How do you guys feel about the SAT/ACT?

Pre-College Issues High School Life
161

<p>Hey JuniorMint–sorry for overreacting. Don’t know what got into me in that moment. :)</p>

<p>If I’d known you thought my post was really kind of a joke, I’d not have reacted so harshly. We all know the difficulty in telling whether someone is serious or not over the internet.</p>

<p>But yeah, my suggestion is likely a bit puerile, but I honestly feel like colleges would value a collaborative and reflective assessment. I understand how it sounds unnatural, but I am open to all kinds of options.</p>

<p>Like has been said, there is an issue in education, and inherently in testing. You do not have to be educated to realize this; success rates are dropping, and the world is collectively getting dumber.</p>

<p>I just feel like as a student who takes these tests, and who has to live with letting other students potentially suffer through them, it’s my responsibility to ensure otherwise. And I will find ways to more efficiently assess students, and hopefully get a few universities behind me to kickstart the process. It may not be the collaborative/reflective method that I posted about.</p>

<p>I took the SAT Subject Tests and the ACT. I feel good about both of them and know I did great, but there’s just a problem with them. I felt disadvantaged in some cases due to slow reading. I see that to be a problem, for example.</p>

<p>But yeah. Sorry again for the overreaction. :)</p>

162

<p>@SerenityJade, I’ve taken the SAT one time and I haven’t gotten my scores back. So I don’t see how that constitutes “bias.” Your argument for not being upset with your scores because they’re your scores is just begging the question. It doesn’t answer anything. If I got a 1500 combined I’d be upset. And if I wanted to go to a top-tier institution, and got a 1900, I would be upset.</p>

163

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually the ACT is not quite more popular than the SAT.
The ACT is not bigger than SAT since it is run by CB.
Therefore the ACT is not "eviler than the SAT.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s just the problem. Most people only take the SAT/ACT once or twice. It’s does not account for factors such as allergies, distractions beyond control, sleepiness level, etc. The SAT/ACT need to be reform and I think it should do it time-wise and more improvements as I noted before:
-Offers not just Saturday mornings.
-reduce prices.
-Have the options of sending like 2 scores to any college for free ONCE you know your score. And regular score sending should have a REFUND (I also want to say that me and my mom have already been cheated by the system- we sent the scores like 3 days before the deadlines, we didn’t know that it would take 1-2 weeks. We saw rush score. 1-2 days… you know the rest)

  • ^ Delivery shouldn’t take weeks.</p>
164

<p>“It’s does not account for factors such as allergies, distractions beyond control, sleepiness level, etc.”</p>

<p>The main reason people do badly on these tests is that they just don’t know the answers. Take allergy meds, get more sleep, and focus on the test. If the distractions are so ridiculous that they actually make it impossible to take the test, take it again at a different site. If you’ve practiced and you know what you’re doing, the score will reflect that.</p>

165

<p>Quite all right, purmou! Friendship time. :wink:
Good luck with your test results!</p>

<p>Ahem, now, messieurs Serenity and Descuff, to prove that I am not a blind SAT drone with a vacant stare in my eyes and a backup No. 2 pencil hidden in my curly hair, I will entertain some change.</p>

<p>The current recipe of SAT I + two or three SAT IIs works well for me, but if I had to reform the test, this is what it would look like:</p>

<p>It would no longer be a reasoning test, but rather, a knowledge test, more akin to the SAT Subject Tests. </p>

<p>The Math section would be replaced with a hybrid of Math I and Math II. This new combination would be one and a half hours long with a break in between the content. Most of the material would be learned in high school, minimizing the need for review. Students who have not yet taken trigonometry would be put at a disadvantage, but this would be righted by a generous curve which anticipates more incorrect answers. This would mean that at the top of the scores, the difference between an 800 and a 700 would not be two missed problems. It also means that the scoring would have to be re-centered in order to make perfect math score less frequent. I did this because there is a score bias between females and males, who often score higher on math. The timing shortens the length of the original test and fixes its seeming choppiness.</p>

<p>For the second section, which I will rename the Verbal section, I would insert half of the Literature Subject Test, which is actually not that different from Critical Reading, and retain an essay. The Lit portion would last 45 minutes and because of its difficulty, would also have a generous curve. This would make higher scores less frequent while not rendering them impossible. The essay would be 45 minutes as well, and would carry more weight. I would change the rule that the essay can be untruthful and say that essay graders may include historical accuracy and a semblance of plausibility in their grading criteria.</p>

<p>The scoring would become 1600, with scores above 1400 becoming much more infrequent. If one looks at the MCAT, for example, there are barely any scores at the top of the table. This ensures that those who actually know the material, as well as those that test well, are rewarded for their effort and knowledge.</p>

<p>I do not think that the current test is “really dumb,” so I will be the first one to label what I just said moronic.</p>

166

<p>Actually what you said was amazing o.o </p>

<p>They told me that the test us suppose to test what you already learn. Your “reform” would bring that in clear focus… Tell me Mr.Mint are you the next CEO of college board?</p>

<p>Sent from my LG-VM696 using CC</p>

167

<p>I am not poor, neither am I rich. Here in India, there are some people who waste all their life on SAT and get low 2000s and some others who don’t care and still end up with 2380-90s.</p>

<p>AND MIND YOU THESE ARE NOT ALWAYS THE SMARTER ONES!
Im angry cause I didn’t get a good score, but don’treally knowwhat the SAT measures!</p>

168

<p>The SAT measure stuffs you supposedly learn in a regular American high school. I’m not sure how international study for it.</p>

<p>Sent from my LG-VM696 using CC</p>

169

<p>Yet people die for this exam!! I cannot figure out why or how!!!</p>

<p>But in the end i am happy with my marks and believe that i can get into any college with it(any)!</p>

170

<p>Ahh, the pursuit of the American dream… I think. </p>

<p>What was.your score?</p>

<p>Sent from my LG-VM696 using CC</p>

171

<p>

</p>

<p>It’s my score so I am happy with it. It puts me in a perfect spot for the college I want to go to and its Honors College and it’s merit money I desperately need.</p>

172

<p>Honestly, I think standardized tests are a good thing. High schools are just too different from one another for GPAs to be worth the focus of an entire application. Also, college students have to take tests they don’t really want to all the time, and I’ll be damned if their professors tend strongly to be accommodating with regards to testing conditions and dates. The ACT and SAT are supposed to measure college readiness, are they not?</p>

<p>I did get a 34 on the ACT and a 2230 on the SAT, mind you, so you would be justified in considering my response a little self-serving, but know that I think extracurriculars should also be important and mine, frankly, aren’t that great.</p>

173

<p>I would change the way math is scored. Its ridiculous how getting 2-3 can drop your score by 50-70 points. It should be more like math 2.</p>

174

<p>I think EC should be weighted less in a college app.</p>

<p>Sent from my LG-VM696 using CC</p>

175

<p>Most colleges don’t care about EC’s. I think the only colleges that bother to look at EC’s are the ones where everyone who applies is awesome in every other way.
But yeah, I agree. Mostly because mine suck.</p>

176

<p>ECs are meant to show your passion in either a specific subject or in a breadth of subjects. It shows that you are a diverse individual. Places like Stanford value ECs in tons of subjects (service, math, internships) while Caltech/MIT likely value the STEM ones much more than the others.</p>

177

<p>But what if our schools doesn’t offer an EC for us</p>

<p>Sent from my LG-VM696 using CC</p>

178

<p>Most of my EC’s aren’t associated with school, which is why I got rejected from NHS.
I’m in two school clubs, but I also take piano lessons, have a chemical engineering mentorship, have a job, and volunteer at the library in the summer.</p>

179

<p>All of my ECs are separate from school, and stuff that I had to find. My advice is to stop being lazy and find stuff, show initiative…</p>

<p>I created an EC at my school, for example (a PTPI student chapter).</p>

180

<p>And those who have no transportation and live in the middle of nowhere? Those who are irreligious in areas where the only things to do service-wise outside of school are church-related? I have no extra curriculars because my school doesn’t anything to interest me. I used to be in Art Club. That went away. NHS is a joke and I could never make a (five-minute-long) meeting. Debate started this year and it’s hard to figure out exactly what we’re supposed to do. It’s hard to get a club started because all the kids who would join clubs play 2 or 3 sports instead. So that leaves non-athletes with nothing to do. Most students could not care less about school and we don’t have the budget for clubs. Debate is running on literally whatever football gives us.</p>