Hey, hey, ho ho, the SAT has got to go!

Parents Forum
1

<p>Will the jig ever be up?</p>

<p>I earned a lot of brownie points from the SAT and GRE, and I was a National Merit Finalist. In fact, both exams grossly overpredicted my future academic performance, so you could say I got a good shake from them. As an applicant, I liked the brownie points from these exams.</p>

<p>But these exams have very little to do with high school, college, or graduate work. I have yet to meet a person who majors in Standardized Test Taking or works as a Standardized Test Taker. The Princeton Review books and the real practice exams were very effective in boosting my scores but had nothing to do with helping me in the studies they were prerequisites for.</p>

<p>The SAT I, ACT, and GRE exams send a negative message to students - that gaming the system is more important than learning. There is something seriously wrong with a system in which memorizing a few hundred vocabulary words and taking practice exams is a far more efficient way to earn brownie points than actual learning is.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, standardized testing is trickling down, as the K-12 educational system is putting MORE emphasis on standardized tests. It isn't just the top students who have to worry about standardized test scores - all the other students, the teachers, the principals, and the school districts now have to worry too. Students are threatened with the prospect of not graduating, the people working for the school are threatened with the prospect of being fired, and the districts are threatened with the prospects of funding cuts or even termination.</p>

<p>What's happening is that more and more schools spend more and more time teaching to the test. This can only dumb down the students in the long run, as anything not on the test is blown off. It also discourages teachers. I personally know an individual who used to teach Spanish at a junior high school in Richmond, VA. Students, parents, and the school kept blowing her off because everyone was obsessed with the mandatory SOL exam, and Spanish wasn't on it. As a result, she quit teaching.</p>

<p>In the Soviet Union, the workers had the saying, "We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us." The motto of our educational system is becoming one of "We pretend to learn, and they pretend to teach us."</p>

<p>When I was a K-12 student in the 1980s and early 1990s, we did have standardized tests, but the teachers and principals weren't fixated on them. The test results were used to supplement grades in deciding how to place us. You might call me an old coot, but people did get educated in those days. And no, we didn't walk 6 miles in the ice and snow to go to a one-room schoolhouse. Yes, the USA had 50 states. (Admittedly, there weren't as many nations.)</p>

2

<p>Bowdoin and Bates eliminated their SAT I requirement years and years ago. Everyone there is STILL waiting for the sky to fall.</p>

<p>For those of you who haven't read the book <em>None Of the Above: Behind the Myth of Scholastic Aptitude</em>, the ETS is the rich corporation that makes the SAT. All those fees are used to pay the executives exorbitant salaries and maintain lavish corporate perks like a golf course and tennis courts.</p>

3

<p>In the LA Times this weekend was an article about the ease of gaming the new writing portion of the SAT2.</p>

4

<p>Amen, but can you really suggest to all these desperate teachers (and lawmakers, and everyone else) that a standardized exam against which ALL students may be compared needs to go away?</p>

<p>When I was in elementary school, I lived in Texas. The elementary school progress is ruled by the TAAS test (or at least was when I was there), which was very similar to the CAT-9/Stanford exam in California. Thing is, despite taking this test and feeling that the teachers were always teaching to the test, when I moved to California I was three years ahead.</p>

<p>My experience tells me that it isn't standardized tests that are the culprit so much as a combination of many things, such as what is expected on the test as well as the unnecessary emphasis on scoring well. For example, if every child needs to pass the exam to graduate from high school (as with California's new and terribly bad CAHSEE exit exam), the result is that lawmakers dumb down the test instead of expecting that maybe all students aren't fit to leave high school and not everyone should pass the exam with flying colors.</p>

<p>To me -- with the CAHSEE particularly but also including the TAAS, the SAT, the ACT, and so on -- standardized testing is treating the symptom (low graduation rates, students not being 'prepared' for life after the compulsory school system) by regressing themselves to an impossibly low standard. </p>

<p>I believe standardized testing has its place in the educational system, but I do NOT believe it deserves such a lofty one. Your experience, jhsu, illustrates just that: the SAT and GRE had nothing to do with your eventual successes.</p>

5

<p>Ho, ho, ho, look at the new troll go! </p>

<p>JHSU, could I possibly suggest to spend a bit more time on researching your subjects than on sharpening your axe.</p>

6

<p>jhsu:</p>

<p>You may be right. Okay we eliminate SAT then what. How do you compare kids from a school where the top kid only score 3.5-3.6 out of 4.0 GPA? Only one kid score an A and most other class score B on the exam but when the AP comes even the C students score 5. Should we abolish the APs too? Kids score 4.0 and still score 750-760 on SAT II and 4 on APs. So how college select the kids. Could you please tell me? </p>

<p>Before you make college selection more subjective tell me you’re to compare the kids across the high schools with grade inflation rampant in high schools. Thanks</p>

7

<p>JHSU, I partially agree with you. I taught the SAT a number of years ago. I have seen a lot of top scorers not live up to their scores and some mediocre scoring folks do well. In fact, there was a large number of unexpected differences. Part of the reason is simply the timed nature of the test. There are a lot of thoughful kids that simply needed more time to finish. I know of two kids who could have easily scored in the high 700s on both parts if they were given a little more time.</p>

<p>However, we do need some type of test to compare people among high schools. I would suggest more of an ACT type of test than an SAT and only if there is enough time for most people to easily complete the test.</p>

<p>I think a writing section is crucial too. However, I would NOT have the testing board grade the writing. Instead, I would have the essay sent to the colleges! Let the admission's committee review the essay. This would eliminate any subjectivity in scoring and allow for creativity in writing.</p>

8

<p>"I would NOT have the testing board grade the writing. Instead, I would have the essay sent to the colleges! Let the admission's committee review the essay. This would eliminate any subjectivity in scoring and allow for creativity in writing."</p>

<p>Excellent idea. Prep school see the essays through SSAT. It will eleiminate any editing done by outside party and make it same for everyone.</p>

9

<p>"There are a lot of thoughful kids that simply needed more time to finish. I know of two kids who could have easily scored in the high 700s on both parts if they were given a little more time.
However, we do need some type of test to compare people among high schools. I would suggest more of an ACT type of test than an SAT and only if there is enough time for most people to easily complete the test."</p>

<p>The limited amount of time is the ... essence of the SAT. Why do you think a great number of people from tony zipcodes flock to AFF charlatans? The SAT is a very simple test that is made difficult by the time constraints. </p>

<p>There is no need to suggest more of an ACT type; the ACT exists with all its qualities and deficiencies. I happen to believe that the ACT is not such a great alternative. If people prefer the ACT format, then nothing precludes them to take it ... as many times as they wish. </p>

<p>I really do not understand the need for some to attack the SAT. It is what it is: an imperfect test that it is still the best we have. It is imperfect because it can't be perfect. The test is supposed to separate students at the extreme ends of the bell curve while maintaining an average of 500 for middle america. With the changing environment of US high schools and the availability of prep material, it seems a tall order to fill 7 times a year. </p>

<p>On the issue of discontentment, why don't you reserve some of the ire for the SAT subject tests. One of the most touted test is the SAT-IIC. In reality, the test is more or less a test of one's mastery of a graphic calculator. Then you have Chinese and Korean tests that test first to third grade language proficiency. </p>

<p>Lastly, for the verbal, I recommend to change the verbal component by offering the choice of completing the NY Times crossword puzzle!</p>

10

<p>Xiggi notes, "
The limited amount of time is the ... essence of the SAT. Why do you think a great number of people from tony zipcodes flock to AFF charlatans? The SAT is a very simple test that is made difficult by the time constraints. </p>

<p>There is no need to suggest more of an ACT type; the ACT exists with all its qualities and deficiencies. I happen to believe that the ACT is not such a great alternative. If people prefer the ACT format, then nothing precludes them to take it ... as many times as they wish. </p>

<p>I really do not understand the need for some to attack the SAT. It is what it is: an imperfect test that it is still the best we have."</p>

<hr>

<p>Response: sorry Xiggi, I don't agree for many reasons. If a test in imperfect, there is nothing wrong with trying to make it better! Your reasoning, which is to allow an imperfect test to stay imperfect, eludes me. Life is all about improvement and advancement.</p>

<p>Yes, there is a need for ACT type of test if the SAT is imperfect. At least the ACT covers things that kids should have learned in school.</p>

<p>Also, the SAT is NOT a simple test. WE disagree here too. There is no reason to make a test tougher based on timeliness, how long the bladder can withstand lacking a bathroom break, color of walls etc. If your point is to make the SAT tougher but allow for enough time to complete the test then I can't agrue that point. </p>

<p>My point: only legitimate criteria should be considered in standardized testing and not irrelevant information such as strict time, bladder control etc. that have nothing to do with academic performance!</p>

11

<p>Personally, I would base admissions ONLY on standardized tests. The tests may be far from perfect, but they are closer to perfect than the subjective alternatives. The reason for the seemingly random admission decisions is the subjective element in evaluating essays and ECs.</p>

<p>ECs in particular need to go. Kids should be able to be kids and enjoy themselves. Colleges would have teenagers spending all their time crying for the poor or fighting each other for "leadership" positions. Why are teen suicide rates up? Could it have anything to do with everyone always telling teens, who have very little power to do anything about it, that they need to be worried about every injustice, about those living in corrupt countries etc..? Having responsibility with no power is a miserable feeling. </p>

<p>ECs and essays are, in my opinion, simply ways to give admissions folks the ability to discriminate in favor of people with certain values. It is used to reduce diversity by reducing the number of students with values different than those of the admissions office. To the average admissions office diversity just means different skin color. Different values are not welcome.</p>

<p>The values they want are the values they believe get the best publicity, and therefore money, for the university. In a nazi environment they will want good facists, in a communist environment they will want good communists - none of it has anything to do with education.</p>

12

<p>I think that there is nothing wrong with the SAT. It tests your reading ability, vocabulary, ability to put together a coherent thought, and your mathematical logic.</p>

<p>What's wrong with the SAT is how it is univerally compared between applications who have the best advantages and can easily do well and those who don't.</p>

13

<p>Taxguy, let's say that we will disagree on this issue.</p>

<p>I do, however, want to point out that you left out my "explanation" as to why the test is imperfect. This is no different from analyzing a balance sheet by looking at the liabilities only! </p>

<p>The SAT is Just like humans: they will always be imperfect because they cannot fulfill everyone's expectations. In a nutshell the SAT measures how well the top performing students -on the SAT- do against their peers. The standard is expressed as an average that is expected to be between 500 and 530. Some people -USAMO caliber students- have criticized the test for being too easy, especially on the math portions. Yet, only a few thousands earn a perfect score. Some people have jumped on UC bandwagon and attacked the college success predictability of the test, but largely ignored more extensive studies that debunked the findings of the California genius. What I did not see is a PROPOSAL for a better test from the overly vocal and misguided critics. Do luminaries such Atkinson, fairtest.org, or the most recent fame-seeking but hollow-sounding Lloyd Thacker bother to provide concrete examples of positive changes in the format or contents? The answer is a deafening silence! </p>

<p>As far as the mechanics of the test, let's agree to disagree. Timeliness and total duration of the test are two separate issues. I agree that the CB should review their policies in light of the extended length of the test. They should IMPOSE better and uniform guidelines, and make sure that the proctors are aware of the bathroom needs. However, there is no debate possible on the issue of the time constraints. Again, that is the essence of the test. Students who struggle with the time constraint are lacking in their knowledge and mastery of the TEST's finer points. The SAT -or the ACT- does not test deep knowledge as much as it tests reasoning abilities and understanding of the SAT's arcane format. Without time constraints, the test becomes entirely trivial. </p>

<p>I could provide ample examples of known time sinks that cost inexperienced students many minutes, but can be solved by logic and reasoning in a few seconds. Since you tutored the SAT, I would expect you to be aware of the difference between answering a problem correctly by working through the entire problem and being able to pick the correct answer by logic.</p>

14

<p>Xiggi notes,"This is no different from analyzing a balance sheet by looking at the liabilities only"</p>

<p>LOL: Although I liked your analogy but don't think it is valid. However, we can go on and on all day about time limits, fairness etc. If time limitations are the "essence of the test," as you so nicely put it, I don't agree with the essence of the test- period. However, I am not going to belabor this point. Although we agree to disagree, I always like reading your posts. I will simply do what I have always done: write op ed pieces attacking the SAT! Maybe I will be a lone wolf howling in the dark or maybe I can make a difference. Who knows?</p>

15

<p>Well, my two bits would be: Nationalize the exams and do not allow students to take the SAT more than twice, and; the colleges should require applicants to identify any test prep courses they have taken. This would provide some perspective on the results.</p>

16

<p>The problem with the SAT is that you can do relatively successfully if you have the money for a prep course/books and a little bit of luck.</p>

<p>What did I do to prepare for the SAT? I took a couple of practice tests and memorized roughly 100 words (all beginning with the letter A). That's it. With a little luck on test day (all of the difficult words began with A), I scored a 790 despite never scoring above 740 on any of practice tests.</p>

17

<p>The SAT, along with a few other things and some good fortune, got me into a top school decades ago. No one in my family had been to college before. We did, of course, know how to read, and how to reason, despite my father not having finished high school. Somehow something must have been wrong with that test, or I was extremely lucky, because from what I've been reading on these boards in the past year an a half, we didn't have any where near enough family income for me to have done that well. </p>

<p>Anyway, there's no need for a campaign. As some schools have shown, they can each make up their own mind. Let the schools who don't benefit from it toss it out the window. I'm sure HYPSM, Duke, and others are anxious to go more into the mode of taking someone else's word for the merits of a student. They're free to do it anytime. They could invite more "portfolio" type submissions, maybe some video tape, sibling recommendations. </p>

<p>Can the critics of the test be just a little realistic? The reality is that if we didn't have the test, you'd need to institute it. I'm sure the physics, chemistry, and math departments would like to have some indication of just who they are admitting, beyond taking the high school counselors word for it, or the local teachers. (I'll grant you that a lot of the other departments don't much care.) </p>

<p>The real problem (that people have) with the test is that it ends up effectively disqualifying some people from admission to certain schools and programs. So what? I'd rather get disqualfied that way than by someone whose subjective view of educable fodder didn't rank me high enough on the institutional needs for that particular admissions year.</p>

<p>If I were running an admissions office, I'd sure want to see the scores.</p>

18

<p>What did I do to prepare for the SAT? I took a couple of practice tests and memorized roughly 100 words (all beginning with the letter A). That's it. With a little luck on test day (all of the difficult words began with A), I scored a 790 despite never scoring above 740 on any of practice tests.
and so how does this seperate out students who will do well in college again?</p>

19

<p>My point exactly. It doesn't.</p>

20

<p>Emeraldkity4 my point as well. Note, I am not against some type of standardized test! I am just against the SAT and the way it is being used and presented.</p>