thought-provoking article: Why America needs the SAT

Parents Forum
101

<p>There remain some unresolved issues, so I have some questions:</p>

<p>What qualities do or should colleges look for in an applicant? Should they favor ability, work ethic, preparedness, or something else?</p>

<p>How should colleges evaluate applicants from different schools? Is GPA really an effective measure of ability, work ethic, or preparedness? What are some effective measures?</p>

<p>What is the purpose of college in the first place? Is it to get an education or to prepare students for the real world or both?</p>

<p>How can success in college be measured? Income after college? GPA? Other academic achievements (e.g., research)? Or is this unimportant with regards to admissions?</p>

<p>And I'm sure there are many other questions, but this is a start.</p>

102

<p>Basically, GPA should be a measure of everything you want academically in an applicant - a mixture of natural intelligence, work ethic, dedication, etc. It represents four years of work.</p>

<p>HOWEVER, the problem is that GPA can be misleading. So much of it is subjective. The argument that taking hard classes unfairly lowers your GPA is not a valid one - they will see that you took hard classes and understand why your grades might be lower. The better argument is that GPA can be misleading because it can be skewed by the school you attend, or even the specific teachers you happen to have.</p>

<p>Clearly SAT alone is not a good idea. I truly believe that the SAT is a good measure of intelligence and natural potential. It is not a good indicator of qualities such as work ethic. It does, though, eliminate many of the problems of GPA because it is not subjective. It is a standardized test that is taken by nearly everybody. I also do not feel like economics (the ability to afford a tutor or course) has a large effect on the score, because as I showed in an earlier post, from what I have seen all you really need are a few review books with practice tests.</p>

<p>Standardized tests and GPA should both be strongly considered. For example, a low SAT score and high GPA might suggest that the student is an "overachiever."</p>

<p>There really is no right answer to what is the best combination of factors.</p>

103

<p>There's a claim here that GPA's are a better predictor of college success than SAT's. I have heard it is the other way around--to the chagrin of those who for some crazy reasons hate subjective analysis. So provide a link to show GPA predicts college success better than SAT's, or we won't believe you!</p>

104

<p>I mean here <a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/highered/ra/sat/sat_scorefaq.html#rea7%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeboard.com/highered/ra/sat/sat_scorefaq.html#rea7&lt;/a> and here <a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/highered/ra/sat/sat_data_satI.html#predictor%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeboard.com/highered/ra/sat/sat_data_satI.html#predictor&lt;/a>
show that SAT has a pretty good predictive power. I would guess that GPA would be similarly predictive ONLY if you were measuring two people from identical--or VERY similar--high schools. But we know that applicants to top schools come from a wide, wide range of backgrounds. GPA and SAT together tell a lot.</p>

105

<p>"I also do not feel like economics (the ability to afford a tutor or course) has a large effect on the score, because as I showed in an earlier post, from what I have seen all you really need are a few review books with practice tests."</p>

<p>What is up with some of you guys? You think doing well on the SAT hinges solely opon the preparation for it? Your years of schooling/learning leading up to the test is a tremendous factor in your performance on the SAT. </p>

<p>Ask yourself this, if you had a choice, would you give your child up for adoption to a lower middle-class family or upper middle-class family? Exactly my point...</p>

<p>Economics is an all-encompassing factor in all of this. It determines a child's peers, quality of instruction, motivations etc. etc throughout his/her teenage years. If you were economically challenenged, your motivation for academics may also be challenged. I've met quite a few who were in such a situation in high school and had to help support their families by working after school or weekends, something most upper-middle class people don't ever have to worry about. </p>

<p>No, economics is not simply about whether one has the "ability to afford a tutor or course". I'm sorry but it's about a little bit more than that. Some of you really need to open your eyes and see what's going on your world.</p>

106

<p>I am an SAT tutor and people are mistaken in that it is very difficult to improve a score in the 700 range to an 800. The reason for this is simple: the difference between a 700 and an 800 is SIX questions. The differences between a 500 and a 600 is more like FIFTEEN questions. While I can't say which score is easier to improve, the fact is both jumps are attainable. </p>

<p>I have encouraged students with top scores (700+) to continue to focus on those sections because with a little luck an 800 is completely possible. IMO, SAT scores should be released within a range that essentially allows for "luck." We'd have to do stats on it, but I believe this would reflect something of a guessing range of +/- 2-3 questions. For example, a friend of mine scored 760 on the SAT math, which Collegeboard said warranted a range of 730-790. Interestingly enough, if he were to have gotten an additional question wrong his score would have fallen to a 720. This isn't even in the range! </p>

<p>If top scores weren't so arbitrary, there wouldn't be such a massive decline in the predictability of the SAT for near perfect scores. Whereas a midrange scorer can only guess their way 20-30 points higher, a high scorer can guess their way up to 100 points higher. It is unfortunate that when validity most matters - at the elite colleges - the SAT is a major disappointment. </p>

<p>I tutor some students in the lower range of scores and it is very clear that some of the mathematics, vocabulary, etc. goes over their head. This is where the SAT is valuable. Whether or not a top student can manage to guess the few questions that challenge him is hardly indicative of college performance.</p>

107

<p>That SAt gives students from medicore high schools a chance at elite universities. It esential to preserving the american meritocricy.</p>

108

<p>good point....hadn't thought of that one.</p>

109

<p>Well, not really a good point. Although you're correct in that at gives some a chance, the SAT score brings down way more people than it uplifts. Look at the average scores in less affluent areas where mediocre high schools or worse are the norm. Those that get this "chance" you're talking about are the exception and not the general rule. Most get slighted due to their slightly lower test scores. Don't tell me Princeton won't take a candidate with a 1400 score vs. a candidate with similar credentials but with a 1250 score (old SAT's).</p>

<p>My point is that if you take a 10 fairly bright individuals and put them in a mediocre high school, probably 8 out of 10 of them will have SAT scores which will not be high enough to compete competitively with 10 other similarly bright individuals who had a higher quality, more competitive high school environment. One just needs to compare the average SAT scores from high schools in various regions/areas to see this.</p>

110

<p>in my opinion, the test is discriminatory to those with documented learning disabilities. Not only is the test discriminatory, but the review process for legitimate accommodations are also unfair.</p>

<p>Colleges must make an extra effort to review those who are gifted/learning disabled as these students are very intelligent and could add much to any program. Should Einstein not have been given a chance to go to college? Indeed, that almost did happen. </p>

<p>The administration and interpretation of the SAT for the gifted/ learning disabled as well as any disability must be reviewed and modified. What these students may lack in one area is usually compensated to a very high degree in another area and I feel that they can enchance any program or profession that they choose to enter (if they are given the chance).</p>

<p>No one asked me for my opinion, but in this case, I cannot keep it to myself.</p>

111

<p>When I said that economics does not have a large impact on SAT scores, I meant that tutors and courses seem to really do nothing. From what I have seen, the kids that are smartest do the best on the SAT - the kids who hire tutors and courses do not do as well.</p>

<p>OBVIOUSLY not attending a good high school or not having a supportive family will prevent success on the SAT. But this is completely irrelevant. Socioeconomics are a completely different area for discussion. Socioeconomics is the root of many of the problems for some students, but the SAT is as fair as it can get.</p>

<p>But my main point is...</p>

<p>Contrary to what many people may believe, I think that the SAT actually evens the playing field between the wealthy and the disadvantaged. Think about entering a research competition such as Intel STS for example. I am lucky enough to attend a high school with a large science research program. It is well-funded and the teachers are aware of many opportunities for summer research programs. At other schools this kind of program would be impossible, so most kids that enter competitions like Intel STS come from a background with many advantages. However, the SAT is taken by everybody, and I do not think that being able to afford a tutor gives any real advantage on the test. Even somebody who is poor can afford a $20 review book with practice tests. I opted to only prepare using review books, and I ended up doing very well.</p>

<p>Also, high schools that send many kids to top colleges each year are familiar to college admissions people. They would know that a good GPA at that high school means a lot. However, for somebody attending a high school that is nowhere near as good, colleges would not know how to interpret his GPA. But colleges know how to interpret the SAT score because it is standard for everybody.</p>

112

<p>I beg to differ. As shown above, by virtue of the discriminatory nature of the review process for modifications for the learning disabled, the exam does not level the playing field for "everybody." Let's not fall victim to not including those who may be quite intelligent, but have learning or physical disabilities. Many fine students were either unable to take the exam due to denial of a computer or scribe, or took it anyway without the proper modifications and thereby received scores that were nowhere reflective of their actual ability. That is not leveling the playing field for "everybody." The whole process needs a review.</p>

113

<p>"OBVIOUSLY not attending a good high school or not having a supportive family will prevent success on the SAT. But this is completely irrelevant. Socioeconomics are a completely different area for discussion." </p>

<p>"Contrary to what many people may believe, I think that the SAT actually evens the playing field between the wealthy and the disadvantaged."</p>

<p>RC, man you just emphasized two very contradictory points. What is it? Does one's socioeconomic position generally factor into scores or not? I don't know where you really stand based on your two contradictory points above.</p>

<p>And socioeconomics is not a completely different area of discussion when it involves the question of whether the SAT is a fair measurement or standard. And just because the SAT is "as fair as it gets" doesn't make it fair.</p>

<p>Whether it is a FAIR STANDARD (ACROSS THE BOARD) is one of the main arguments presented here and people keep sidestepping it. The fact is that it is a flawed method that is much more of an advantage to those who are better off than to those who aren't, plain and simple. Again, look at the average SAT scores by region and again, ask yourself if you'd give up your kid to a financially well-off or not so well-off family? It is really a simple point.</p>

114

<p>Why the hell not talk to someone that is poor and goes to a crap ass school?</p>

<p>I swear, I love it when well-off white people talk about the poor man's problems :) ^_^</p>

<p>Anyway, in regards to SAT, I managed to score in two parts a mid 700 and in one part a mid 600. How did I do this? I took the test three times, the first two times working odd jobs (I was a freshmen then a sophomore) to get enough money for books and to pay for the exam itself.</p>

<p>My senior year, how did I prepare for these exams? With a full time job and classes, it required sleeping 2 hours a night, maybe, but I improved my score slowly and painfully. Reading, Reading, and more Reading. Remebering formulas, how to get certain answers with incomplete information.</p>

<p>Now, I know I don't have an 800 on all three sections. But if this doesn't show how preparation can help a person to get some success, I don't know what it is.</p>

<p>Now, the socio-economics. I'm a native spanish speaker, so the SAT naturally comes harder to me. I'm also poor and my school sucked. Average SAT score is in the low 900's (via 1600). My guidance counselors didn't even know how to access an ivy league site on the net without google. Yet, it took hard work for many years (I'm also ADD) to force myself to learn. </p>

<p>Ultimately, yes, life itself is an unfair playing field. Some of you have opportunities that I never had. That's why I dislike the whole EC competition. Because how can I compete there against somebody with a great science school who had research opportunities? Yet, in the SAT/AP/SATII's, ACT, I could make up the difference by just trying harder.</p>

<p>When you are socioeconomically disadvantage, the ammount of work you must do to get remotely similar results to those with advantages is astronomical. But it can be done if you are willing to sacrifice. And ultimately, the hard work you did will pay off because that work won't just magically leave you once you go to college. </p>

<p>The rougher path leads to one being stronger, leaner and more fit to have success than the soft path. </p>

<p>(Though I'm not saying rich people don't have to work, but the work is never of desperation)</p>

115

<p>What are you trying to do?.. Pass off only SAT writing scores as valid predictions of freshman grades? Most college students take more than just english classes. That link refers to only the writing subscore as a predictor for college english grades; verbal and math statistical analysis is nowhere to be found.</p>

<p>As for references to my earlier post...</p>

<p><a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/test/views.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/test/views.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/highered/ra/sat/06676SATValidityBro051028.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/highered/ra/sat/06676SATValidityBro051028.pdf&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.fairtest.org/facts/univtestcomparison.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.fairtest.org/facts/univtestcomparison.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2002/pdf/eleven.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2002/pdf/eleven.pdf&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2001/11/07_sat2.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2001/11/07_sat2.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.ucop.edu/sas/research/researchandplanning/pdf/sat_study.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.ucop.edu/sas/research/researchandplanning/pdf/sat_study.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

116

<p>There are way too many sidestepping the main issue here, which I clarified before:</p>

<p>"For arguments sake, let's assume you are correct regarding those statements. But since the correlation between first year grades and SAT scores (which, like i mentioned previously, is the point of the test in the first place) is lower than GPA/SATII's, my solutions are still valid."</p>

<p>and</p>

<p>"But why support them in the first place, if it's well established that other factors are far better at predicting first year grades? Fairness becomes a moot point."</p>

117

<p>Ferny Reys...good job and congratulations.</p>

118

<p>firewalker...<em>sigh</em></p>

<p>You don't seem to get it, do you? In some cases, GPA wouldn't be a fair correlation. In some instances, SATII's wouldn't be a fair correlation. IOn some instances, SATI's aren't fair correlations.</p>

<p>However, if you combine all three an analyze what they mean together, that's the best correlation.</p>

<p>You obviously never seen a detective movie:
The more information. the better the analysis.</p>

<p>There is nothign wrong with having ONE more piece of data. It's better to have too much than not enough.</p>

119

<p>Firewalker, you seem to not understand how correlation works. What is likely to be a better indicator of freshman grades: class rank or teacher recommendations? If it is class rank, should recs be abandoned entirely?</p>

<p>Although I am unsure if they post data for this, I would believe that among students with high GPAs those with higher SAT scores will tend to do better. Having additional data, in the form of MULTIVARIATE linear modeling, often can strenghten a correlation. Surely colleges know this, or they would have abandoned it entirely. If the solution was as simple as "correlation is weaker therefore trash it" I am sure the SAT would be gone.</p>

120

<p>
[quote]
For most kids reading isn't nearly as easy or as enjoyable an experience.

[/quote]

Mathmom, haven't you heard of Harry Potter? ;)</p>

<p>I do agree with you, though. I'm very lucky in that my family MADE us be readers. We got read to every night before bed. My little siblings still get books before bed - the youngest gets read to, if he wants it; the older one reads to herself. We find them books that they like - my sis requested "scary, mystery books" for Christmas, so I found a pile of them for her. So she's not reading The Hobbit like I was at her age - eh, whatever, she loves to read and she'll get curious about other books.</p>