More Colleges Backing off SAT and ACT Admissions Rule

Applying to College
161

Colleges make decisions that they believe in their bests interests on a going forward basis. They may state they are doing it for the benefit of students, applicants, professors, staff, etc. or fairness or whatever other reason is given. But ultimately its for the school’s benefit. Nothing wrong with that. Its how other businesses operate.

Often times when you make a change, some one benefits and someone else is negatively impacted. Particularly when you have a zero sum game such as college admissions (colleges typically are not looking to increase their class sizes). Typically those who benefit will champion the change as being righteous and just. Those who are hurt by it will do the opposite.

What is in the best interests of one school isn’t necessarily in the best interests of all schools. If you like a given policy (or strongly disagree with its opposite) pick schools that fit your views best. Same is true if you disagree with a given policy. Its why there are different colleges with different options.

162

“Just because someone dunked a basketball once does not mean that it is his/her optimal shooting tactic in most situations. Or if s/he made a heave from back court once”

Oh come on now @ucbalumnus, hail mary shots are a complete tangent.

Being able to dunk means one has the physical ability to do a certain range of actions on the court. It shows that a certain set of skills can now be added on top to an understood level of skills and ability. And it doesn’t mean you give up practicing layups.

163

In fact she took it 3x ( @Mom2aphysicsgeek - so not that huge a jump that ACT would suspect she’d cheated). The 29 was spring of soph year (sorry I let her do it but she wanted to, “just to see”), 32 as a junior, and once more fall of senior year for the 35.

If a student who repeat tests with different scores isn’t considered in the studies, it should be.

164

In theory… in practice, test preparation opportunities are more likely to be available for students from high income families. Even where they are made more available to those in low-opportunity situations, they cannot replace years of disadvantage that accrues from being in a significantly worse school system for years.

165

Sorry, perhaps I’m being slow: what is the issue with taking the tests multiple times but improving year to year? I’d say that as long as we get a score by the fall of senior year, it feels like a level playing field (if everyone had the opportunity to take it more than once).

166

Yes, so we need to make schools more equal… and you’ve already noted that that’s the first order influence…

167

But not everyone does. If the family is pretty savvy about waivers and testing, and qualifies financially, they can get a waiver to take it twice (which in D’s case would have meant only a 2-3 point spread rather than 6).

168

Why is it the case that your daughter’s score increases were solely because she took the test an additional time? Had she only taken it senior year she may well have gotten a 35. Had she only take it twice, she may well have ended up with a 35 as her highest score.

169

Yup, those things are possible. But there’s no way to know.

170

“(which in D’s case would have meant only a 2-3 point spread rather than 6).”

… or limit actual test taking to junior and senior years when the students are more ingrained with the skills needed to do well on the test? It’s like @saillakeerie just stated, it could be that your D didn’t reach a 35 level of execution until senior year. I guess this whole perception of the test as an IQ test (and hence should be giving the same results all the time) vs an ability test is adding to the confusion? Perhaps?

171

And there is no way to know if your college essays were great because you wrote them on your own or had other people review and give you comments. Or a whole host of factors that can go into a GPA beyond competency in the particular courses (teacher’s pet, difficult kid in class, parents paid for tutors, maybe you are great at memorizing/regurgitating but retained nothing 2 weeks after the class, etc). Or that you were the starting point guard on the varsity basketball team for four years because your dad is best friends with the coach.

There are a lot of issues at the margins with various parts of a resume that colleges consider. Nothing is perfect.

172

I suspect so, @chippedtoof .

Including tests, I’d say, @saillakeerie .

173

@ucbalumnus our public school offers free prep sessions to all students - though space is limited. Students run the spectrum from low income to affluent. Counselors push hard to make sure all parents know where the resources are and encourage participation. They also push Khan Academy and provide free practice test taking sessions, and there is no cost to participate in any of those activities. I am sure other schools do the same.

174

@OHMomof2 I don’t think tests are perfect either (never said otherwise). But it seems to me you are saying none of tests, GPA, essays or ECs are perfect so schools shouldn’t use tests. And if that isn’t what you are saying I apologize but at that point we are in agreement so there isn’t a discussion to be had.

175

Considering that the SAT was intended as an “aptitude” test, and the CB/ETS once claimed that test preparation made little difference, that is what shapes how it is seen. It is still much less targeted to specific academic achievements than SAT subject or AP tests, even though, as a measure of IQ, it is still confounded by environmental factors.

176

The beauty of the ACT is that it is a curriculum test. It’s not an IQ test or an aptitude test. It just wants to measure what you’ve learned. It seems the last revamp of the SAT was undertaken to make it more like the ACT. The SAT even changed it’s name to Scholastic Assessment Test (rather than Aptitude Test).

177

Actually, SAT is no longer an acronym for anything.

1926-1990 “Scholastic Aptitude Test”
1990-1997 “Scholastic Assessment Test”
1997-now “SAT”

178

These are stats reported from a few years ago(2013), fwiw: (if 2 million students spent 2.5 BILLION/year = 1250 per student per year who took the exams. 2.5 billion would go a long way toward other, more rational identification measures- although my guess is that number includes more than just ACT/SAT tutoring.)

 "Over 1.66 million students took the SAT last year, and for the first time, the number of students who took the ACT surpassed SAT takers by about 2,000 students. Many students take both tests, take them multiple times during their junior and senior years, and take the PSAT, SAT II subject tests, and Advanced Placement tests.  These tests are an industry unto themselves, with millions of dollars spent on test fees, administration, and preparation.
 The tests also carry additional fees for late registration, standby testing, registration changes, scores by telephone, and extra score reports, each of which ranges between $11 and $55...

…
The College Board and the Educational Testing Service, both private nonprofit educational testing organizations, administer the SAT. The ACT is administered by ACT, Inc, also a private non-profit.
Americans for Educational Testing Reform has criticized the organizations for collecting millions in profits while maintaining their nonprofit status and therefore avoiding federal taxes. College Board spokesperson Leslie Sepuka, says, however, that all of their profits are invested back into programs and services, including a fee waiver program for low-income students.
The executive salaries at these organizations have also come under fire… The former president of the College Board, Gaston Caperton, for example, took in $1.3 million, including deferred compensation in 2009, according to tax records–more than the president of Harvard University. He stepped down last year and his successor, David Coleman, now earns a base salary of $550,000, with total compensation of nearly $750,000.Richard Ferguson, the former CEO of ACT, Inc., received $1.1 million including retirement benefits in 2009.
(…)
According to a March report from IBISWorld, although profits fell briefly during the recession, the tutoring and test prep industry generates an average of $840.4 million every year and employs more than 115,000 people. And a 2009 report from Eduventures calculated that about 2 million students spend $2.5 billion a year on test preparation and tutoring."
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2013/05/01/SAT-Tests-Another-Drain-on-the-Family-Budget

179

@lastone03 of course, not all schools offer free and easily accesible test prep. That is the point - and one of the reason SAT test scores are most closely correlated with income and with access to PSAT testing.

This fable of the SAT helping the socio-economically deprived student is 100% myth. It is not borne out by any stats anywhere. Again, SAT publishes an NM list. Look at the schools. A few homeschool kids are clearly helped.

As far as scholarships, schools give scholarships without the SAT as well. The misfire is thinking that absent standardized tests, colleges can’t recognize academic talent. I think that stats suggest that is not true, or if true, only in the margins, and likely not worth 4 million+ Saturdays a year.

Here’s some public school’s average SAT scores in CA. Run some “median income” numbers for these districts…
http://schools.latimes.com/sat-scores/ranking/page/1/
They start at a high of 1990 (old test obviously) and go down to 1000. And this is not all schools.
Here’s someone pimping the private school advantage.
http://www.capenet.org/pdf/Outlook399.pdf

180

We need to let go of ideas about the SAT reflecting IQ. If I recall correctly, the departure from aptitude testing began slowly with the 1994 changes and the transformation was complete with the 2016 New SAT. It is now intended to be an achievement test.

https://www.collegeboard.org/membership/all-access/counseling-admissions-financial-aid-academic/sat-enters-new-era-week-students