<p>OK, weighing in here.</p>
<p>I think the questions and discussion about my d’s test scores and choice of college simply illustrates a myth about the value of those standardized scores. </p>
<p>To start with, my daughter’s SAT scores were not 100 points below the 25th percent mark at her school. They are 120-160 points below.</p>
<p>D’s Math: 580 - Barnard Math range: 640-710 - Columbia Math range - 670-780
D’s CR: 620 - Barnard CR range: 640-740 - Columbia CR range 670-760</p>
<p>I’ve included Columbia figures because the issue I am responding to is Marian’s question, “why would a student want to attend a school” where the score range is 100 points higher, and my d. keeps signing up for classes at Columbia as well as Barnard. And I want to show that it isn’t a case of a kid who simply is lopsided - here scores are significantly below range no matter how you slice it. </p>
<p>However, the numbers don’t matter. SAT is not an IQ test, and even if it were, the notion of IQ as a fixed expression of ability has pretty much been debunked by current cognitive research. Assuming at least a normal level of intelligence, effort & experience generally wins out over supposed innate talent. And a lot of those high end SAT scores are more a reflection of experience than innate ability in any case – my d’s scores are well above the mean scores for her high school (around 500-550). </p>
<p>As Northstarmom pointed out, GPA is far more predictive. Another far more predictive & significant factor is EQ – that is, kids who show an early ability to defer gratification do better in the long run that the kids who lack that ability. </p>
<p>My D is not a “diligent plugger” – she is highly creative and she works fast. I don’t know what the 7 habits of highly efficient people are… but I’ll bet she has them. She doesn’t work particularly hard, but she plans and she sticks to her plan. She doesn’t procrastinate, and she doesn’t get sidetracked. </p>
<p>The point is: if my daughter were at a college where her scores were mid-range – she might be equally challenged, depending on the college. (For example, her scores would be within range at the excellent LAC that Curmudgeon’s d. chose over Yale). The high SAT band at the elites is not a reflection of greater academic ability or intellect – it simply reflects a selection process that allows the schools the luxury of selecting for a high score range. But SATs simply are not the type of tests that really can tell very much about the intellectual ability of the student who takes them.</p>
<p>I don’t think kids should have unrealistic aspirations, and SAT score ranges certainly are useful in discerning overall likelihood of admission. But I don’t think any kid should be slotted as somehow less capable because they don’t happen to score well on a test, and I’m sorry if any kid is deterred from applying to their dream school on the false rationale that their low-end scores mean that they wouldn’t be able to compete at the school. It’s sad that SAT’s, with their well-documented economic & ethnic bias, have become a sorting hat that becomes part of a feedback loop of diminished expectations. (that is, if the thought process is: “I was hoping to go to Yale, but I can’t seem to do better than 1900 on my SAT’s, therefore I must not be smart enough”… its unfortunate. Whether the kid with the 1900 has a chance of getting into Yale is a different issue than whether he would be smart enough to do well if he did get in.).</p>
<p>I’d note that my d’s college participates in the HEOP program which literally requires that SAT CR score be 620 or below in order to qualify. See <a href=“http://www.barnard.edu/admiss/support/heop.html[/url]”>http://www.barnard.edu/admiss/support/heop.html</a>
It would be cruel indeed if those students were brought into the college with the expectation that they would fail because their SAT scores are required to be below range.</p>