<p>The new president of the College Board, David Coleman, has stated that one of his top priorities in his new job will be to be to change the SAT so that it reflects "Common Core State Standards". I'm actually very surprised by this since the SAT really hasn't undergone major revisions since the 1940's. Of course the writing section was added in 2005, but the change Coleman is hinting at seems much more substantial. Here's a quote from Coleman about possible changes: </p>
<p>“The common core provides substantial opportunity to make the SAT even more reflective of what higher education wants. The real value here is that if the SAT aligns more to the common core, we won’t be giving an assessment at the end of K-12 that’s out of kilter with what we demand at the end of the day.”</p>
<p>The question is will this new SAT be like "New Coke" back in the 80's?</p>
<p>Excellent question Agrasin, and it brings up another. If the new SAT tests exactly what is learned in high school, why is it needed anymore? I mean all through high school you’re tested on history, math, English, science, so what will the SAT add if it tests the very same thing. Won’t grades be enough in that case? The main selling point of the SAT has always been that it tests something that high school grades don’t necessarily measure.</p>
<p>@mevsthesat Grades and rigor are variable and thereby difficult to compare without some sort of a standard. The SAT is intended to be that standard.</p>
<p>Brownford, I agree. The current SAT is that standard, but if the College Board changes the SAT so it aligns directly with high school curriculum, will it still be the standard?</p>
<p>It’s still a comparable score… Yet the current test needs changes. There are people who are not talented at English and are penalized twice on the SAT and can take huge GPA hits. By adding more sections our worth can be weighed better.</p>
<p>Wait, if the SAT’s becoming more curriculum-based, wouldn’t that devalue (some) SAT Subject Tests? They test directly on subjects typically taught in schools.</p>
<p>I would say changing the SAT to reflect current high school curriculum would in fact devalue SAT subject tests, but of course it depends on what changes the College Board makes. Here is a quote from an article that really gets to the point of why the changes Coleman are talking about are very significant:</p>
<p>“The SATs were created in early 20th century to do in many ways the very opposite of what Coleman proposes, notably to measure student capability in a way that wasnt specifically connected to their socioeconomic background or the quality of their high school education. The SAT was supposed to predict first-year college grades.”</p>
<p>The SAT has been around since 1926, and one of the main arguments for it has been that it tests something different than high school tests. If the College Board changes that, than the whole test may loose its value.</p>
<p>It sounds to me like a way to make all students test in subjects. A lot of kids don’t want to, and the college board can’t force colleges to require subject tests. So I guess the new SAT would make up for it. Unless they make registration for the new one more expensive, they’ll be losing money. I wonder if he’s thought about that part…</p>
<p>Just call me cynical, but CollegeBoard will only change the SAT in ways that preserve or increase their revenue from the testing process. Therefore I am pretty sure they won’t do anything to de-value to subject tests. We have paid an outrageous amount of money to them in the past 18 months for SAT test fees, score choice, subject tests, AP tests, and CSS/Profile fees.</p>
<p>If the SAT becomes more like the ACT by adding more sections and becoming more of a knowledge test, Collegeboard’s SAT will not exist in fifteen years, having lost competition to the ACT.</p>