Standardized test scores as sole factor?
Why does this question always evolve into a comparison of test scores?
Comparisons of test scores remain deeply ingrained in a large part of our culture. We rarely seem to question the measurement process itself as we all assume and accept that the higher test score gives an “unbiased” result which justifies a selection.
My concerns date back to a presentation given by a former past Prime Minister of Rhodesia (currently Zimbabwe) while I was in college… The speaker was justifying white rule in Rhodesia as necessary based on IQ test scores. The white government was necessary to administer and care for the rest of the population. He felt this evidence closed the discussion and justified apartheid policies.
Do tests have cultural biases?
First one should define successful student:
If I can recite the classics, am I successful? Which set of classics? What is creativity and how do we measure it? Is mathematical reasoning important for all majors? If I work well with other people, is it a “necessary” or “sufficient” quality for a successful life? What is a “successful” life? What are the goals of a secondary education? Is it defined by successful entry into an “elite” college? Are we on a merry-go-round where “elite” colleges are defined by test scores?
Once again I am peddling (or is that marketing) a thread of mine “Why Test Optional Admissions?” @ http://talk.qa.collegeconfidential.com/sat-act-tests-test-preparation/2084255-why-test-optional-admissions.html#latest
OK, You did not wade through the “Why Test Optional Admissions?” thread.
Take a short cut and listen to Jo Boaler @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3icoSeGqQtY
These tests are not objective. They just look like they are. Someone decided what the best answer is - in some EBWR cases you can very reasonably argue another answer would be better. The ACT essay grading scandal is another example of subjectivity entering the system.
They also require specific test taking skills that, beyond broad bands, do not correlate with academic success. So, there’s a big difference between 1200 and 1450, but context helps you interpret any score within that band.
950 v. 1000? 1480 v.1530? No impact on admissions or success. Let alone a score used to determine cut offs. And what if I were recommend cutoff changes due to budget cuts, would the kids admitted with 1430 be considered as less good than those with 1450? What if you admitted, not all students above the cut off, but based on a ranking? Would you have to create 1341, 1342,1343,1344…??
What about if you attend a school where only 16 kids out of 400 are taking Precalculus, the rest stopping at algebra2 or algebra3, who’s not yet studied 1/3 of the test’s math content? How do you compare with a kid at a school where college-going kids all take precalculus junior year and some even took it sophomore year, hence they’ve studied the most advanced subjects BEFORE they take the SAT?
These tests also can be tricked and prepped for - but few students prep. It’s a socio-economic/cultural marker to be ‘prepping’. At some schools, kids are told “you’ll take a test tomorrow. Don’t worry about it”. And that’s all they’ve heard of the test. Others have heard about it since 8th or 9th grade, prep for the PSAT.
It may also be a certain type of personality that focuses on those scores; the extreme end of the spectrum of which is here on this website and not especially appreciated in elite college admissions.
I’ve never thought about it that way before.
@YoungThriver PSAT is more difficult because it is designed to be preparation for the SAT, which is usually taken by 11th and 12th graders. The SHSAT is designed for 8th graders.
@ThomasBr Oh, interesting.
Generally those who test well don’t have an issue with the SAT tests and those who don’t test well do not support them. There are very few kids with a 1600 who are complaining. However, there are many issues, just one being that the test is often memorized a question at a time in China and then compiled so that the test answers are known hence higher scores there. Though to be fair, China is far ahead of the US in the study of mathematics.
There are kids from low socio-economic places who do sit a test ( both SAT, SSAT and all the rest) and score extremely well. There are also kids with high SES who score in the lower range. One can definitely “prep” for these tests as past tests are published and there is an entire industry built around it.
As for tests for the NYC schools, I support it. I have heard it is becoming increasingly popular to prep for these tests. But the test being the single determinant means a young kid’s path is not stopped because of something they did/didn’t do in 6th or 7th grade. Let’s face it, there is a real push to make everything holistic. Many support this for college apps, but would you support that for middle schoolers? There have been a lot of issues around racial quotas and scores as well. In some school districts there have to be a particular number of students from X race. And this has raised many issues and lawsuits.
What’s sorely lacking are enough seats in these schools to support a larger number of students who qualify. Having classes of 32 kids isn’t good for learning-even if the students are the top of their cohort. Many good charter schools also have this problem. Some districts aren’t keen on having charters “poach” the best students by means of a test school.
All in all, good issues to think about. I’m sure there are many more.
I am sorry to be jumping in late and want to add to what @Happytimes2001 and others have said…the issue about relying on test scores is a bit more complex for BS (IMHO) because it is not only a school, but a community of students. If you just relied on test scores, it may not be the best metric for building a community. We have seen this play out on CC from personal stories of students and parents. Scores may not reflect a student’s ability to work cooperatively, to be emotionally resilient enough to board at school within a diverse community of people, or to manage the workload. Further, it is my understanding that class participation and one’s ability to communicate in the classroom is very important to one’s success at school. Your kids have to get along with others. Your kids have to be cognitively flexible and emotionally flexible at BS. It’s more than high scores. :bz
Also: Boarding schools need actors, athletes, musicians, editors, artists, etc. If they relied on test scores alone, they could end up with an orchestra with no cellos, lots of tennis players but no one to row crew, lots of actors but no visual artists or kids willing to paint sets!
And no golfers!
My reasoning for supporting the test only schools is that it provides variety of school type. If the soft art of BS admissions makes you nervous there are test only schools. If test only schools make you prickle because of all the built in advantages to kids who can prep for the test then you can apply to schools that take a holistic approach. It’s good to have both IMO.