Of the 7, which trumps?

Parent Cafe
41

<p>Mini, if it is the intent of the adcoms to find wealthy students, how would eliminating SATs deter them from such a purpose? They can look at who is applying for aid, they can look at schools, parental education and jobs, etc etc. With SATs, it is still possible to excel despite one's disadvantages. If adcoms want to find those who are extraordinary students--using SATs along with transcript, rank and so on--they can do so. If they want to find the wealthy to pay full fare, they can find them without the SAT.</p>

42

<p>Mini's daughter -the Bubble Queen- might have benefitted from special allowances for homeschoolers, or might have fallen through the cracks. It is a public secret that all scores prior to starting high school are wiped from the records of The College Board.</p>

43

<p>You can request SAT scores prior to high school to be retained. A girl I knew scored 1550 in 7th grade; her parents decided there was no point in retaking the SAT later and asked for her score not to be wiped out.</p>

44

<p>xiggi said,</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>It is really about the racial politics of the SAT I test.</p>

<p>The SAT and Racial Politics</p>

<p>[Although Atkinson says that the UC must set high standards, he also says that since California has a highly diverse racial and ethnic population, the UC “must be careful to make sure that its standards do not unfairly discriminate against any students.”16 According to Atkinson’s logic, because he believes the SAT keeps African-American and Hispanic students out of the UC, the test thus discriminates against these groups, so therefore it must be eliminated. Of course, he does not say why poor Asian-American students, many of whom come from the same or similar neighborhoods and schools as African-American and Hispanic students, do just fine on the SAT. Addressing such a point would not be politically or racially correct.]</p>

<p>[Atkinson’s statements make it clear that his opposition to the SAT is motivated more by racial politics than by any genuine interest in the empirical evidence regarding student achievement. Indeed, David Murray, research director of the Washington, DC-based Statistical Assessment Service, states that “every major premise on which [opposition to the SAT] rests is false.”17 Murray observes that SAT scores correlate “with those on a whole range of other measures and assessments, including IQ tests, the National Assessment of Educational Progress, and the National Educational Longitudinal Study.”]</p>

<p>45% UC Berkeley, 40% of UCLA, 60% of UC Irvine, 35% of UC San Diego is Asian American. Asian Americans are the biggest group in the jewels of the UC system, which consists of some of the most academically elite and competitive colleges in the nation, either private or private, as represented by the present racial and ethnic composition of its student body. Asian Americans still will be the biggest group in this system, no matter what the standards and criteria for admissions are, including the new "Comprehensive Review", using life's obstacles and experiences as a plus factor in admissions.</p>

<p>The article further states, </p>

<p>[Neither is the SAT somehow uniquely unfair to minorities. Murray points out that “Far from being idiosyncratic, the scoring patterns of whites, blacks, Hispanics, and Asians on the SAT and GRE are replicated on other tests as well.”19 Critics would retort that all standardized tests, not just the SAT, are biased. Murray refutes this charge by noting that “the National Academy of Sciences concluded in the 1980s that the most commonly used standardized tests display no evidence whatsoever of cultural bias.”20 Murray notes that a University of California study showed that the SAT actually overestimates the first-year grades of African-Americans and Hispanics in the UC system.21]</p>

<p>[Murray also says that while the SAT may slightly underpredict the college success of women, for more selective universities, “the SAT predicts the grades of both sexes quite accurately.”22]</p>

<p>[Finally, Murray points out that research shows that SAT scores do not depend heavily on the income of students’ families. Students of different races but whose families have similar incomes perform very differently on the exam.23]</p>

<p>[Murray concludes that those who are trying to eliminate the SAT hope “to achieve the ends of affirmative action by other, more politic means.”24 SAT critics, says Murray, want “more ‘nuanced’ measures of scholastic merit like ‘creativity’ and ‘leadership,’ tacitly understood as stand-ins for skin color.”25 Atkinson, for instance, advocates a so-called “holistic” assessment of student merit. As Murray points out, however, “there is no reason to think that minority students possess these qualities in greater abundance than do their peers.”26 Murray concludes, “The attempt to substitute them for test scores will thus only perpetuate the corrupt logic of affirmative action by piling deception upon deception.”27]</p>

45

<p>marite said,</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>I had called the College Board, and they told me otherwise. Our son did score a 1540 in the beginning of the eight grade, and he was required to retake it. He only did some more practice exams with the most recent SAT I tests from his school (since he had done all the tests in the 10 Real SAT book) and took it again in the 10th grade scoring a 1600. I guess retaking the SAT I does improve one's scores in his case. The odds are against it at the highest levels of scoring above 1500.</p>

46

<p>This is the point that the flaming white liberals refuse to admit, because this debunks all their arguments against the SAT I test, including Mini's arguments.</p>

<p>"Of course, he does not say why poor Asian-American students, many of whom come from the same or similar neighborhoods and schools as African-American and Hispanic students, do just fine on the SAT. Addressing such a point would not be politically or racially correct."</p>

47

<p>I read reports that this was no longer possible, but it does not make sense to lose great scores.</p>

48

<p>Marite’s point about the advantages of early home life reminded me of a funny incident. I was in a food court with my three young children ages 2, 4, and 6. They all have loud voices and were constantly bickering with each other as they were eating their lunches. I was quite embarrassed by their behavior and kept trying to get them to settle down so they wouldn't disturb nearby patrons. I noticed an elderly woman approaching the table and began to prepare my apology. She said, "My grown son and I have been listening to your children and commenting on what wonderful vocabulary they have! Do you read to then a lot?" </p>

<p>Both S's scored in the top 1% on their verbal SAT’s. D hasn't taken them yet.</p>

49

<p>Taking the lowest scores of multiple sittings or the first time...god, I'd feel like I was preparing for the Baccalaureat....if you get sick (which happened to me one of 2 times I took it), what do you say-Better luck next year?</p>

<p>maybe the best of 2 times, or the average? </p>

<p>trying to avoid increasing already out the window stress levels...</p>

50

<p>I don't care if they use the SATs for admissions. What frosts my behind is the shakedown racket the College Board folk inflict on the American people. In collusion with the colleges, they have a monopolistic system that takes hundreds of dollars from each student and puts it right in the CEEB's coffers. </p>

<p>Seems like to me that, if the colleges want the test scores so badly, THEY should pay the freight. Bet they'd sing a different tune if they had to pick up the tab for thousands and thousands of applicants. Of course, they have their own little rackets going, collecting millions of dollars in application fees from kids with a one in ten shot of being accepted.</p>

51

<p>Which of these factors will override? Make the difference? It depends.....</p>

<p>Legacy #1 if your parent went to the school and there is a building on campus named after him. Otherwise, #6 or #7 if "only" a graduate.</p>

<p>SAT's tied for last. 1600s are a dime a dozen. Don't HYPS say they could fill their entire class with 1600s if they so desired? (twice?)</p>

<p>Athletic Recruitment #1 if your alternative is going into the NBA lottery. Drops drastically after that. </p>

<p>EC's #1 if your ECs include starring in blockbuster films; Still pretty good even if the the films are not that great... If you are merely president of 25 clubs drops to #7</p>

<p>Difficulty of class courses taken tied for last... who cares? </p>

<p>GPA tied for last - HYPS could also fill their classes with 4.0... or 4.5s or 5.0s or whatever perfect is at a given HS. Don't bother getting the doctor's excuse so you don't have to take gym which would lower your weighted GPA.</p>

<p>Class Rank tied for last - Top 20 are not statistically different anyway</p>

<p>interesteddad---- don't get me started! Drives me nuts also, especially when PR starts offering their own SAT prep courses! What an industry!</p>

52

<br>


<br>

<p>You are really misinformed. 1600 scores are definitely not "a dime a dozen".</p>

<p>In 2003, there were only about 900 perfect 1600 scorers on the SAT I out of 1.5 million test takers of the SAT I or O.06 times 1% or 6 one-hundreths of 1%, which will put the 1600 scorer in the top 0.0094 percentile.</p>

<p>I think Mensa defines "genius" as being the top 1 to 2 percentile in IQ testing.</p>

<p>There are not enough of 1600 scorers to fill Harvard's freshman class of 1600 students, not to mention Yale's and Princeton's freshman classes. The 1600 score is still a high distinction, which only about 900 SAT I test takers achieved in 2003. I would not trivialize or demean their accomplishment out of ignorance.</p>

53

<p>Cookiemom:</p>

<p>When my S was in daycare, we took him and a group of friends to an amusement park. At lunch, some of the kids wanted to eat their ice cream, others wanted to skip dessert to resume playing. The oldest child in the group said: "Let's take a vote." The vote was to resume playing. Dessert was skipped without further argument. H and I were quite impressed by the whole thing, not just the willingness to abide by majority rule, but also the arguments that were presented in a quite decorous manner considering it involved 5 year-olds. It was a very expensive daycare, and all the parents were professionals. Three of the kids ended up in the same top LAC.</p>

54

<p>Oh yeah? Well, when MY wife was PREGNANT, the she had twin fetuses and one composed an opera and the other won the Nobel Prize, and they both came out of the womb walking and toilet-trained, and at age 10 one had a tenured position at Harvard and the other was teaching at Yale!!!</p>

<p>LOL! Sorry, I couldn't resist. But surely you can see where we are going with this!!!!!!! It just adds to the nonsense about the superiority of expensive day care centers and professional parents and.....omigod, I see now that you must have been JOKING, Marite! Sorry!</p>

55

<p>What sport is your son being recruited for?</p>

56

<p>The point is that kids who come from well educated families with a high SES have advantages that come into play well before high school. SES has a huge impact on SAT scores, grades, EC's and eventual college admissions. That's why schools are now scrambling to figure out ways to attract and admit less privileged students.</p>

57

<p>NEdad:</p>

<p>Cookiemom made my point, so I won't repeat it. I just want to point out that middle class culture emphasizes the value of talking and the importance of words. The kids could have "voted with their feet." But by 5, they'd already been conditioned by parents and teachers to talk in order to resolve their differences. Look at what colleges ask of applicants: much of it has to do with words, whether in the SAT, the application essay, the letters of recommendations. Look at what applicants are encouraged to look for in colleges: small classes where discussion is encouraged, research papers and essays instead of multiple choice questions. Look at what a liberal arts education seek to foster: critical thinking, good writing skills. These are values and skills that well-educated middle class parents are better able to instill in their children even before they get to kindergarten. This is why ranting against expensive SAT prep classes taken in junior or senior year of high schoolseems to me so inadequate when one considers the advantages accrued over the previous 15-16 years of a kid's life.</p>

58

<p>Back to the original question, I think the factor on your list most overlooked by students and parents is the difficulty of the course load. This doesn't apply so much to the kids and parents on this board, but in general. The top schools are expecting that students are taking 5 "solid” academic classes each semester, and that these classes are Honors and AP, if available. With over 50% of high school students nationally boasting averages in the "A" range, the schools are forced to look at the difficulty of the course load.</p>

<p>I find it difficult to talk to other parents and students about this, because by the time we usually have this conversation it's too late. I've done mock admissions with the school I interview for, and this can be a deciding factor among otherwise similar looking students. A few years ago an MIT adcom was quoted as saying that they look at the courses a student has taken before they look at the grades. If the course load isn't challenging enough, they never even look at the grades.</p>

59

<p>Very good points, Marite. When you think about this, it makes the money spent on SAT prep seem even more outrageous. It can't possibly make that much of a difference, especially on the verbal section. One of my S's friends was actually told by a test prep company, that they are mostly successful at raising math scores.</p>

60

<p>Which trumps...
When looking at thousands of candidates, solid academics/scores get you a look. Likely contribution to community gets you in. (I agree with Xiggi.) Other things, like legacy, as tip factors. Athletes--USUALLY a tip factor, not auto admit; there are a lot of scholar athletes out there.
Schools interested in diversity of all sorts look at "the whole person" so a student who excels in HIS environment is noticed , even though scores may be lower. But the odds of doing so are greatly decreased by socio-economic disadvantages, starting early in life and just accumulating as time goes on (agree with Marite on that). You can come up with dozens, if not hundreds, of impacting factors: lack of books, lack of parental involvement, lack of good nutrition, lack of good teachers, lack of challenging courses, lack of awareness of educational options, lack of info about the college process, etc.
Just my opinions. Interesting thread.</p>