<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/opinion/18salins.html?_r=1&th&emc=th%5B/url%5D">http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/opinion/18salins.html?_r=1&th&emc=th</a> </p>
<p>Evidence from the large SUNY system suggests the SAT test does better than high school grades alone in predicting college graduation rates.</p>
<p>thank you for posting....now tell this to UMich/Ann Arbor admissions (and other top universities) which prioritize GPA way over SAT/ACT.</p>
<p>I hope that isn't true. I'm a terrible test taker. I work hard in my AP classes and have passed 5 of the 6 AP exams that I've taken, but I've only managed to get a 9 on the essay on my last pass at the ACT with a composite English/writing composite of 32. For the Ivies, I don't think that's good enough.</p>
<p>^don't worry...doubtful that Ivies will change...you gotta have it all for them....</p>
<p>SAT measures intelligence & GPA represents work ethic.</p>
<p>None of the SUNYs look at the SAT writing test. It's interesting since they all have different admission standards.</p>
<p>
[Quote]
SAT measures intelligence & GPA represents work ethic.
[/Quote]
</p>
<p>This is the complete truth. And you need both to get though college, not just one or the other.</p>
<p>There are a lot of holes in their analysis. It isn't a matter of a direct, simple corelation. There is some correlation between grades and test scores. When you bring up the test scores at a school, you usually automatically bring up the gpas as well.</p>
<p>I certainly hope that they would put less weight on the writing score.</p>
<p>More bunk from those who are trying to save the SAT exam and promote interests they may have in the College Board.</p>
<p>There is a plethora of information that is contrary to this oped piece. Colleges are finding out that the measure of success in college has little to do with the SAT score.</p>
<p>if that were the case, then the thousands of colleges who admit kids with SAT's below 1200 each year would be wasting their time. When in fact, they also have very high graduation rates at some very "modest" (i.e. not in the top 100 USNWR rankings) colleges.</p>
<p>Believe in the SAT if you want. But its a bogus measure of success in college. GPA is but ONE factor, and not the ONLY factor in success. Organization skills, emotional maturity, motivation, freedom from financial stress, healthy lifestyles, healthy diet, supportive faculty, overall campus culture, and many other sundry factors also play a role.</p>
<p>There are lots of examples of kids with high SATs who bomb out of school because of immaturity and partying, something the SAT doesnt measure.</p>
<p>Actually, the college board itself disclosed recently that the writing score is a better measure of success in college, particularly those schools who value good writing skills in their coursework. Which is why Wake Forest went SAT optional this year.</p>
<p>Based on the article: "Among the campuses that raised selectivity, the average incoming student’s SAT score increased 4.5 percent (at Cortland) to 13.3 percent (Old Westbury), while high school grade-point averages increased only 2.4 percent to 3.7 percent — a gain in grades almost identical to that at campuses that did not raise their SAT cutoff." </p>
<p>The controls look very good. Similar GPA but higher SAT score means substantial higher graduation rates. The analysis is the most convincing thus far. I am glad that somebody in the academic eventually stands up and speaks the truth. I really like to see a more detailed analysis. Specifically, Is the improvement a broad base one across all the majors or just a few majors? Does the ethnicity composition of the student body alter when SAT scores improve?</p>
<p>Several years ago, a study by UCB suggested that GPA is a better predictor than SAT1. But the analysis used so many artificial normalizations and did not compare the students within the same majors, it is almost worthless. Sometimes, I really wonder whether the academic administrators are capable of telling the truths since they are so restrained by the media and the politics.</p>
<p>SAT's measure a kind of intelligence, a certain way one's brain work, one that not everyone has, and one that is not necessary for college success</p>
<p>it's a conundrum. you can't be stupid and score well on the SAT's. However, you can be very smart -- just as smart -- and not score well.</p>
<p>If you're truly smart -- and 'smart' is the ability to reason and solve nonroutine problems -- then you should have no problems doing well on the SAT. </p>
<p>Just 'cause you have a high GPA doesn't mean you're smart -- GPA is a big game with many nonobjective factors. On the SAT, it's you, multiple choice questions, and a heartless scantron machine. You can't fool it and you can't make it inflate/deflate your grade.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <blockquote> <blockquote> <p>Demeaning the SAT has become fashionable at campuses across the country.>>></p> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>I suspect that many adcoms downplay the importance of the SAT score but in fact do rely on it a lot.</p>
<p>Wake Forest University went SAT optional this year for one primary reason: to increase applications. WFU may justify & rationalize based on other grounds, but increasing applications is the main objective.</p>
<p>Just 'cause you have a high GPA doesn't mean you're smart -- GPA is a big game with many nonobjective factors. On the SAT, it's you, multiple choice questions, and a heartless scantron machine. You can't fool it and you can't make it inflate/deflate your grade.</p>
<p>Exactly but college is not a big scantron machine so the SAT can't measure how you do in college.</p>
<p>^ They're under pressure to weigh the SAT pretty heavily because it counts in their U.S. News ranking. But they like to downplay it because 1) many really don't believe in the SAT (and the studies are far more mixed than the author of the OpEd piece would have you believe); 2) adcoms don't like to admit how much US News yanks their chain; and (3) they can't stand smart slackers with high SATs and low GPAs who think they're entitled to be admitted based on SAT scores alone. Most adcoms would prefer to admit only those with both high GPAs and high SAT scores, but only the elite schools have that luxury. If forced to choose, I think most would rather take the overachiever with a high GPA and mediocre SATs, who is at least going to work hard and make the most of their ability, over the (possibly lazy, indifferent, or inattentive) student with high SATs and mediocre grades. But US News pulls them somewhat in the opposite direction. Going SAT-optional addresses that problem, and probably kicks them up a bit in their US News ranking as well.</p>
<p>Not particularly surprising really. It mirrors the research on the GRE and graduate school as well, but one must remember that a large part of this would be the simple fact that most university classes focus more on tests in terms of grades than anything else (oftentimes with finals making up 40-70% of a student's grade and the midterm being up to the remainder... Albeit, some courses have a term paper and quizzes, but college is quite test-heavy)
With that in mind, you should almost expect a standardized test to correlate <em>more</em> with one's college GPA than does their HS GPA with their college GPA! This would have obvious implications for graduation rates.</p>
<p>
[quote]
SAT's measure a kind of intelligence, a certain way one's brain work, one that not everyone has, and one that is not necessary for college success
[/quote]
I don't know about that. I believe that Math SAT correlates pretty damn well with success in an engineering program.</p>