thing as the same grade in the same course at another high school), then standardized testing would not be needed for university admissions. Canada somehow manages to do that (Canadian universities do not require standardized tests for those in Canadian high schools, but do require them for students in US high schools).</p>
<p>First of all, I know the author so don’t be so snide, she’s a perfectly nice person and so is her kid. They are living, breathing human beings. It’s so easy to be nasty to people on the Internet. Getting to a spot in Coney Island can be a pain, especially if you don’t have a car, which many city dwellers don’t. Yes you can take a subway but then you might have to schlep to a bus or walk in a seedy area, and doing that at 6:30 in the am kinda sucks. No, it won’t kill anyone. Yes, we all deal with inconveniences. It only sounds like its a federal case because her annoyance has been published. Some of you have to stop being so incredibly judgemental. I am 100 percent sure you would all complain if this happened to you.</p>
<p>And who wants to spend an extra weekend day taking the SAT again in May, when you never did anything wrong in the first place? The kids are being punished for the adults’ mistakes. And yes, taking the SAT again on a weekend morning IS a punishment.</p>
<p>Redpoint, of course we get that the writer is a real person. I trust that she’s a nice person. I for one have not said a thing about her that I wouldn’t say to a friend. In particular, I would chide anyone who would use the words “emotional devastation” in connection with anything having to do with the SAT test. Yes, I would be irritated if this happened to my child. I don’t know that I would consider it blogworthy. Or call the College Board “evil.”</p>