<p>I thought it meant students who are currently high school juniors (in the Fall 08)... anyone else on this one??</p>
<p>OMG why can't they let the class of '09 choose too? I HATE my subject test score.</p>
<p>Considering almost all schools already either superscore or look at the highest score, this won't have much of an impact on the present admissions system. It will generate a few extra bucks for the College Board.</p>
<p>Too bad, though. Colleges ought to look at the full transcript from the College Board. If a kid got a 1700 3 times and then gets a 2100, well....</p>
<p>But don't you think it will encourage students to take it over and over and over again if the colleges don't see the number of times a student has taken it?</p>
<p>Yes, it certainly will encourage collegeconfidential-type kids to take it over and over. That's why i said it will generate a few extra bucks for the College Board. But those in the know already know that the disadvantages of taking it a bunch of times are slight or non-existent. And most normal (non-CC) kids get tired of it after a few attempts at it.</p>
<p>There used to be a "score choice" for the subject tests until 5 or 6 years ago. It was cancelled - CB claimed that it was 1) hurting lower income students, and 2) created many problems because the students were forgetting to release the scores on time...</p>
<p>First, it is good to remember that the true clients of the College Board are not the students but the schools that are requesting the test scores. Students and their parents only happen to be the ones paying for the service. The College Board reacts to the desires and wishes of their members! Students matter ... none.</p>
<p>A few years ago, the College Board stopped offering score choice and for only one reason: schools did not care about the number of tests taken but cared solely about the highest test scores on two or three tests. </p>
<p>This move simply reinforces something some of us have been repeating ad nauseam for years: despite the claims of a dwindling numbers of admission officers, colleges care about the highest reportable numbers just as much as the students. If they had ANY intention of limiting the numbers of test taken, it would have been a cinch to announce measures such as averaging test scores or diminishing the highest scores. Not only did they NOT do that but most schools encouraged multiple sittings by rewarding them via superscoring. Again, schools WANT to report the highest possible scores for the enrolled class. </p>
<p>In the grand scheme of things, this change means little to nothing at all.</p>
<p>Back in the day of the SAT II Score Choice, the score report showed the dates each test was taken, just without a score attached if the student didn't release it.
I agree with xiggi. The schools in my experience accept the top score regardless of the number of times taken. The only difference between my son under score choice and my daughter who applied when it was no more was tactical. My daughter didn't take a test unless she felt she could knock it out of the park. My son gave it a shot regardless. But in the end, it didn't matter which way they approached it. Under either regime. The top score is the top score.</p>
<p>I still think this has some significance when it comes to subject tests. I am not convinced that only the top scores are looked at there. This has some benefit when applying to schools that require differing number of subject tests -- allowing students to pick and choose among those tests, I do think has some value.</p>
<p>For subject tests--if you only take it once, are you still able to hide your score?</p>
<p>Because of this:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Under the new policy, students who take the SAT or the supplemental SAT subject exams multiple times will be able to decide whether to let colleges see one, some or all of their scores.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So no "none"? Because I don't see a lot of people retaking subject tests, so that would mean you'd have to show those scores if you only have one for a subject.</p>
<p>Until the entire story and rules are out, it's difficult to say. For those schools who just take a look at the top scores, it's not going to make a difference. For those schools that what to see the whole thing, maybe, maybe not. If schools can see who is holding scores and who is not, that could enter into their decisions. We are, of course, talking about the very top schools that select the very few. For that matter, a college can request all of the schores if they so choose.</p>
<p>
QFE. </p>
<p>I know that I'd be na</p>
<p>Also from the article, emphasis mine: "Only 15% take the exam three or more times, and research shows that repeated test taking is unlikely to further increase a student's scores, officials said."</p>
<p>Not really as accurate as it sounds, as ALL scores are on the hs transcript sent to the colleges.</p>
<p>Third child, but I just realized this bit of pertinent information. I checked with the gc and she confirmed it.</p>
<p>My d was debating whether or not to take the ACT. Her SAT scores were superior so she really had no need to test further. Could she take the ACT and not have the scores sent should they be negative factor? Sure. Would the ACT scores be a part of the hs transcript regardless? Yup.</p>
<p>So I'm not sure what the benefit is here. BTW, I find it disturbing that this info about testing and a hs transcript is not common knowledge. Rather - I had no idea and this is my third child.</p>
<p>High schools should not be putting SAT/ACT scores on HS transcripts. I know that our HS does not do so, so unless a student releases their scores, a college would have no way of seeing them. These scores "belong" to the student and should not be released without their permission. Whether the "new" College Board rules exist for any reason other than the fact that they were probably losing money to the ACT people, I don't know. What I do know is that this is not a new concept. Prior to, I believe, 2004 score choice existed for the SAT. They eliminated it for the reasons that many have cited here; unfair advantage for wealthier students, encouraged taking of multiple tests for no real benefit etc. To turn around 360 degrees it seems to me that there is an ulterior (read financial) motive behind this. I'll be very interested to see the complete list of rules regarding the release of scores. I suspect that if colleges continue to superscore, kids will release all their scores anyway.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>Double check the info about your hs's transcripts. I had no idea that test scores appear on the transcripts and I have had children at three different hs (and got my info from someone who had a child at a fourth hs.) At first, I thought "nope" because a big deal is made about sending the scores. So I specifically asked and had the info confirmed.</p>
<p>I have checked...as a matter of fact I have seen all my kids' transcripts and our HS does not put SAT/ACT or AP scores on the transcripts. Up until 2 years ago they did note AP scores of 4 or 5 on the transcript and they have even eliminated that. For what it's worth, the HS used to put New York State Regents exam (required for graduation) grades on the transcript, but after much parent input changed the policy to just note pass/fail for the Regents exams. The consensus was that no other specific exam grades are on the transcript (they are on the report card, but not the transcript), the kids only have to pass to graduate and it's no one's business how they did on one specific standardized test. So, though I totally understand that the high schools your children attend do list the scores (as do many others), ours does not. And if you are unhappy with the policy I would suggest that you approach your guidance department and principal to try to reverse the policy.
Also, many colleges still require an official College Board score report as part of the application.</p>
<p>There is a thread about this in the College admissions forum too. One poster (bigp) commented that he/she thought this might lead to students takign the SAT every weekend, if they could. I am reposting my comment:</p>
<p>"Good point bigp. Sad that this may cause some students to take the test over and over and over. Like they don't already have enough stress and enough demands on their time? Will the spots in the test sites fill up sooner, causing an increased pressure to sign up earlier and earlier or for more and more (in case a student gets shut out of a site or two) and then increased locations or increased frequency of testing dates? Scary....."</p>
<p>
[quote]
It's not so much that poor students can't afford the sitting fee to take it multiple times; it's more about (a) the cost of prep and (b) people knowing that they have the option and being encouraged to take it many times. This will further encourage richer students (with their cutthroat college counselors) to take the SAT as many times as possible -- and with extensive prep -- whereas kids from poor schools with crappy counselors might not even know that you can take it more than once! I didn't mind this so much when the colleges could see a record of students' multiple attempts, but now they won't even know. -___-
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No matter the changes The College Board decides to implement, it seems impossible to drawn that old canard.</p>
<p>Think about the alternative: one chance at the SAT and no repeats allowed. Do you really think that this would handicap the rich students and diminish the impact of test preparation? </p>
<p>Not in the least as it will actually INCREASE the benefits of outside preparation and place a premium on "underground" material that was acquired more or less legally. Do you think that the poor student with no access to such material will be in a better position than students paying thousands to outfits such as Karen Dillard which have developed "relationships" with school officials who do not hesitate to steal tests? </p>
<p>The reality is that the value of "test prep" is GROSSLY inflated. While there are true superstars in the industry, the majority of courses (read PR, Kaplan, Sylvan, Karen Dillard) are plain rip-offs where the one-eyed lead the blind as slightly above average students lead average students to an .. average score in exchange for about $1,000. On the othe hand, the super tutors who charge several times such amount deliver results to a well-heeled population. </p>
<p>If there were only ONE chance at the SAT, the importance of such test would multiply, and so would the value of the services of the high-priced consultants. </p>
<p>The more "free" chances a student gets at the SAT, the better off he will be. Comparing the combined cost of 2-3 sittings and TCB's Blue Book (or online course) with the (mostly wasted) cost of any generic test prep course shows what a bargain the combination of self-prep and multiple sittings is. </p>
<p>While there are MANY problems for poorer students facing the transition from middle school to college, the adequate preparation to the SAT ought to be one of the most minute ones!</p>