Why do they have really high class rank, but standerized testing is only average?
<p>Well keep in mind that they don't take highest combined SAT score but highest single sitting score. And they only pick from CA students.</p>
<p>dood you must realize...sum schools give easy grades compared to others. Like, i think my school Harvard Westlake has only a handful of gpa's over 4.2 and our SAT scores are like wow...same for BEverly Hills high school, hardly anyone with 4.4+ but average SAt scores cream the average in the U.S. But like fairfax high school, lots of straight A's i heard of btu SAt just suck.</p>
<p>It is becuase the school has a mission to serve the taxpayers of California. They want to educate the top 5 or 10 % of the CA public school's kids. UC does not believe the SAT is particularly valuable as an assessment tool, either. They were going to entirely drop the use of it, until the college board assed the writing part just for them. They do use the SATII's more.</p>
<p>how do they know if someone is in the top 10% at their school? They know who is in the top 4%, but they don't ask anything about rank on the application.</p>
<p>*UC does not believe the SAT is particularly valuable as an assessment tool, either. *</p>
<p>neither do I.</p>
<p>theres not one uc that has average sat scores</p>
<p>School GPA Rank in top 10% Average SAT
UCSD 3.98 99% 1239
UCD 3.74 95% 1190
UCSB 3.76 95% 1182</p>
<p>Comparable by top 10% non-california schools.
Williams College 85% 1413
NYU 65% 1352
Notre Dame 85% 1369</p>
<p>Just trying to show that schools with number of students in top 10% is lower by 10% or more, but despite that has 100-200 point higher SAT scores.</p>
<p>Maybe it's because alot of California's high schools are crappy.</p>
<p>...or that the SAT isn't the best indicator of college readiness</p>
<p>rExRuN467 - do you go to Harvard Westlake?</p>
<p>well, californias public schools are currently ranked second to last in the country, and also (more importantly) california has a higher proportion of minority students than any other state, and its been shown that whiteness and wealth are teh greatest indicators of SAT strength, not one's "aptitude" for college. The UC's mission is to educate the smartest students in the state of california, and they've shown that the best way to do that is to accept the students who've shown that theyve taken advantage of the education already given them, not by accepting teh students who can perform well for 3 horus on one saturday.
Other valid points are the "single sitting" factor, and if you look at the UC guide, berkeley, for example, admitted only 7% of applicants who had a 3.7-3.99 gpa, and less than 2% of people with a 3.0-3.69. They are much more forgiving of people who didn't score well on the SAT verbal or math, admitting 25% of people with a 600-690, and even 5% of people with below a 400.</p>
<p>"Maybe it's because alot of California's high schools are crappy."</p>
<p>Yeah i find it odd how low our education rating is. I go to an extremely competitive high school. You often get gipped out of honors classes because its so impacted by high achieving students. Last year we sent 3 people to harvard, 3 to stanford, 1 to UPenn, and tons to berk/LA. There's a ton of other schools like this around my area like Monta Vista and Lynbrook (I go to Leland). But then again california is huge, so its probably much different in other areas.</p>
<p>I think it's amazing how the valedictorian of a California high school can have an SAT I score in the 1100s, don't you?</p>
<p>Because the SAT doesn't measure if you get 10/10 on little homework assignements or if you complete a 100 point project. After all, it is possible for someone to get a 4.0, and then get nervous and screw up on a test or just not naturally be able to retain facts.</p>
<p>kinglin:</p>
<p>Even the Collegeboard's own data show that SAT scores are positively correlated with family income. Since the UC's have the highest proportion of Pell Grant recipients in the country, approximately 35%, they are bound to have lower test scores. Check out Williams low-income class, and you'll easily understand the why they have high scores. THECity is also correct in that a single sitting can make a big difference.
Also, by design, the UC's are supposed to educate the top ~12.5% of Calif high school grads, so nearly all s/b in top 10%, ignoring recruited athletes and other special admits. </p>
<p>Bettina: the UC's are CB's biggest customer, so they DO count those scores, sometimes heavily (look at UCSD or Davis). OTOH, adcoms discount low scores for low income, first generation college apps, etc., thru comprehensive review. Former President Atkinson had another agenda in pushing for the change, if you read his speeches on this issue.</p>
<p>California's contribution to classroom education is 44th in the nation, we are a $1000 below the national average per student. Like Hawaii, our diversity is so great that there is no majority race, but because we are so large this has an even greater impact on our schools. Many schools are overcrowded, classes underfunded (local highschool dropped German, leaving juniors and seniors to search elsewhere for that third and fourth year, had planed to bump a class of AP physics, but that was stopped by quick parent reaction) and because the classes you can take at senior high are often impacted by the classes available to you in middle school, many students from underfunded and low income school sites have to wait until freshman year to get Algebra.</p>
<p>The SAT's have limited value, the same can be said for local high school grades, and teacher rec's...what tools are left. Any standardized test can be challenged for a bias, but I think the AP model might be the way to go, but at high school course levels, not college and with a 100 point spread so differences can be identified at a more detailed. A sophomore english test, an algebra test, some history and science tests, like the New York State Regents exams.</p>
<p>It is understandable if you earned a high SAT score or know someone who did, that you might want that to count the most, but the college board has failed to demonstrate the correlation between these test scores and college success. Just as college grades and adult success are not easily correlated.</p>
<p>I got up for coffee, came back hit send without editing the above, I apologize for the mistakes, I should have edited this before I hit post. In short, I think California needs to improve its funding for education from K-UC; find other standardized subject tests at high school grade levels should help identify the academic quality of students and to let students know how they are doing compared to a state or national norm. I also think we need to build three more UCs to take the pressure off the existing ones so we could accept more out of state students.</p>
<p>"but the college board has failed to demonstrate the correlation between these test scores and college success."</p>
<p>I agree. I have completed a whole semester at UC still as a HS junior with straight A, even got an A+ , but my SAT is under 1200. Collegeboard is just a moneymachine. I do not have the clue to those tests, I hate them. I hate the crowded HS too. But I liked to take university courses. Still might not be accepted because of the low SATs.</p>
<p>Jag, which UC do you go to. THe UC's vary greatly in difficulty and selectivity.</p>