<p>Just think about it... my generation (I'm a high school junior right now) hypes the PSAT's, SAT's, ACT's, and whatever else like they're determinants of an individual's self worth. On College Confidential, this SAT Prep forum is the fourth most active section. Is the system flawed? It's definitely not alright to screen college applicants by an almost meaningless four-digit number, but at the same time, what other methods of selection can be used? Yes, colleges use GPA, EC's, interviews, etc. to determine acceptance, but it cannot be denied that SAT/ACT scores are important factors in the decisions.
Will my generation ultimately advance society because of this rigorous process or is it a hindrance to free thought and speculation, conforming children's thoughts to the standards of College Board?</p>
<p>Cool story bro</p>
<p>I believe that it is a hindrance. I feel that my fellow peers care more about their stats than what they actually get out of the class (besides the stats of course). Education and the enjoyment of learning takes a back seat to perfect SAT scores and 5’s on AP exams. In turn, the college board produces a generation of students who care more about competing with one another over their statistics and future salaries than making significant advancements in science, technology, art, literature, etc.</p>
<p>Why is it not all right to screen college applicants by a four-digit number?</p>
<p>Seriously, what is it that scares people about things like that so much? "OH I DON’T WANT TO BE REDUCED TO A NUMBER… it’s not like you’re required to have your name legally changed to your Collegeboard identification number and the SAT score you got. The point is to attempt to provide a uniform, objective standard. Would you rather return to the old system, where you get into the best colleges only if you’re friendly with professors there?</p>
<p>To some extent, your scores show your willingness to succeed, your ambition.
Colleges want students who know how to focus on their goals and correctly judge their priorities. They are aware that not all knowledge or understanding of practical subjects is shown through their tests; the more important question is, are you diligent enough to develop that knowledge?</p>
<p>At the very least, the SAT (the only test I am familiar with) doesn’t hinder your free thought. It requires you to have fundamental skills for college. It is necessary to know how to read and write (formally communicate), and solve problems effectively.</p>
<p>seconding amarkov, it’s better to be judged by SAT scores than by whether you know someone important…</p>
<p>I see nothing wrong with the use of standardized testing in college admissions - if anything, I feel that it should be increased. However, the tests themselves need to be reformed (ie harder questions) so as to provide greater accuracy at the highest scores.</p>
<p>I actually agree with noimagination. Though it seems like I am against standardized testing, I am not. I think the tests need to be harder, like the PSAT. 2 or 3 questions seem to make a huge difference in scores (especially on the math), and it shouldn’t be like that. It reminds me of my AP Euro class last year. About 50 students took the class (AP Euro is probably the most popular AP class at my school because it is the first one you can take), and over half of them aced the tests (literal 100%'s). I did pretty well on the tests, but I didn’t always get a perfect score. The questions were pure identification, and extremely easy. No analysis, no complex questions/answers, nothing. Literally, “Who was the founder of the religious sect of Protestantism that we know today as Methodism?” b. John Wesley. No one really believed that I was a viable candidate for a 5 because I didn’t perfect every test. But from day one, I knew that the AP exam would be much harder. Needless to say, while the majority of my class sunk into the sea of mediocrity, I performed very well on the AP exam.</p>
<p>I think the standardized testing is the most objective and most way of testing someone. Honestly, there is nothing really unfair or irrelevant about the questions in the SAT. I know people who didn’t do any prepping and they got 2200-2400. It’s not because they’re geniuses, but because they never slacked off in their math classes and developed the right skills, and throughout their entire lives, they’ve been reading a steady amount of books for fun, developing good grammar and reading skills. Lots of people say SATs are unfair because only the rich can afford prep or books and whatnot. But really, SAT prepping isn’t that necessary. It’s more about not slacking off doing what you’re supposed to do at school. (Except I do admit that the sentence completions are extremely lame)</p>
<p>Sentence completions I always did well on. It was more so finding errors in sentences that gave me problems. Some sentences seem awkwardly worded, but they’ll be correct. For math, I am talking more about how if you miss only 2 or 3 questions, you get a significantly lower score than one who got them all right. I am not a very good test taker; I can answer almost all of the math questions, but when I stress out (I have anxiety issues), I can’t think straight and it wastes time. I am a nervous wreck when it comes to big tests, especially standardized ones. I feel like I perform badly even when I ace tests.</p>