<p>
[quote]
"And for the record, I find it 100% admissible to penalize students who do not make the effort to write in an intelligible fashion"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>ziggi, I share your impatience with poor presentation, but I think you underestimate the "effort" required for some students to produce good handwriting. It's often a physical/neurological challenge. In a 25-minute timed test, where we know length helps improve score, the handwriting athletes have a big advantage. Not fair!</p>
<p>Marite notes,"I don't think it's really possible to write a thoughtful, well-argued and well-written essay in 25 minutes. Heck, people have not exhausted the topic of memory in hundreds of books"</p>
<p>Response: I completely agree Marite. In fact, this is the one central flaw for both the SAT and the ACT: the severe time limits of the tests. Kids should be given plenty of time in order to easily complete the tests and write the essays. Certainly an hour to organize, plan and write the essay isn't asking too much.</p>
<p>I should explain that our state university honors program, which looks like a plausible "safety" program for my oldest son, has always required an essay for admission, and always will. The program does regard writing ability, but it's not sure that the new SAT I writing section adds information about applicants that isn't already apparent from the program's own required essay.</p>
<p>Taxguy, I hope you are not suggesting adding time to the non-writing sections. The element of time is the MOST critical part of the test. Adding even 5 or 10 minutes to math and english sections would make them trivial, especially for the ACT. Further, with the addition of extra-time, you are bound to see tougher grading and expected higher standards. In addition, as it stands, the biggest criticism of the test is its length. </p>
<p>As long as the test will have to be administered countless times a year and confined to a single session, there won't be any solutions. As I have written before, I would love to see the College Board relegating that monstruosity of a program called AP to a position similar to the current SAT, and see it offered ONLY OUTSIDE the school year. This would open the door to move the SAT to the time periods where the APs are currently offered. With two weeks to spare, there would be plenty of opportunities to offer a different test and break it down into a couple of days. My favorite scenario would include a first week in May and a second week in September or October where all SAT and all the Subject Tests --including an extended selection-- would have to be taken. Every student would be done with the SAT by taking it either in May as a Junior or in September as a Senior. Those should be the ONLY scores that mattered, just as the Junior PSAT is the only score that counts. </p>
<p>The rest of the Saturdays of the year could allow the AP-obsessed students to test as much as they wish ... on their own time!</p>
<p>
[quote]
The program does regard writing ability, but it's not sure that the new SAT I writing section adds information about applicants that isn't already apparent from the program's own required essay.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, much as I hate to question the integrity of our nation's youth, your statement begs the question. There's much about the SAT I writing section to dislike, but it is moderated and therefore the work of the student. It would be nice to think that all students to your U's honor program wrote their own essays. But I doubt it.</p>
<p>Hey, Xiggi:</p>
<p>Remember the students who take college courses and have finals--usually during weekdays in May! And remember that for some students, the alternative to perishing of boredom is to take APs. Not an obsession, a survival technique. :)</p>
<p>Marite, students can take all the AP they want. The AP are too profitable to go away. It's only a matter of time for TCB to announce AP No 100--probably one in Swahili or Turkish Literature! :) </p>
<p>We were just discussing when the tests are offered. Conflicts with the finals at college would be the same for the AP exams or SAT exams given during the weekdays.</p>
<p>You're right. I'd prefer the SAT-IIs to be given in June, as most classes do not end until late June.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In my opinion, a handwritten test should be graded on all its components, and that should include spelling, presentation, correct argumentation, as well as ... the mechanics of writing itself.
[/quote]
Yeah, but doesn't the collegeboard claim it disregards mechanics? If so, then perhaps it ought not ding folks for sloppy handwriting. Yet, I have to say, I agree that an essay should be graded on everything, including the presentation. When my kids turn in essays, I hit 'em incredibly hard if indentations and all kinds of nitpicky stuff are not in order. They complain that my own essays are sloppy (and they are), but still...</p>
<p>LOL.</p>
<p>Replying to #25, the nature of the prompt on that program's essay question helps (it's hard for a third party to fake, or to buy off the Internet), and of course the program also looks at plenty of "moderated," as you call it, information, as scores on the other sections of the SAT I, ACT, SAT II, and AP tests are all considered in making admission decisions, as are grades from relevant prerequisite courses. </p>
<p>I'm fully agreed with you that it is helpful, in an era of parents "helping" their children far beyond what would have been imaginable for my parents, to have a proctored, third-party test be one basis for admission decisions. And I even think it is possible for the College Board to design a writing test that meets that goal--but first it has to teach its graders to get off their high horse about cursive handwriting or avoidance of vigorous, first-person writing.</p>
<p>Drossel, that was my opinion, not The College Board's. There is no evidence that the graders DO penalize students for sloppy penmanship. Hmm, since only pencils are allowed on the SAT, is there such a sthing as pencilmanship ... or pencilwomenship? Maybe, young men have a harder time without their mechanical pencils. :)</p>
<p>Xiggi notes,"The element of time is the MOST critical part of the test. Adding even 5 or 10 minutes to math and english sections would make them trivial, especially for the ACT"</p>
<p>Response: huh? I don't see your point. I think the severe time limitations adversly affect smart but thoughtfull kids. I would make the SAT over a two day period of three hours each and NOT make it a test of endurance, which it is now and not make it a test of who can think quickest.</p>
<p>Amen, tax guy. (On the "endurance" issue)</p>
<p>schools arent really using the writing section anyways...its a waste of time and money!!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Xiggi notes,"The element of time is the MOST critical part of the test. Adding even 5 or 10 minutes to math and english sections would make them trivial, especially for the ACT"</p>
<p>Response: huh? I don't see your point. I think the severe time limitations adversly affect smart but thoughtfull kids. I would make the SAT over a two day period of three hours each and NOT make it a test of endurance, which it is now and not make it a test of who can think quickest.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Taxguy, I was responding to this:
[quote]
In fact, this is the one central flaw for both the SAT and the ACT: the severe time limits of the tests.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You seem to be mixing apples and oranges by confusing the issue of the length of the entire test and the the issue of the time constraints of each section. Also, you are absolutely incorrect that the test should NOT be about who can think "quickest." The test is ALL about reasoning under time constraints. Extending the 30 minutes to answer a section of 25 questions to 35, 40, 45 minutes would simply render the test trivial, and make it an absolute worthless measurement for students who do not suffer from a handicap. Again, the element of restricted time is ESSENTIAL to the integrity of the test. Simply stated: without the time limitations, there is no SAT nor an ACT!</p>
<p>The issue of endurance is a totally different matter. It would be better to offer the current SAT in two days, but it would--and should--not change a iota to the difficulty of the test. The issue of endurance can be addressed easily; the issue of extending time is totally impossible without creating an entirely different test.</p>
<p>Agree that there might be ways to improve the writing section! However the concept of a proctored writing assessment has been long overdue. Colleges have been expressing disappointment with student writing skills for years. Obviously the age old applicant essay isnt a valid indicator of communication skills, else why the surprise? A student with excellent writing skills will produce their own application essay with minimum outside help. A student with poor writing skills will receive as much help as is needed until the essay reads well.
When I auditioned for music, I had to perform a live audition- multiple works from memory, demonstrate reading ability, theory concepts, transposition, and so on. I cant imagine a music department making a decision based on an audio tape, where one has multiple opportunities to get it right. Worse yet, who knows who is actually doing the playing?<br>
At least a proctored writing sample gives the college an idea of what they can expect- what they have to work with.</p>
<p>I absolutely agree with the idea of a proctored essay. My complaint is that the time allotted for the essay is too short, especially since readers are expected to focus on critical thinking rather than on the more mechanical aspects of writing.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think the severe time limitations adversly affect smart but thoughtfull kids. I would make the SAT over a two day period of three hours each and NOT make it a test of endurance, which it is now and not make it a test of who can think quickest.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree, that would be the way I would go. It would also solve the problem of giving extra time for LDs. It will never happen though!</p>
<p>Having the SAT over a 2 day period? The SATs would have to be taken in the summer, when kids would have two consecutive days free. I don't think the College Board would like to run afoul of people's religious worship days.</p>
<p>But making it a two day test would cut down on multiple repeaters!</p>
<p>Ell:</p>
<p>When there was the SAT-II Writing, essentially, the test was over a two-day period.</p>