<p>Mmmhmm. Oh well, doesn't look like things are gonna change anytime soon so...[beer]</p>
<p>jhsu most APs don't come out until after universities accept students. Unless you want a system similar to the british one using APs in the kselection process just won't work</p>
<p>superwizard, if we're talking about admissions reform (and we were, I think), the timing of AP results could be adjusted. That is, if we believed that AP results were significant, admissions decisions could be better coordinated with AP timing.</p>
<p>Yeah that's why I meantioned the British System which offers 'conditional' acceptance. Actually some universities in Britain use he APs that way too. (My friend needs 4 in 4 APs in order to keep his acceptance to UCL (university of college London).</p>
<p>wow -- s/he needs four 4s? Talk about pressure. You know, that could change the face of high schools in the U.S., maybe for the better. D took four AP courses senior year, got straight A+ course grades, but less stellar AP scores. She opted to put more emphasis on studying coursework, less on AP prep. They apparently took quite different focusses in history, econ, and government (e.g., radical SDS/Black Power emphasis in APush, a great course and valuable POV, but not great preparation for the AP test). So I'm thinking, if AP scores became more important for admissions, savvy students would buy the prep books and put their time there.</p>
<p>yeah then we will talk about how the AP tests are unfair to inner city kids with crappy schools, not all schools offering same # of AP courses, how the $80 a pop are hardship to poor students, how the welthy will go to AP prep classes and buy those prep books..........</p>
<p>Yeah it might but think of the increase in pressure on the students which really can't be good. If my acceptance right now was hanging in the balance I would probably go crazy. As for my friend the irony of it all is that collegeboard hasn't released the AP scores for my school and now he's going crazy :)</p>
<p>simba, that's exactly backwards -- what I was saying was that smart, motivated kids (inner city, international, whatever) could buy -- or borrow if you prefer -- the AP prep books, study, take the tests, and forego high school classes altogether; that would eliminate the unfairness.</p>
<p>The subject of the physically and learning disabled is ignored.</p>
<p>Amen, olddoc. (I was waiting for someone to notice this.)
And in fact, for the LD's (at least), if anything the reverse is true: The SAT I's (especially) compromise their often high GPA's -- if those students are the Highly Compensated LD'd who do not get accommodated because EVEN THEIR OWN HIGH SCHOOLS will not accommodate their classroom testing needs. (Their IQ's, advanced creativity/problem solving enable them to produce well on their classroom work -- albeit with enormous time investment, beyond what a non-LD'd will have to spend. They are abandoned by their own schools, not to mention the CB, to fend for themselves.)</p>
<p>That group of LD'd will manage to achieve, often, in demanding high schools where the curve is stiff, the requirements exacting, where there are no Easy A's. Yet their unaccommodated SAT I's will make them appear to the colleges to be unable to perform at a college level, since often their scores put them in the moron/imbecile/retarded range. (Take your pick; I'm not being flip.)</p>
<p>Yes, I can definitely see how the SAT I is just SUCH an equalizer.</p>
<p>I don't think most here are ignoring it olddoc and many of us appreciate you bring this interesting aspect of the SAT to light. I just don't think many here know that much about the physically and learning disabled in regard to the SAT. Enlighten us further if you can.</p>
<p>thank you, Truman. Unfortunately at the moment I've got to run somewhere; will get back to you. I can see that you're newish to the board. I wouldn't want to be too repetitive, since some of us LD parents have discussed this at length on PF (you might do a search on PF for "SAT without accommodation"). Also, there's a newish LD-dedicated forum on the main forum page, with probably a lot of posts in the last month or so. In the meantime, marny1, OrangeBlossom, others, might want to contribute to the "enlightenment" aspect? I can summarize a little later, & also PM you. </p>
<p>Btw, the previous principle I mentioned is often operative even in high schools with full-blown LD departments & supposedly supportive of that. And CB has been known to say that even if an LD student can document need for accommodation, & <em>has</em> been accommodated in h.s., their high grades in that h.s. can eliminate them from CB's SAT accommodation. (Thank you.)</p>
<p>"Your message WASN'T CLEAR on your post. You tried to put me down when you thought I was "white" while stating your point of view regarding the issue of the SAT, which was essentially THE SAME as mine. How consistent is that?"</p>
<p>No, I was in general speaking to the whole forum. The majority of people here aren't dealing with low performance schools in barrios near the border. The "white man comment" was one made in jest. Shssh. I've always thought it was funny when New York Democrats talk about the poor Mexican in South Texas :0</p>
<p>Lighten up, will ya?</p>
<p>""Attempting to belittle your opponent"? You need to reread your post and see that you belittled yourself by playing the race card, as shown above. As I told simba, in a forum such as this, where far too many people are educated and reasonable, once you play the race card, you really can't be taken seriously."</p>
<p>No, I think I mentioned the race card ocne. I mostly talked about being poor and going to a crappy school. </p>
<p>Fine, would you like me to say it? Poor people in GENERAL get the shaft. Shssh..</p>
<p>I love the whole "taken" seriously thing. Seriously :) It's a common debate tactic on the internet to hinge upon one aspect of another poster's post to anchor yourself to a position that doesn't defeat your opponent's point, just makes it so that "you can't take them seriously."</p>
<p>"Along with that, you toot your own horn by blabbing about what you've accomplished in spite of your deprived background. Your post was coming from left field, right field and center field...absolutely no consistency in your message. Basically, you just posted regarding this issue to blab about what YOU'VE accomplished. Get over yourself."</p>
<p>Not really. I've got actualy papers written about this. I've spent time doing research on the effects of socioeconomics upon elementary and secondary education. I just didn't figure CC needed for me to speak in that lingo, particularly when others have already posted what my view is. I just tried to be a little bit more...down to Earth about it?</p>
<p>I got over myself a long time ago. Perhaps the elementary debate book about betlitling your opponent is still working for you, yes?</p>
<p>Look Truman, in all honesty, it was just a post. No need to get offended by the Mexican :) ^_^</p>
<p><em>gasp</em> RACE CARD!</p>
<p>"Something like being able to play like Michael Jordan vs. the average player has absolutely nothing to do with this issue. What a weak argument. That's like saying, "not everybody can be the physicist Einstein was, everybody just doesn't have that kind of ablilty". This sports analogy doesn't exactly translate to academcs does it? Only a select few make it as an NBA player. Talk about having to make it into an exclusive club. Not the case, for the most part, in academics."</p>
<p>Fine, make it Nobel Prize. Not every academician can win a nobel prize. :)</p>
<p>But look, the analogy does make sense. Instead of making Michael Jordan the example, let's make it college basketball. Not every person can play basketball at a level to even make their HS team. There is some work, but if you are a short person with a bad leg, you aren't going to make any basketball team, no matter how hard you work.</p>
<p>If you aren't that mentally faciliated, it won't matter how much work you do, you still won't be as smart.</p>
<p>There is a reason why genius is said to come from birth.</p>
<p>What I did to prepare for the SAT had NOTHING to do with reinforcing my high school work or preparing for college. The Princeton Review Hit Parade words, the Create-Your-Own-Ruler Trick, the Joe Bloggs Rule, the Working Backwards trick, the Trigger Words trick, etc. and then practicing them on sample tests were the things I did to prepare.</p>
<p>If we accept the premise of the SAT proponents, then one of two conclusions must be true:
1. If I hadn't prepared for the SAT but did everything else the same way, my academic potential would have been less.
2. My tactics constituted cheating.</p>
<p>So if you accept Conclusion #1 above, then you're saying that all those slick tricks prepared me for college work. I fail to see how this can be true, because none of my professors turned to the ETS for midterm or final exam questions.</p>
<p>If you accept Conclusion #2, then where do you draw the line between cheating and studying? According to this logic, students shouldn't bother reading their textbooks or class notes and that a really serious student would be able to learn the material without actually studying.</p>
<p>First, thanks epiphany. I look forward to learning more about this issue. </p>
<p>Ferny Reyes Debate books, tactics? Are you serious?? What is this, some kind of game to you? </p>
<p>When I mean race card, I mean using race to marginalize another, which you clearly attempted to do. And of course Im not offended. Im not a well-off white person as you tried to label me. Most educated, reasonable people would agree that its unacceptable to use race in that context in an educated debate (speaking of debates).</p>
<p>And I think you misunderstood me about academics. I mean we are talking about the SAT's here..come on. I'm talking about students trying to get a good education at a university, not professors. I said academics not academicians. </p>
<p>The analogy is weak because it points out MJ and the NBA (pls. don't twist it into college basketball for your convenience) and compares it to college applicants trying to get a good education. There are about 350 NBA players who've made it out of millions who have tried to get in. You can't compare something as exclusive as MJ & the NBA to trying to get a good college education to later succeed in life. That is nowhere near as exclusive in nature. In other words, one may not have ability comparable to Einsteins, yet still have enough ability to succeed in the field of physics. In the NBA, you need a certain defined skill set and physical features reasonably comparable to MJ or anybody successful like him. If not, youre not going to make it. </p>
<p>The example you gave about college basketball is given. If you have a relatively low or average level of intellect, for example, theres nothing much that can be done to boost it. But what does that have to do with socioeconomic conditions possibly compromising SAT scores of bright, capable individuals? Thats one of the points Ive been emphasizing all along but some of you just cant seem to comprehend it.</p>
<p>jim, if you believe in half of the b.s. that you say you sir need to wake up.</p>
<p>jhsu, perhaps what shows your ability to do college work is not that you used those tricks on the SAT; rather, that you took the time to learn those tricks and apply them. Any smart individual should be capable of understanding that high SAT scores are near essential when it comes to admission to a top university. So instead of whining about how the SAT doesn't cover anything useful, the top students find a way of succeeding at everything that is thrown at them - including mastering an arbitrary test that measures bizarre abilities. </p>
<p>If you are...
1) incapable of doing well on the SAT with or without studying; or
2) incapable of realizing that high SAT scores are necessary</p>
<p>...it is unlikely that a top school would be interested in you.</p>
<p>I dont think the SAT is a measure of intelligence at all. we dont even understand the meanign of intelligence or the working of the brain. the same thing goes with the "IQ" test. a mentally retarded person has many times a extreme genious for music--there are many things we dont udnerstand. i think college admission should be based on individual skills which the person is good at which is what people end up doing later on in their lives. HS grades are far more importand because it is a long term commiment to alot of work and emulates the college experiene more closely. i saw many people get a really nice sat score and making c's in their high school classes while i was making a's. of course i know that colleges would know that but ur assertion that an "intelligent" student should be able to pass the test is just not a good one because "intelligence" or genious comes in many forms and it doesnt just manifest itself in the ability to answer some questions on a reading passage or take the derivative of a function. i think it should be expanded to cover a mix of subjects like science too to make it a more "well rounded test" or just leave the SAT 2s and make students take speicific ones when they apply to their area of study.</p>
<p>"Nor do the grades given out even at elite institutions seem to have much relation to student ability or performance. As reported by his lawyer, an imposter who in the early 1990s gained admission to Yale with a fake transcript earned a B average in the two years before he was caught, even though his GPA at the community college he previously attended had been only 2.1."</p>
<p>So didn't he just prove the opposite of what he suggested? That a community college student with a 2.1 GPA could be doing much better if he was attending Yale, and that his SATs didn't matter in the least?</p>
<p>Is the idea that Yale should be "rewarding" students for their SAT scores with good grades, rather than making them work for them, as this student would have had to at the community college?</p>
<p>I suggested that the SAT II and AP exams be used as a substitute for SAT I scores. Those of you who objected to using AP scores have some good points - not enough scores are available in time. It's also true that scaling up the AP program is difficult due to the burdens on both the students and ETS.</p>
<p>So why not use the SAT II exams as a substitute for the SAT I? The SAT II exams have their share of flaws, but they would give students an incentive to learn better in their classes while the SAT I has very little to do with high school or college classes. All those tricks I had to learn for the SAT I helped me earn brownie points from bean counters but had NOTHING to do with my high school work. Efforts made to study for the SAT II exam also help students on the corresponding final exams in class and vice versa.</p>