I wonder if the SAT II tests are biased against the IB curriculum....

Parents Forum
1

<p>My daughter recently took the SAT II test (Bio and Am History) and didn't do as well as the regular SATs (2250) but still low 700 level. After discussing the SAT II tests with my daughter I found the following:</p>

<p>Bio - in the IB world (where my daughter attends high school), Biology is spread over a 2 year period for the junior and senior years. While the IB kids go very much into detail for all the conceptual areas, many subject areas don't get covered until well into the senior year - after the SAT II tests. This makes it difficult to address those subject areas even with a cramming session before the SAT IIs.</p>

<p>American history - The IB program is very heavily European focused in history. Pre reconstruction material is not even discussed (beyond the discussion of the formation of the US up to the framers of the Constitution). Even the World History test wouldn't have been appropriate because of the lack of focus on non-US non-European history in the IB program. And the SAT Am History test includes quite a bit of pre-Civil War material.</p>

<p>Having read somewhere that the SAT tests (from a business perspective) are in competition with the IB programs (worldwide), could there be a natural bias against IB kids in these SAT II tests based on the material taught versus tested? Do you parents out there have any thoughts?</p>

2

<p>My oldest took SAT ll tests, she didnt take AP or IB courses, she did fine.</p>

<p>My nieces took IB courses & attended a top LAC which asked for SAT ll scores, they also did fine. </p>

<p>Not any bias in our experience.</p>

<p>Some people do better with the ACT.</p>

3

<p>

</p>

<p>(Gasp! A test on American history that does not have many questions on European history.) And this shows ‘bias’? Huh?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Never read that, and plus it makes no sense. The SAT/ACT and Subject Tests are required for many in college admissions. IB tests are not. (Nor are AP tests.)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>In theory, the Subject Tests are designed for students who have not taken AP/IB. Of course, in practical terms, in that case it takes a lot of self-study to clear 700 without a REALLY strong high school honors program.</p>

4

<p>The tests are there without any curriculum that idealizes them unless a curriculum chooses to do so. I know a lot of IB kids who did very well on the Sat2s and never heard a peep of complaint about lack of prep for them. I agree with Bluebayou in that one does have to focus on prepping for just about ANY test to score in the upper echolons. You can’t just assume the year round class will do it all—used to be when i was teen, but no more. Too many kids who are not only well prepared but also focus on doing well on the test.</p>

5

<p>

</p>

<p>What a strange question! </p>

<p>This is not a chicken and egg debate, and perhaps a good avenue to consider is how the IB program is hardly the academic panacea it is purported to be. </p>

<p>That is the price one pays for accepting the notion that a glorified remedial program from Europe only needs a mild rewrite to become the American new darling and academic fad. While some parts of the IB program are slightly above average, you just found out that most of it is lacking and that its commercial success in the United States is invariably tied to its marketing prowess and ability to convince a gullible academic crowd. </p>

<p>Did you happen to think that IB (or IBO) was less of a commercial enterprise than the College Board?</p>

6

<p>Xiggi, your post is a very succinct assessment of the IB program.Thanks.</p>

7

<p>The subject tests came first and are geared toward a typical American curriculum which IB is not. Years ago when I was young they actually had a European history test, but since so few American schools actually teach Euro as a separate course it was replaced with the World History test. I like the IB curriculum but I think it’s silly to expect the College Board to rejigger their tests to be a better fit. Since most (maybe now all?) schools only require two, it should be pretty easy to find two that will work (Math and Literature for example.)</p>

8

<p>The people who design IB courses have their own priorities, and matching the content of their courses to the American SAT Subject Tests is not one of them.</p>

<p>Similarly, when local, country, or state school districts design curricula, they often don’t pay attention to the SAT Subject Tests, either. Relatively few students take these tests, and the school systems have other priorities.</p>

<p>The most prudent approach to SAT Subject Tests, in my opinion, is to find out which courses taught at your child’s school have curricula that most closely match the curriculum assumed by the tests. Which tests do students from that particular school score best on? Teachers, guidance counselors, and parents of older students may have this information. If you can’t get the information from them, then getting some prep books and taking practice tests may be the best way to find out if you’re well prepared for a particular Subject Test. If the student finds that there are whole sections of the test that cover material she doesn’t know, it may be best to choose a different test.</p>

9

<p>My D and her friends went to a science-based magnet school and still felt they had to prep fairly heavily for the SAT IIs using Barrons books in order to get a high score. I don’t think most can expect to just walk into an administration of a SAT II test in the sciences and expect a great result without some outside-school prep.</p>

10

<p>glorified remedial program??? </p>

<p>lol</p>

<p>AP hands out 5s like candy.</p>

11

<p>This is silly. All schools have different curriculum. Are SAT IIs biased against students who take precal as seniors because they won’t have learned the Math II material in time? Obviously not. Those students will just select different tests. It sounds like your D picked tests over material IB hadn’t prepared her for, and I’m sure there were different subjects she could have taken like math, literature, physics, chemistry, or foreign language (although above 700 is a good score). Did she prep for them? If not, as NJSue said, they’re difficult to score highly on. I don’t think they align well with any curriculum, even AP. In addition the variance in the curves makes it so the subject you choose is almost more important than what you know. I ended up doing physics, even though I had had AP chem and only regular physics, because missing 15 questions still gives you an 800 as compared to -3 (IIRC) for chem and bio.</p>

12

<p>D2 was in the IB program and she had to self study for SAT IIs, much of material was not taught in IB. D1 was in a regular program - honors and APs. She did well in SAT IIs without having to do much prep. I am in general not a fan of IB.</p>

13

<p>I’m sure I will get blasted for this but the IB program isn’t as good as parents think it is. People equate having a lot of homework with being a good program and that just is not the case. Kids in IB have not been proven to do any better in college than kids that did not take IB but their parents sure drink the kool-aid over the program. It’s the same thought process that comes into play when people say that their child got a “good education” because they got all “A’s”. It all comes down to your kid and it matters little if they take IB vs AP when it comes to taking the SAT/ACT. Around here the only schools you can find IB programs are the failing schools. They introduced IB to keep the “top” kids in that school happy.</p>

14

<p>* They introduced IB to keep the “top” kids in that school happy*</p>

<p>In fairness they are pretty happy. My above nieces who were in IB, graduated from a top university, one Summa cum laude, the other is currently in a top school of pharmacy.</p>

15

<p>I don’t consider more homework the plus of IB. I consider the emphasis on writing the plus.</p>

16

<p>I think the strength of a school’s IB program very much depends on the teachers, as is the case with AP classes as well. SS1 went through the IB program and it was good for him because it helped him develop a good work ethic. Not all kids need this, and this is not a program I’d recommend for SS2. Additionally, I did not see the college admission benefits at his school that the parents were sold. The kids who were admitted to the tippy-top colleges (including H) were those who went the AP route, not the IB route.</p>

17

<p>

</p>

<p>One of my kids is an IB Diploma graduate (and now a top-20 university graduate), but neither she nor I drank any kool-aid. </p>

<p>She wanted to be in the IB program to be with her academic peers and because it is a highly respected program within our school system. The specific curriculum was of less importance to her, and IB’s international emphasis was of no importance at all. </p>

<p>Did IB enhance or harm her college admissions prospects? In her opinion, it did neither. However, some of her classmates felt that IB was detrimental to their admissions prospects because their GPAs were lower than they would have been if they were in the regular program. </p>

<p>Did IB prepare her well for college? Yes, unquestionably. Her academic transition to college was extremely smooth because she was already accustomed to working at the level expected of a college freshman. </p>

<p>Is she glad she went the IB route? Yes, because it prepared her well for college (and because, among people who know our community, having been in this particular IB program still gets her a certain degree of respect).</p>

<p>Was she always glad to be in IB while she was in it? Not always. Sometimes, there was a lot of work, and some of it was work she did not enjoy. And the nitpicking nature of IB requirements was an irritant. But she did enjoy the company of like-minded academically oriented classmates, which was one of the main reasons why she was there.</p>

<p>Did she do OK on the SAT Subject Tests? Yes, with scores above 750 on three carefully chosen tests (none of which required any self-studying – in fact, to the best of my recollection, she didn’t specifically study for any of the Subject Tests at all).</p>

<p>Would she recommend IB to others? Not necessarily. She knows – and I know – that it has pros and cons. It is not for everyone. But it can be a good experience for some, especially if the program is well established and well run, as this one was.</p>

<p>Would my other kid have wanted to be in the IB program? Not if it was the last high school program on earth. And he was right to make that choice. He had narrowly focused interests and a low tolerance for nitpicking and large amounts of homework. IB was not for him.</p>

18

<p>Much ink and many keystrokes have been spent --and perhaps-- wasted on discussions about the IB, its academic rigor, and its applicability to the United States’s education sector.</p>

<p>Are there any doubts that a well-implemented program could satisfy the academic needs of well-prepared (and carefully selected) students? No! </p>

<p>Is it hard to imagine that a student who easily aces the SAT Subject Tests without much preparation and earns a very high score on the SAT was well-served by the IB program at his or her school? Again, the answer has to be a resounding no!</p>

<p>While one could easily support the theory that the same student would have excelled with a different program such as the AP, it remains that for a number of students a program such as the IB delivered the goods. </p>

<p>The problem stems from the repeated attempts to elevate the IB program from a successful niche player (read remedial and elitist) to a participant in national curriculum discussions is plain wrong. Just as wrong as its implementation as a discriminatory and divisive tool to exacerbate the much maligned (as they should at least) schools-within-a-school problem that is showing its ugly head throughout the “progressive” public schools. </p>

<p>The problem is not that this program exists; its major problem is that the NICHE schools that could and might have adopted it have RARELY done it. Few elite high schools have jumped on the European bandwagon, but plenty of public schools have adopted the program to offer to parents the illusion of a better program masking the real objective, which is to separate the riff-raff from the easy to educate students and offer the faculty even more attractive sinecures and financial incentives. But the worst tragedy is when the IB is sold to mediocre schools … as it is mostly done by the IBO mercenaries. </p>

<p>Here’s a reality that is easy to verify. Take a city such as Dallas and look at the schools that offer the IB program? None of the elite school do! And there are good reasons for it. They know better! </p>

<p>Again it works for a few, and it is unfair to label those few … KoolAid drinkers. Sadly enough, gallons of KoolAid are served and gleefully consumed by unsuspecting families.</p>

19

<p>

</p>

<p>Xiggi’s post suggests an interesting question.</p>

<p>At the college level, very few people on this board object to separating students into different institutions (or schools-within-a-school, such as honors programs) based on achievement. </p>

<p>Nobody ever says, “Your kid should go to Directional State College instead of Harvard even though he was admitted to Harvard and your family can afford it. It’s inappropriate to separate students who have the credentials to get into Harvard from those who can only get admitted to Directional State College.”</p>

<p>Yet when it comes to high schools, a substantial number of people object to similar sorts of separation. Some are uncomfortable about the existence of exam schools, magnet programs, IB programs, and honors classes.</p>

<p>So at what age does it become appropriate to separate students by achievement level? Why is it OK to do this in college but, at least in some people’s opinions, not in high school?</p>

20

<p>Marian, you do indeed pose an important question that could be answered through various lenses. However, rather than discuss it based on the merit (or lack thereof) of segregating students by aptitude and desire, I would prefer to simply point to the vastly different organization, mission, and especially funding of K-12 and tertiary education. </p>

<p>In the US, for good or for bad, our K-12 system has maintained an exclusive and monopolistic system of education funding, and this is in exchange of a promise and contractual obligation to provide a free and equal education to ALL. The tertiary system is neither free nor the exclusive domain of the publc sector. </p>

<p>In addition to already coupling the overall quality of public education to the availability of higher revenues in the form of property taxes, we also have a movement to create those schools-within-the-schools to mimic the “better” private school model. Again, all attributes that serve to separate and discriminate.</p>

<p>A public system of education, especially one that precludes equal competition for resources, should aim to lift every boat, not the ones who float better or were better built. Robbing Peter of the better academic resources to educate Paul is not compatible to the purported egalitarian mission of public education. Simply stated, our BEST teachers should be directed to the easy to educate, but to the MOST difficult groups, and our resources should be concentrated on educating those precise at0-risk group.</p>

<p>In a perfect world, there should be a place dedicated to educate the best, brightest, and more apt students, but it cannot come at the price we are currently willing to pay, namely fail the majority of the students in a Darwinian academic process. </p>

<p>Fixing our mediocre middle and high schools should be a process that starts from the bottom, and our measures of success should be in the form of how well we eliminate the dropouts or the graduates who are quasi illiterate. And it should not be measured in the number of AP or IB graduates.</p>