<p>My D went to a large HS, with graduating classes of almost 700, where 50% of the kids graduate with a GPA of 3.75 or higher. That’s right. Lots of AP classes and yes maybe some grad inflation. They don’t rank. Seems excessive doesn’t it? Well on the other hand, the average student SAT/ACT score is in the top 10% nationally. So what’s a HS to do?</p>
<p>Ok, here’s a slightly different twist. If a kid takes a test prep class, studies for months for SAT/SATII, then retakes 3-5 times until they get the supersore that they want does that accurately predict college success? I would imagine that the schools which have eliminated score choice would say, “no”. A number of the most selective schools now require that every score from every test be submitted both SAT and ACT. If grade inflation exists, then score inflation certainly does as well.</p>
<p>Well, “score inflation” would more properly describe the [url=<a href=“http://professionals.collegeboard.com/data-reports-research/sat/equivalence-tables]recentering[/url”>SAT Suite of Assessments - College Board Research]recentering[/url</a>] done in 1995 for the various SAT sections (to bring the average up to 500 on each section instead of 420 V and 470 M).</p>
<p>Test preparation would be just that – the gaining of skills specific to doing better on the test, without necessarily improving one’s ability to succeed in college. That some students’ test scores are increased by test specific coaching further reduces the value of the test scores in comparing students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Perhaps, but colleges reject score choice to reduce cheating. [Score Choice makes cheating on the ST’s really easy – just google it.]</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well sure, the ultimate definition of grade inflation: 25%+ socre 100%.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. GPA is the best single predictor. GPA+SAT/ACT is better. GPA+ST’s are even better. GPA+AP/IB are best.</p>
<p>But note that adding test scores only provides a marginal benefit.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Google revealed nothing in particular. What is the cheating mechanism that is specifically enabled by score choice?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Rank them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The curve is notorious b/c of the low % of assigned top grades combined with a very competitive student body. I would say this for this particular case the high scores were a function of the test being too easy. In the particular case you could receive half or quarter points, so something like 10% of the class got 24.75 and above in which they received an A. Then the next 20% got a score between 23.0 - 24.75 getting them a B. Then the next 40% received a score of 21.5 - 23.0 getting them a C. Then 20% received a score of 21.5 - 20 which meant they got a D and then then the last 10% got a score of 20 and below meaning they failed. For many of my other courses (particularly the finance courses) getting a 70% or higher on a test would get you an A and put you in the top 10%. </p>
<p>I would say a case that supports grade inflation for the above would be one in which anyone who got a 22.5 (90%) or above would have received an A (something like 50-60% of the class). This is not the case in the above due to the curve…i guess it would be good to define grade inflation maybe I’m thinking about it incorrectly…in my eyes grade inflation is present when a substantial portion of a class is assigned a top grade (like in the above if 50-60% where given an A). Which apparently does happen at schools like Harvard for example where 90% of the class graduates with honors.</p>
<p>What grade inflation should mean is that the same quality of work now gets a higher grade than it used to. For example, if a student writes a paper that would have been graded a B a few years ago but would be graded an A now, then that is evidence of grade inflation.</p>
<p>Of course, changes in other variables like student abilities and variations in the difficulty of test questions can make the measurement of grade inflation less transparent. Grade inflation is rarely as obvious and transparent as the 1995 SAT recentering.</p>
<p>tried to send you a pm, ucb, but your box is full.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My school didn’t produce graduates at the same level as the top high schools, and I don’t even think has ever sent a graduate to the college I attend now, and I’m doing perfectly fine here. I don’t see why I should be discriminated against because my parents couldn’t afford a private school or to move to a better school district.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But the material one needs to know to get the A varies drastically. I, myself, went to a very good public high school many moons ago. The school regularly sent students to top colleges. We had AP tests and top SAT/ACT scores. The school where I work now is below average in our state via state tests and below average in the country via SAT tests (school doesn’t offer the ACT). There are similar caliber students in both schools, but the school I went to expected more out of top kids and presented them with challenging material. We had homework, papers, and all the usual things to do outside of school. The school I work at is not at all challenging to our top kids (or very rarely anyway). We used to offer AP, but dropped them when students could rarely score a 2 or better (poor preparation in class). Now we offer a few “College in the High School” classes where students can get their “A” and college credit (where accepted) solely at the teacher’s discretion without needing to take an AP test. There are a fair number of As - certainly not all, but far more than we had get a 2 on AP tests.</p>
<p>We’ve had some top students (4.0+ GPAs) test into remedial classes when they get to not so top 4 year schools. We rarely get any student into a true top school. Those who do often work a bit outside of school to supplement their education. Very rarely do kids have homework - sometimes in math, but they can finish it in 15 minutes or so and we don’t use a good math curriculum IMO. Kids who return from college (not drop outs) tell stories about how difficult it is. Others drop out and go to community college instead.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is common where I work except SAT equivalent as students need to go to a nearby Catholic school to take the ACT if they wish. Only 15 students chose to do that last year (most were our top kids). Our ACT average was 23. Our SAT average is less than 500 per section on all but math where it’s 502. We have a graduating class in the 300s. Only about half take the SAT.</p>
<p>But we have several students with a 4.0 or higher as they complete what is necessary in their classes satisfactorily. One just recently told me he had a 28 on the ACT. (He was one of the 15 who took it last year.) He has the potential to do well and is or has taken all of our top classes, but our school isn’t giving him a good foundation.</p>
<p>If you look at this </p>
<p><a href=“http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/cbs2011_total_group_report.pdf[/url]”>http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/cbs2011_total_group_report.pdf</a></p>
<p>you’ll see that the average SAT for students self-reporting top 10% high school rank is around 1750 (actually likely a little less because I just added the subscores, which I think probably typically gives a little higher score than the actual composite).</p>
<p>If you look at this </p>
<p><a href=“http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/SAT-Percentile-Ranks-Composite-CR-M-W-2011.pdf[/url]”>http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/SAT-Percentile-Ranks-Composite-CR-M-W-2011.pdf</a></p>
<p>Yiou see that’s around the 75th percentile score.</p>
<p>There are probably three reasons (maybe more, these are the reasons that came to my mind ) </p>
<ol>
<li>Students self reporting higher rank than reality (I think this is a known phenomenon).
2.Only the “college-bound” students taking the SAT, so you would expect their rank to skew higher.
3.Grade inflation in some schools as compared to others</li>
</ol>
<p>One other interesting thing to note is the reference point here on this website. Aside from the moral question, in another thread people were expressing shock that someone would pay money for an SAT score of 1750. Well, if the only less than scrupulous person you can find to take your test offers the 75th percentile, that’s better thn the 40th percentile. Plus, probably slightly less likely to raise eyebrows than the 99th percentile.</p>
<p>"Test preparation would be just that – the gaining of skills specific to doing better on the test, without necessarily improving one’s ability to succeed in college. That some students’ test scores are increased by test specific coaching further reduces the value of the test scores in comparing students. "</p>
<p>I don’t disagree, but such scores MIGHT still be a predictor of success in college if the student approaches the college assignments the same way - research to determine what it will take to succeed, invest the time and energy to execute the study plan, then take the test or write the paper or do whatever else is required.</p>
<p>At the end of the day the analytical skills required to determined how to define success, establish a plan, add the discipline and time to execute the plan, etc. are the similar.</p>
<p>A kid who does not study the SAT at all, just takes it cold and scores very well has not demonstrated the same skill set, but a different one. Which is more of an indicator of future success?</p>
<p>^^^ I can’t speak for all, but a couple of adcoms at higher level colleges have told me they prefer to see the former - those who take the test, score reasonably well (not poorly), but aren’t satisfied and work to take it again. They like that it shows work ethic and dedication. With those who take it once and score well they have a hard time determining if it’s natural talent or if the student studied and worked to get their score.</p>
<p>I’ve had one do it each way. Both have gotten into colleges. High scores are still high scores. So far, the one who worked at it has gotten better merit aid offers (and he scored a couple points better the second time than the one who was satisfied with his high score).</p>
<p>“Anybody who completes all homework assigned and completes it correctly and on time should be able to pull straight “A” at any HS in the USA.<br>
This is absurd, in my opinion.
Eventually, students reach a point where they need to learn to study. Doing the assigned homework is no longer sufficient to enable the student to master the content of a course.”</p>
<p>-Did you try this strategy? It worked perfectly for my kid. She was using it since she was 5 years old, not just in HS. Every kid who is doing everything will learn to study. Doing every assignment correctly includes understanding concepts correctly first, it includes getting correct answers in all problems at home, not when it is explained later at school. Sometime it will involve asking parents. And if a kid is very busy with EC’s, this kid does not have a choice but learn how to do all of this very efficiently, which is the best skill that could be carried into college. The fact is that k - 12 program is very watered down in comparison, this strategy should work, since there is nothing requires having high level of talents and ability.</p>
<p>MiamiDAP-
This is not ENOUGH, though, to be truly prepared for collge and for life and for new subjects.
The student must also learn to think critically, participate in class thoughtfully, write clearly and persuasively, review for cumulative exams, be creative in projects, collaborate with others, apply concepts across a broad area.
And much more.
Getting all the right answers on homework should not be enough, IMO, and is a sign of a school not doing enough with its students.</p>
<p>"Ok, here’s a slightly different twist. If a kid takes a test prep class, studies for months for SAT/SATII, then retakes 3-5 times until they get the supersore that they want does that accurately predict college success? "
-My prediction is this kid will be completely overhelmed at college. He/She will not be able to have normal live being busy studying all the time. The norm is to slef-prep for SAT/ACT for 1 -2 weeks (about 1hr/day), take it once and getting good score. This will indicate that kids can handle college work, plan for themselves, participate in college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The problem with that solution is that it penalizes lower-ranking kids at very competitive high schools. Even if a college is aware that a student in the 30th percentile at High School A is likely just as good a student as one in the 80th percentile at High School B, if they select the High School A applicant, that hits them on the class ranking numbers they submit on the CDS, and thus affects their USNWR ranking. And, hard though it may be to believe, there are actually people foolish enough to believe that USNWR rankings have validity. Therefore, a college is penalized for accepting the High School A student. When a high school declines to rank, accepting a lower-echelon student from that school does not penalize the college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not all K-12 programs are watered down to this extent.</p>
<p>In the schools my kids attended, just doing the homework accurately would not have ensured good grades starting in middle school.</p>
<p>I’m always bemused by these discussions of “grade inflation,” because I think there are several different things that this could be addressing:
- The idea (mentioned by somebody above) that work that would have gotten a B in the past now gets an A.
- The idea that kids are getting As even though they are not mastering the material.
- The idea that schools are not curving, and a larger percentage of kids are getting As (than “should” be, or than were in the past, I’m not sure).</p>
<p>These things aren’t the same, and high schools aren’t all the same, either. It would be silly, in my opinion, for a magnet high school with high-performing kids to have a forced curve. Such a school may have a majority of students who can master the material.</p>
<p>And if GPA is still the best predictor of college performance, maybe that’s because even at a school with low standards, the very best performing kids will still be the smartests and hardest-working ones. They’ll do fine in college, even if they need to do some catching up.</p>