<p>What do you all think?</p>
<p><a href="http://nyti.ms/1gaDnhh">http://nyti.ms/1gaDnhh</a></p>
<p>I never knew “depreciatory” and “membranous” were arcane words…</p>
<p>I just saw this article and was about to post something on the forum when i saw your thread. I think this is so interesting especially since this is the SAT i will most likely be taking in a couple years. I think the new format sounds better, and I like how they are collaborating with Khan Academy!</p>
<p>So “less arcane” words, less tricky questions, optional essay (unless colleges make it less optional), essay more analytical, they don’t ding you anymore for incorrect guesses, and it’s supposed to be harder to prep specifically for the test, which makes it better for kids who don’t have tons of money for outside coaching. But it will be interesting to see how they still get enough variance. My DS will be in the first class to take it, I guess, as a current freshman.</p>
<p>So no guessing penalty. The essay writing doesn’t have to be coherent-- you can just express random thoughts. The hard words will removed from the vocab section. And geometry is being removed from the math section. They already removed the word-analogy section years ago. </p>
<p>Why stop there? While the College Board is at it, it should replace the semi-arcane words with SMS abbreviations & emoticons in the vocab section; add Twitter tweets to the reading comprehension section; and replace the optional essay writing section w a self-esteem bonus section so that no one has to have a score below 1600.</p>
<p>Is ‘twerking’ a vocab word?</p>
<p>The reason the SAT should be difficult is so there is a normal-distribution of scores, i.e. a bell-shaped curve. With this further dumbing down of the test, there will be a skewed distribution where “every snowflake is special”. </p>
<p>Why not simply have students take subject-matter tests, like they do in other countries, because this gutted SAT will be pointless.</p>
<p>And, since it’s now supposed to match the “common core” now (which BS aren’t adopting), one wonders what that means for BS kids? Maybe it doesn’t matter, since it sounds less challenging anyway. The writing part actually sounds better (50 minutes instead of 25, an analytical essay instead of opinion) – but, of course, it’s now optional. Again, it will be interesting to see how they create variance, which they ARE in the business of doing.</p>
<p>I agree with GMT. I don’t think I’d like the newer version of the SAT. It would probably render the SAT moot to some point, with higher and higher amount of people achieving perfect scores every year. I get that it’s happening, but the number would probably rise significantly.</p>
<p>On the flip side, perhaps this change will lead to a more holistic approach in identifying qualifiied applicants. I understand that all High Schools aren’t created equally; however, maybe this will cause College Administrators to dig a bit deeper and look at applicants from a 360 degree perspective, instead of from a numbers perspective. Or, I could be full of crap :)…I guess time will tell!</p>
<p>Hm, my interpretation is that they want the test easy and straightforward enough for disadvantaged students to succeed. So they’re dumbing it down. Not surprising - that has been the general trend, ever since the loss of the analogy section. I’m not really sure what that will accomplish, other than a huge cluster of students at the top, useless information for the most competitive colleges. They may as well dump the test altogether.</p>
<p>I’m also a little bothered by the notion that upper SEC students have a substantial advantage because they can afford expensive test prep. I have 2 comments on that.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>More intelligent parents tend to have higher income because it takes brains to get high paying jobs. More intelligent parents tend to have more intelligent children because intelligence is largely hereditary. Thus, higher SEC students might perform better on SAT largely because they are brighter.</p></li>
<li><p>Expensive test prep is absolutely unnecessary to improve SAT scores. Daughter of blue collar family, here, graduated public high school in early 80’s. Bought myself a couple of inexpensive test prep books, took practice tests once a week, and watched my scores soar. No tutors, no test prep classes; parents didn’t even know what SAT was. My daughter, a high school senior, also studied from inexpensive books, not because we can’t afford test prep classes, but because I know from experience they are not necessary. She also made significant gains. It’s not so much expensive test prep that raises scores, it is the DRIVE to succeed. And I think that drive to succeed is important information for colleges, regardless of a kid’s SEC.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>SAT changes timeline
<a href=“Implementation Archive – SAT Suite | College Board”>https://www.collegeboard.org/delivering-opportunity/sat/higher-ed/timeline</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m all for that. I think standardized tests have become meaningless indicators of performance–if they ever were valid.</p>
<p>I think they were useful once upon a time. Now, what with “recentering” and making the test ever easier (they don’t have analogies anymore??), I agree that they are pretty pointless. I have to admit I’m disappointed; my kids inherited my standardized testing ability, and now it looks as though it will not do much for them (although if it turns out on Monday that my standardized testing genes helped get them a prep school education, I will be quite satisfied after all 
).</p>
<p>Yeah, dumbing it down will really make the test pointless. </p>
<p>Or maybe it will shed more light on the value of an overall education and a consistent performance pattern over 4 years…just sayin!</p>
<p>I don’t see how that would accomplish that. </p>
<p>Well, I could be wrong, but I get the sense that at least here in the US, the value of an overall education and consistent performance over 4 years is already valued by college AO’s far more than SAT scores. As it should be. The test was just one little additional piece of information, which becomes less meaningful if it becomes so easy that it doesn’t spread students out over a normal distribution.</p>
<p>I posted most of that somewhat tongue in cheek because the reality is that the top universities aren’t going to alter their admission patterns or behaviors based on a tweeking of the SAT. The tail will not be wagging the dog anytime soon.</p>
<p>O.K. so below is an explanation of one of the 8 major changes in the test taken from the college board website. I sincerely hope they are doubling the time allotment. Students will be required to read “passages that will be paired with informational graphics” and integrate the information in both…………</p>
<p>"When students take the Evidence-Based Reading and Writing section of the redesigned SAT, they’ll be asked to demonstrate their ability to interpret, synthesize, and use evidence found in a wide range of sources. These include informational graphics and multiparagraph passages excerpted from literature and literary nonfiction; texts in the humanities, science, history, and social studies; and career-related sources.</p>
<p>For every passage students read, there will be at least one question asking them to select a quote from the text that best supports the answer they have chosen in response to the preceding question. Some passages will be paired with informational graphics, and students will be asked to integrate the information conveyed through each in order to find the best answer.</p>
<p>Questions that assess writing skills will also depend on a command of evidence. Students will be asked to analyze sequences of paragraphs to make sure they are correct, grammatically and substantively. In some questions, students will be asked to interpret graphics and edit the accompanying passages so that they accurately convey the information in the graphics."</p>
<p>@honoraryamom</p>
<p>But I don’t see how making the SAT easier would shed more light on the educational performance. If anything, having it harder would put a spotlight on the kids that excel in the same hard program.</p>
<p>Not that I’m complaining that they’re making it easier, I just don’t like the premise.</p>
<p>Okay, having extra time on the writing would be a lifesaver.</p>