<p>Here's why we will all be happy when we see the "Super SAT".</p>
<p>The main problem to for admissions officers of the Ivy's and other highly selective universities is the overabundance of candidates who have perfect grades and near perfect test scores. </p>
<p>The reason for this problem is that the Ivy's are forced to use the same benchmarking standard for students as all of the other universities - namely the SAT/ACT. The fact of the matter is that a few missed questions on these standardized exams represents the difference between a 2300 and a 2400. This asymptotic compression of results at the high end of these test scores makes separation of these students, by academic standards, basically a random event.</p>
<p>As a result, EC's become the only differentiation and students are judged by the summer trips they take to Guatamala to build straw huts for indigenous tribes. This springs a cottage industry by entrepeneurs to package these strips to children of wealthy parents. The kids fly down, get a few snapshots with the natives, board a chartered plane and then go on vacation.</p>
<p>The answer? The Super SAT is a standardized test that will separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to applying to Ivy League / highly selective schools. The Super SAT will be comprised of only the most SAT difficult questions (the ones that are now answered correctly only 25% of the time). </p>
<p>Students who score 2100 on the standard SAT, will only score 1200 on the Super SAT. Someone who can score 2300 on the Super SAT will now be set apart from all of the other college applicants. We will finally be able to separate the really bright kids from the ordinary bright kids. The Ivy League will finally have a quantitative measure they can use to separate out these students. Students will once again be judged on their academic capabilties, and no longer phony EC's. The Ivy League once again will be populated by the best and brightest STUDENTS.</p>
<p>Your premise is flawed. You’re assuming that the Ivies CARE about the small differences between a 2400 and a 2300 achiever. Once a level of “brightness” is demonstrated, they look to other intangibles. Yes the “rich kids serve the brown folks junkets” are nauseating. But the quality of admitted kids is at an all-time high. What incentive is there to create another hurdle - one that immediately, the kids at the best schools and wealthy backgrounds will be able to master the fastest?</p>
<p>“The Ivy League once again will be populated by the best and brightest STUDENTS.” As far as they are concerned, it’s already happening. The “quagmire” you propose is not so – frankly it’s kids on Christmas morning. There is an overabundance of excellent applicants.</p>
<p>This “quagmire” is more felt by the students who subject themselves into the rat-race of admissions to the ultra selectives. The schools don’t feel it’s a quagmire at all – although they are sympathetic to it.</p>
<p>You also assume that “best” and “brightest” are essentially the same. Schools are not seeking to populate their classes with those capable of getting the highest possible scores on standardized tests–they don’t even do that now, with the tests they already have.</p>
<p>ill agree witht2; there is no quagmire. As it is, some would already argue that standardized testing isoveremphasized. Most would agree
e that the difference between a 2300 and 2400 is not large enough to make a difference in 90 percent of cases</p>
<p>I strenuously disagree with you. The fact that schools like Duke and BC are now populated with students who have the same test scores as the Ivies means that the Ivies needs a higher standard of differentiation.</p>
<p>The reason why there is a “small difference” between a 2300 and a 2400 is that 95% of the questions on the SAT are very easy for the bright kids. The Super SAT would be comprised of only the 5% of the questions that are commonly answered incorrectly. As a result instead of a band of scores from 2300 to 2400, these bright students would score between 1200 and 2400 thus making it much easier for the Ivy Leagues to determine the best of the best.</p>
<p>You’re assuming that standardized tests separate the wheat from the chaff. They serve a useful function (namely, everyone takes them, so they can be used to compare students from different schools or districts), but they have some significant problems. The major ones are not, by themselves, particularly good predictive instruments.</p>
<p>bobbythebrain wrote: “I strenuously disagree with you. The fact that schools like Duke and BC are now populated with students who have the same test scores as the Ivies means that the Ivies needs a higher standard of differentiation.”</p>
<p>Again, a flawed premise. The alumni, administration and current communities at the HYPMSC ARE NOT sitting around nervously twiddling their thumbs because there are excellent kids getting into schools like Duke, BC and others. The ultra selectives are very secure in their identities of being fantastic, world-leading institutions of education. As a matter of fact, they actively court under-served populations (rural, urban, international) to find MORE diamonds in the rough. </p>
<p>Guess what that does to their traditional base of admittees? A good number of them get rejected. And where do they go? Why to other excellent schools such as you’ve mentioned, of course. Is this a bad thing? Certainly not. The students still get superb educations and the schools they attend are made greater by their presence.</p>
<p>The human population is getting better and brighter. That’s a fact. My take is that a rising tide lifts all boats. In the imminent future, I’ll celebrate the fact that statistically, the so-called “2nd tier” selectives will look very much like the “top tier” schools (and I’m an alum of one of the HYPs, too).</p>
<p>The reason why there are now 50 schools flooded with 2300+ SAT students is because 1,500,000 students are applying for the same seats as the 1,000,000 students who applied to college 10 years ago. </p>
<p>The Ivy’s want to continue to have the brightest students. They want to have higher SAT scores than Duke and BC. They need a benchmark. It is the super SAT.</p>
<p>One final point: your premise that students who metrically perform are better candidates for the so-called “top schools”. Again, as you are aware, they currently don’t admit that way.</p>
<p>There ARE schools that do admit on this basis. Think of IIT in India or Beijing university or Seoul University. Top schools in their nations where competition is beyond fierce. And in the USA, there are schools that purely admit based on metrics too. Yet these don’t pierce the so-called top 20 rankings. Why? Because our society values things besides standardized test achievement. The very thing you argue FOR would diminish the “stature” of the Ivies and top schools you’re looking to improve. They would say: “Thank you. No thank you.”</p>
<p>Again, as an alum of one of these “ultra-selectives” I would be very ecstatic if the graduating classes at Duke or BC matched the graduates of my alma mater (and I’m not certain that they don’t already). That would be progress and I’d be glad to assist this process.</p>
<p><<<One final point: your premise that students who metrically perform are better candidates for the so-called “top schools”. Again, as you are aware, they currently don’t admit that way.</p>
<p>There ARE schools that do admit on this basis. Think of IIT in India or Beijing university or Seoul University. Top schools in their nations where competition is beyond fierce. And in the USA, there are schools that purely admit based on metrics too. Yet these don’t pierce the so-called top 20 rankings. Why? Because our society values things besides standardized test achievement. The very thing you argue FOR would diminish the “stature” of the Ivies and top schools you’re looking to improve. They would say: “Thank you. No thank you.”>>></p>
<p>So what you are saying is if the Ivy’s could have access to Super SAT scores, they wouldn’t want to see them?</p>
<p>Well that’s quite the hypothetical, BTB. What I would say is that the Ivies would not support the generation of such a test to begin with since it doesn’t serve them and would only serve to add more pressure to the HS applicant pool. Remember: I’m positing that the Ivies and other top schools ARE NOT IN A QUAGMIRE to begin with. They are perfectly happy.</p>
<p>“The Ivy’s want to continue to have the brightest students. They want to have higher SAT scores than Duke and BC.”</p>
<p>Yeah, except, they don’t. Really. The Ivy’s, and for that matter other top colleges in the US, don’t feel the only measure of a top student is a high score on a standardized test, no matter how hard the standardized test is. I know, it’s hard to believe. And yes, there are entire countries that pick students for their most prestigious schools by standardized tests. And that works for them. </p>
<p>I think it would be interesting to see a few new national universities pop up that do only admit students based on some sort of super SAT scores. It seems it would be easy to attract top professors. Would students flock to them? Would they be considered as prestigious?</p>
<p>We had that. It was called the SAT. In 1995 they recentered the SAT, making a 730 Verbal of old now an 800. Then recently they removed analogies from the Verbal section and they made the math section more achievement oriented. All of this has resulted in a flattening of the top scores. </p>
<p>It used to be a 1600 SAT was so rare, when it occurred it would be mentioned in the local newspaper. Now there are hundreds each year. </p>
<p>This is actually good for the most selective colleges and state schools (especially good for the UC system). It’s not good for the second-tier selective schools who are trying to identify talent. It’s not a problem at all for the third-tier. </p>
<p>Good for Harvard, good for UC Berkeley, bad for Georgetown and NYU.</p>
<p>“The Ivy’s want to continue to have the brightest students. They want to have higher SAT scores than Duke and BC. They need a benchmark. It is the super SAT.”</p>
<p>They have plenty of benchmarks–prizes, EC achievements, publications, etc. I don’t think you will have much trouble distinguishing between the entering class of Harvard and Duke, if you looked at the students’ resumes.</p>
<p>If the Ivies wanted another test, or were concerned about the inability to distinguish one 800 score from other, they would have asked for it. And being the Ivies, they would have gotten it, just as the UC system got the changes it wanted in the SATs.</p>
<p>You’re trying to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. Otherwise, how do you explain the 2400’s that get rejected every year from the Ivies and the 2200s who get accepted?</p>
<p>All of these are subjective and sometimes fabricated. It is better to have hard, quantitative evidence that one student is more intelligent than another.</p>