<p>I just finished a call to the GRE scoring service to arrange the delivery of my son's scores to the graduate schools he is applying too. The 'press 1...press 2' is tedious enough when there this little thing called the web but let's leave that aside. After paying $130 each for the general and the subject tests, I just paid $15 for each of the 9 schools the boy is applying to, plus a $6 service charge times two because the system only handles 8 schools at a time.</p>
<p>We are very fortunate in the sense that the charge is not going to kill us but I am sure there are people for which the $157 is more than an inconvenience. In addition I cannot help but think this is a monopolistic practice.</p>
<p>I know the SAT has come under attack and alternative exist such as the ACT and the increasing number of schools that do not require standardized scores at all, but I am not aware of such a trend in graduate or professional schools.</p>
<p>This is actually the second time I go through this. After requesting additional scores for my daughter's SAT I sent a message to ETS (or the College Board I can't remember) asking for an explanation of the charges but to my surprise it went unanswered (sarcasm). This time I am thinking about writing to my congressman. In general I am all for free enterprise but some regulation may be in order in this case.</p>
<p>Thanks for putting up with this rant. I'd be interested to hear other experiences and ideas on what to do.</p>
<p>Thanks for your rant! This is a hot topic with me (meaning I get "hot" discussing it) even though we have gotten off relatively easy. The fees and poor service are certainly annoying. In many cases they get more than full support from colleges that encourage taking the SAT more than once and only accept scores that are officially reported by CB even when scores are reported by the high school. </p>
<p>Yes there is ACT, and a growing number of test-optional colleges, but the market share enjoyed by CB lets them behave like a monopoly. I think most students that take advantage of an SAT optional application do so after performing poorly on the SAT more than once, so I don't think it's put a huge dent in their revenue just yet. Maybe a few less score reports. </p>
<p>My favorite was when scores were to be available free online at a certain time, but their website just couldn't handle the traffic. Alternatively, students could receive their score report over the phone.... for $7, so their poor overloaded website probably generated several thousand (X 7) dollars of extra revenue that night.</p>
<p>ETS is very poorly run. Their web site in particular has been a problem repeatedly. They also have the typical monopoly attitude: "You don't like it? What can you do about it?"</p>
<p>The collegeboard website is awful. Their help and FAQ links are useless, and sometimes other links just vanish.</p>
<p>I was shocked that no one got Congress or someone to investigate after the scoring scandal last year. Kids saw their dreams and plans go down the drain because these people couldn't even manage to grade their own exams! It was TOTALLY not these kids' fault, and yet no one seemed interested in making any effort to undo the damage the SAT's incompetence had done. It was just a travesty, and my heart bleeds for these innocent kids who -- lets face it -- got screwed.</p>
<p>I hoped that after the scoring debacle the schools would quit requiring the SAT, but that change seems to be slow in coming. And I say this as a parent whose sone has 2150 on his most recent SAT and two of his 6 schools have made the SAT optional. </p>
<p>And WHY can't the collegeboard let kids pick and choose which scores to send? The scores are still legitimate. They used to do it, so it can't be technology.</p>
<p>What I really have an issue with is the whole SAT II subject tests and AP tests. Why can't a AP test be adequate - why should I pay for a second test on the same material from the same college board? One of my daughter's schools wanted three SAT IIs - she has 4 AP tests already - shouldn't that be enough?</p>
<p>Technology? TECHNOLOGY?? Scores are available online. Colleges are identified by a unique code number. Everything is automated. You can order score reports with a few mouse clicks and pay by credit card. Then why, oh why????............
[quote]
Your scores will be mailed about three weeks after you submit your request.
[/quote]
What do they do? Sit around on their fannies for 3 weeks staring into space before they stuff an envelope, lick a stamp and drop it in a box?</p>
<p>Maybe someone can get Michael Moore to make a film about the entire SAT/GRE/College Board process/system. The whole thing seems like such a money-making scam, and the colleges are in total cahoots with it.</p>
<p>I am afraid to --again-- offer a different opinion. </p>
<p>Let's compare the ACT and the SAT.</p>
<p>A. Pricing: Is there a meaningful difference?<br>
B. Registration: the ACT uses a hopelessly archaic and annoying system. The registration prompts you to answer a LOT of question that are NONE of their business.<br>
C. Re-registration: You would think that the original information would be saved, but no ... you have to retype the entire thing.
D. Getting scores? For all the people who complain, the entity that DOES charge for early scores is the ACT.<br>
E. Preparing for the test: While there is a TON of preparation material available for the SAT, the ACT amounts to not much at all. The SAT Preparation online classes are state-ot-the-art. The ACT ... Oops.<br>
F. Integrity of the test? You can guess which organization possesses a multi-million library of VERIFIED and MEASURED questions. Hint: it is on the East Coast.
G. Uses of scores: score choice versus mix and match of multiple sittings. At best, at toss-up.<br>
H. Customer service: the ACT is hopeless and ... rude; the SAT is professional and competent.
I. Website: No comparison </p>
<p>Bottom line: the ACT's only value is to help with a minor strategic advantage with the SAT Subject Tests. The ACT is a poor cousin to the SAT in about every aspect, and its </p>
<p>There are reason NOT be enamored with the SAT, but the comparison between the ACT and the SAT are far from being favorable to the ACT. </p>
<p>While it provides an option, it is not a better one.</p>
<p>PS NJres, scores are sent mostly electronically, and you might be surprised by how fast the scores reach the schools. Check a few of the announcements about the need to send rush scores to ED schools. :)</p>
<p>"While it provides an option, it is not a better one."</p>
<p>That's a personal choice. Most of what you describe deals with the issues srrounding the test. I'll deal with the crappy website and the annoying registration process for what I believe is a much better actual TEST.</p>
<p>Do you really think that Congress would do a better job of designing a system for reporting scores than a joint effort by the clients for scores and score reports?</p>
<p>I am only questioning why they say on their website that scores will be sent out three weeks after they are requested. If in actual practice the scores are sent out earlier then that is wonderful. Here is another thing I find puzzling. Why would University of Michigan say, "Rush scores are not accepted." ?? Why would a school not accept rush scores?</p>
<p>I think - could be wrong here - that rush scores are submitted individually, thus a hassle, whereas regular scores are transmitted electronically in bulk, thus less hassle.</p>
<p>I think anxiousmom is right about rush scores being less convenient to receive. There is no reason whatever to rush scores to a rolling admission college with a huge applicant pool like Michigan. It will receive all the scores of all applicants in plenty of time to make a decision.</p>
<p>Another concern about the SAT is it's "coachability." Kids who can afford to pay zillions of dollars to for-profit companies to be coached and get their scores up do better than kids who can't pay, or choose not to. Our public hs happens to do a good job of preparing the kids for the SAT, but many do not. I thought the point of the SAT was to "level the playing field" so colleges could compare kids between schools, but since it is supposedly so "coachable, " I don't see how that can be true.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Kids who can afford to pay zillions of dollars to for-profit companies to be coached and get their scores up do better than kids who can't pay, or choose not to.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't buy it. We are a middle-income (at best) family. My son can knock the socks off of most high school seniors on the SAT I, at eighth-grade age, because he reads a lot of public library books and THINKS about the math he learns. Effort on the part of the learner trumps expense from the pocket of the parent. </p>
<p>The best way to look at the acknowledged positive correlation between family income and SAT I scores (we all remember the slogan, "Correlation does not prove causation," don't we?) would be to display all the millions of data points in a bivariate plot ("scatterplot"), which would show that many low-income test-takers outscore quite a few high-income test-takers. I think that's great: colleges like to admit smart, moderate-to-low-income applicants, and the SAT I is one help for identifying such applicants.</p>
<p>Almost every school, large and small, gets SATs through electronic files sent periodically by ETS.</p>
<p>Rush scores from ETS and ACT are sent in the mail (one envelope per report, but the way). Small schools with fewer applicants can probably process the paper fairly quickly, but at big school, it might take a few weeks to get processed because they'll be mixed in with thousands of pieces of mail.</p>
<p>Those "rush" scores might actually get to the student's file after the ones that come in electronically, even if the electronic file comes through a few weeks later.</p>
<p>kids don't need to pay zillions of dollars for test prep. Just head on down to the local library and check out PR's (or Kaplan's or....) books -- and, the library is free.</p>
<p>The thing to keep in mind is that affluent families do not necessarily spend money on SAT coaching but are able to provide more resources for their kids than low income families, such as books and educational opportunities like museum trips. A student who likes to read does not need to learn SAT vocab words.</p>