@menloparkmom No kidding? I guess you missed my subtlety. I found the whole article to be ridiculous, particularly this nugget: “To get into elite colleges, one must train for standardized tests with the intensity of an athlete.”
I seems taboo to even suggest on CC that test scores are linked to intelligence-the masses pride themselves on prep, prep, and more prep. The truth is, a really smart kid from any background can take a few free practice exams to familiarize themselves with the format and show up and score in the 99%. On the flip side, no amount of prep is going to get most kids to that level, no matter what background they are from.
There is no need to spend thousands of dollars or hundreds of hours for test prep. A $20 test prep book and Khan Academy provides ample test preparation.
It all depends on the student. If the student has not had exposure to the math that will be tested, student will need to learn it. Similarly, if the student is unfamiliar with the vocabulary and how to write to do well on written portion of exam, that will need to be taught. Different students learn best in different ways.
The point is that many students and families are unaware that big money for college can rest on doing very well on some standardized tests and that prepping for it may make a huge difference in merit offers.
“The truth is, a really smart kid from any background can take a few free practice exams to familiarize themselves with the format and show up and score in the 99%.”
The POINT of the article was that MANY smart kids, AND their parents, DONT know that it MIGHT be important to prep for those tests, because thousands of merit $$ hang on their score.
-I guess that part of the article was too subtlety stated for you to pick up . Or your distaste for the idea that less intelligent students should even bother prepping for tests blinded you to the value of prepping - in certain cases.
Himom got it :)>-
I believe some areas are offering some free test prep for the general public, so kids can gain familiarity with the tests, format, types of questions, timing strategies, etc. it isn’t the same as training or intensive courses, but it’s what exists.
In response to this article, Charles Murray tweeted last night that test prep doesn’t work, calling it a myth.
Does anyone know the research he’s referring to? It must be out of date. Whether it’s ACT or SAT, how can private certified teachers teaching you grammar and math 1 on 1 not improve your score? That’s what high-level prep has become. Or how can now developing a comfort level with the test not improve your score? The research sounds flimsy.
There is a plethora of free materials online and in public libraries. The issue is, poorer kids just don’t know where to look. The issue isn’t access or funds–it’s knowledge of those materials. We get a handful of kids every year at my school getting perfect ACT scores and 1550+ SAT scores, and they aren’t all bursting at the seams with money. But they know where to look, because my school pushes for kids to use Khan Academy or get prep books at the library.
If a kid has the motivation and willingness to get a high score, that’s only half the battle.
@Sidwellmom - no idea unless he linked it in his tweet.
IMO prep does work, to a point. For kids who have been taught the material, just a little time familiarizing themselves with the tests and timing, learning about when to guess and not, how to scan a paragraph, common tricks, etc…can make a difference.
That’s the sort of light prep my kids did and indeed their scores went up. (Though of course simply repeating the test is a form of prep.)
I don’t know how effective hours and hours of prep is for SAT/ACT but it seems most kids in NYC in who take the Stuy/Sci/Tech exams in the last couple of decades prep heavily for years and those are the kids who make it in.
My son raised his SAT score over 300 points by just taking practice exam after practice exam. He would take the same one repeatedly, too. Before he took the exam the first time, he did take a review course. He said he didn’t find that very helpful at all.
Idk I’m a big proponent of prep. My second sitting of the SAT, which I went into blind after about 6 months removed from my first sitting, was about 200 points lower than my first sitting. Prepped for the first time, did not for the second. Major decrease in score.
Count me as a test prep skeptic. The problem with saying you raised your score X points is what do you use for the baseline. Other than real SAT tests, given in previous years, I consider the results of practice tests worthless. I believe test prep companies often will give an initial exam harder than the real SAT, so the student’s gains look artificially inflated when they take the exam. Then, the other issue is how seriously did someone take the initial practice exam. Some people will say they did terrible on their initial practice exam at home, neglecting to mention their pets/siblings/parents kept barging in or they kept looking at their smart phone. That’s not to say test prep is useless, only that it may not be nearly as beneficial as some believe.
According to this, one source(CC apparently blocks blog links), most people(back on the 2400 scale) would score on average 139 points above 10x their PSAT score. So a 192 on the PSAT might predict a 2059(on the 2400 scale).
Hm interesting. Idk. Anyway, I personally feel like SAT prep helped me a ton, and so I’d recommend it, even if it’s just a placebo effect that makes you feel more prepared.
This article was good, but I felt that it is somewhat off-base by blaming the SAT. Everyone wants to blame the SAT these days.
In my experience and my friends’ experience, studying for the ACT and SAT is one of the few things that lower- and middle-class kids can have an edge on. Almost everyone has access to Khan Academy and online practice tests and free Internet resources like PrepScholar and College Confidential.
I found that in college admissions, the rich kids really had an edge in the fancy programs they could do, like @OHMomof2 and @CourtneyThurston discussed. Internships, research programs, and other summer resume-boosters are usually not an option for lower- and middle-class kids who can’t get transportation to a university 45 minutes away or give up wages from a summer job.
This article really spoke to me bc i live in a middle class town (town b) located next to an upper middle class town , (town a) i have two high schoolers and a college student. our best friends live in town a. The atmosphere is night and day. my kids were some of the few we know who took a $700 online prep course. our friends jr spend all summer with a one on one test coach, and has a college counselor. My kids roll their eyes and laugh at the kids in town a, they feel bad for them that they get stuck spending all of their free time prepping. but our friends son got a 33 on the act, and, in the past, he hadn’t been a good test taker. But kids in town a understand their parents expectations, and so they prep, while my boys chafed at taking their one course. They didn’t want me telling anyone about their prep course. Different culture.
Prepping did work for my kids. My daughter, who was eager to do it, raised her act from a 28 to a 32. That is huge in terms of merit aid. The boys did decent but not stellar on psat, around 85th percentile, they took the prep course before act, and one got a 30 and one a 31. the boys complained through the whole course.
Everyone got helpful merit aid, different amounts from different schools, but the scores were key. i tell friends in our town about it, but they roll their eyes and say there’s no way they could get their kids to do a prep course. i think my town is a lot like the authors town. Sports, jobs, all things trump extra academics. It’s too bad bc their families could certainly use the merit aid