<p>
[quote]
Standardized tests, for all their recognized imperfections, are carefully designed and tested to measure such basic intellectual skills as reading comprehension, vocabulary, critical thinking, computational ability and quantitative reasoning. Are admissions officers at SAT-optional universities saying that the test scores do not provide probative evidence of the possession of these skills? Are they saying that these skills are not relevant to success in the educational program of their colleges? Neither claim is remotely plausible.</p>
<p>Moreover, if standardized test scores really are so imperfect, we should scrap them altogether. Its illogical to count a test score if it is high but ignore it if it is low.
<p>Thanks for posting the link. I agree that the SAT is imperfect but do believe it to be carefully designed to measure basic academic skills with the emphasis on basic. Making it optionals just seems to me to be another way of "gaming the game".</p>
<p>"The idea is simple: tell applicants that they can choose whether or not to submit their SAT or ACT scores. Predictably, those applicants with low scores or those who know that they score poorly on standardized aptitude tests will not submit. Those with high scores will submit. When the college computes the mean SAT or ACT score of its enrolled students, voilà! its average will have risen. And so too, it can fondly hope, will its status in the annual U.S. News & World Report’s college rankings."</p>
<p>Wheaton College (MA) as one example first utilized the switch from women's college to co-ed a few years back to keep quality high, now I see they are using the SAT option gimmick to maintain deceptively high SAT scores. Starngely enough their internet based video - is basically selling it as a party school, although one in which the professsors (in the video) declare the students as brilliant</p>
<p>I also noticed Mount Holyoke College, the oldest women's college in the United States, has adopted (via a supposed trial period spread of years) the SAT Option strategy, a bit disturbing since this is one of the original seven sister colleges, a designation that once had great signficance</p>
<p>A quote from the thoughtful article:
"I SOMETIMES think I should write a handbook for college admission officials titled How to Play the U.S. News & World Report Ranking Game, and Win! I would devote the first chapter to a tactic called SAT optional. </p>
<p>The idea is simple: tell applicants that they can choose whether or not to submit their SAT or ACT scores. Predictably, those applicants with low scores or those who know that they score poorly on standardized aptitude tests will not submit. Those with high scores will submit. When the college computes the mean SAT or ACT score of its enrolled students, voilà! its average will have risen. And so too, it can fondly hope, will its status in the annual U.S. News & World Reports college rankings."</p>
<p>I certainly think that these SAT optional schools operate from a mix of ostensible and ulterior motives. The former being an honest belief that standardized tests can be a flawed measure; the latter a strong desire to move up the rankings ladder.</p>
<p>I think the author has a good point that these schools could accomplish their first goal by weighting the SAT/ACT scores lower in their applicant evaluations. However, I think he overstates the case that all measures are flawed. Most importantly, I think that research has shown that hs GPA is the best predictor of college performance. As to grade inflation, the colleges have the high school profiles, so they can see whether 50% of the class is "in the top 10%," have A averages, etc. I also think the adreps can usually recognize a professionally or parent-written essay.</p>
<p>Although I would like to condemn colleges and universities for "playing the rankings game," I really can't. They didn't invent it (as far as I know). They are businesses and they want and need to market themselves to their customers and attract the best. This is the world they are subject to. I do applaud Reed for bucking the system, though. If only more institutions would join them.</p>
<p>When Bates made SAT optional, incoming students who chose not to report their SAT had scored in fact 160 points lower on average. Since the number of applications doubled that year, Bates was able to move up in its US News ranking in being more "selective" but with an SAT 50% range that remains similar to previous years. Whether these students are less well prepared or less well-rounded for a rigorous academic program will be subject to long-term debates.</p>
<p>While I do think the SAT has a place in the admissions process, I do not believe that it necessarily follows that there is a correlation between going SAT optional and a lack of academic rigor. In the case of Mt. Holyoke, students are expected to submit graded writing samples as part of their application. </p>
<p>"Mount Holyoke in 2001 made the standardized test optional for admission, convinced that the SAT had become a negative force in higher education, and committed to casting a wider net for applicants with strong academic potential and exceptional talents who may have been previously discouraged from applying because of their performance on the SAT."</p>
<p>Itis important to note that at this point, Mt. Holyoke stands behind its decision to go SAT optional, now that the results of the three-year study (supported by a $290,000 grant from the Mellon Foundation) are in. This does not at all contradict what the President of Reed is objecting to in his op ed piece. Another question would be, how did going SAT optional affect application numbers? Did the numbers increase and thereby enrich Holyoke's application pool? Mt. Holyoke was most likely not playing a rankings game in embarking on its SAT optional course, however, in most cases, it seems clear that students with high SAT scores report them, while students with lower SAT scores (however "brilliant" the rest of their profile) will not. </p>
<p>I don't think it is at all surprising that some of the luster has dulled on the Seven Sister Colleges - these days they have to compete not only with the other "Sisters" but with the formerly all male elites as well. So, from this angle, going SAT optional is a good "strategy" - which does indeed "open a new front in the admissions arms race."</p>
<p>Just an aside, but Vasaar (another of the Seven Sisters) requires the SAT reasoning test as well as 2 SAT IIs in different areas in addition to graded writing samples.</p>
<p>The significance of Diver's op ed piece is that finally someone in a position to know has shown the courage to say out loud that SAT measures the skills necessary to do high level college work.</p>
<p>Well we know from personal experience, that while Reed does require SAT & recommends SAT IIs, they also place just as much emphasis on other parts of the application, like interview, essays, recommendations etc.</p>
<p>I think there is a place for colleges who look at more of the whole package, rather than use an admission index of scores and grades.
My younger daughter hasn't taken the SAT yet, but in general, does poorly in many testing situations. Im wondering if in addition to her processing difficultites if her ability to make other connections besides the ones that testers are looking for contribute to scores much below intelligence level.</p>
<p>I am also really insulted at Divers suggestion that essays are written by coaches or parents. I never even saw my daughters essay- even if I wanted to rewrite it for her ( which I couldn't have, since I didnt even ask to see them), my daughter has more integrity than to pass something that someone else did as hers.</p>
<p>I also don't believe that the majority of applicants do so, especially to someplace like Reed- that would be counterproductive.
If you aren't capable of writing an admission essay by yourself, you aren't capable of the workload @ Reed, and better to find out before you move in.</p>
<p>Those of us who went through the process in an ethical manner will be incensed. But be aware that MANY, not just "many" did the other - had friends and family "edit" the essays, or hired the counselor (not to say anything wrong with this), or had teachers edit, etc. And yes, it is better to find out early on that there is no fit, but the drive to get into an elite is tremendous for many kids and their parents. We can talk all about "fit" as much as we want, but for some, the only "fit" is ivy or elite, and they will do anything to make it happen!</p>
<p>
[quote]
finally someone in a position to know has shown the courage to say out loud that SAT measures the skills necessary to do high level college work.
<p>There are two threads running simultaneously on this topic, unfortunately. So I hope the mods will combine them so that we all see all views.</p>
<p>That said, I will make a comment re post #4 and cross-post some thoughts I put on the other thread:</p>
<p>Bates was, I believe, one of the very earliest to make SAT optional. I don't doubt that the school appreciated the boost it might give them in the rankings. I don't know if it actually did boost the school or not. Most importantly, I believe Bates has had the policy long enough and done the research to show that those who did and did not submit SAT scores performed equally well at this school.</p>
<p>From the other thread:
[quote]
I certainly think that these SAT optional schools operate from a mix of ostensible and ulterior motives. The former being an honest belief that standardized tests can be a flawed measure; the latter a strong desire to move up the rankings ladder.</p>
<p>I think the author has a good point that these schools could accomplish their first goal by weighting the SAT/ACT scores lower in their applicant evaluations. However, I think he overstates the case that all measures are flawed. Most importantly, I think that research has shown that hs GPA is the best predictor of college performance. As to grade inflation, the colleges have the high school profiles, so they can see whether 50% of the class is "in the top 10%," have A averages, etc. I also think the adreps can usually recognize a professionally or parent-written essay.
<p>I have a problem with SAT-optional. If Mt. Holyoke really believes that "the SAT had become a negative force in higher education", why are they accepting it at all? And do those who do not submit the SATs have to go through a different process? (For example, at Muhlenberg, if you do not submit the SATs, you must submit the graded paper and have an evaluative interview.) If not, then the school is simply gaming the system by not committing to its alleged convictions.</p>
<p>jmmom: I'm told by economists and statisticians that numerous studies show a significant correlation between SAT and "college success", the latter subject to different interpretations, unfortunately. (Don't have any citations for you at hand, sorry.)</p>
<p>Personal experience over several decades at state universities, where student prep is all over the place, leads to the observation that students admitted to honors college programs handle sophisticated material better. No prof asks for scores, of course, but honors college administrators do--SAT/ACT scores are often the primary initial requirement--so one has a general idea. </p>
<p>Since I'm under the cover of anonymity, I guess I can add that my extended family, a large one, shows very high correlation between great scores and great success, and poor scores and no success. Perhaps some wiggle room in between.</p>
<p>Diver does not advocate using the SAT to the exclusion of other measures. Schools like U Chicago make it clear that other factors are more important, but I'm assuming they have a good reason for not throwing SAT out altogether.</p>
<p>I'm just hoping Diver's article leads to open-minded consideration of the issue, and proponents and opponents of standardized tests do not automatically take cover behind their barricades and start throwing verbal missiles.</p>
<p>Spinner: I have no idea about questions 1 and 3. As for the second, I think you are correct as far as it goes. I don't think the studies have looked beyond freshman year. But I am definitely getting out of my territory here. I don't usually argue from anecdote, but in this case I see a lot of situations that confirm that at the highest and lowest scores, SAT/ACT are good tools. It should be obvious to anyone that they cannot stand alone, however, for assessing the potential success of most students. But, I don't think Diver or anyone else advocates that.</p>
<p>I do have the impression that if other schools were pressured to be more visible about the SAT scores of all students applying, that they would come down in rankings and as a result Reed would rise-
However, I think many applicants- already know of the rigor of Reed as well as the caliber of students even without that.
While my older daughter graduated from Reed this past year, and submitted SAT as well as two SAT II scores, she didn't take any prep classes, she only took the SAT twice in high school ( once in 7th grd), and her scores were basically the same each time- although since they take the highest scores and there was a differential of about 10 pts,by being able to combine the score raised her total.
But what about students who aren't going to take prep classes, who don't have the stamina for a 5 hour test?
At Reed, they have unproctored tests that you can take in your room or under a tree. If the SATs were given to students at that pace, I think they would be more representative of how students can perform in college- but going to the all day test, is going to benefit students who are great at taking extended tests, not necessarily students who can excel in college.</p>
<p>( what I have heard is that high SAT scores are corrolated with family income and background as much as how students actually do in school-
* its much smaller than my daughters public high school*and re transfer rate- I don't think that is corrolated to SAT score- but probably to the very small size of the school- limited majors & to the expense as well as the not overstated demands of Reed-
73% graduate in 6 years or less- lower than comparable schools- but possibly for the reasons above)</p>
<p>EK4: I was being a smart aleck in my post. Reed is known around here as an amazing school with a bit of a pressure cooker atmosphere.
I was responding to Diver's piece, which I think overplayed the value of SATs and didn't consider the other things that predict a good college student.
I agree with you, untimed tests would offer many students the opportunity to show their knowledge and thinking skills.
If you think about it, who really has to work under that kind of time pressure, besides race car drivers and production line workers?</p>