Massaging Data

The SAT is hardly a perfect instrument, and there may be some benefits to making the test optional. But let’s be honest about a primary motive for dropping the requirement-making numbers look better for US News.

Publius, at 5:45 am EDT on October 6, 2006

Let’s be clear about what benefit the SAT did have. First, in just about all of the research I have executed and seen, there is no better predictor of college success than the SAT. Second, look at what tool was used to democratize higher education at the beginning of the last century — it was the SAT — which made it harder for the children of the aristrocacy to gain placement at many of the elite private colleges.

I have no problem with dropping the SAT — it is any school’s prerogative, but don’t dress it up as some attempt to improve the quality of the admissions process. It is a blatant way to lower the bar without saying you are doing so. To mislead so many Americans into thinking the SAT is useless is disingenuous and even dangerous.

Mike, at 9:00 am EDT on October 6, 2006

Psychometrics

I’m sorry, no offense intended, but when did high school counselors become experts in psychometrics, exactly?

To drop the SAT is to lose an important measure of how far many groups of children have yet to go. Having said that, many colleges, particularly at the lower end of quality, in effect don’t really use the SAT because they accept essentially everyone who applies.

Louis Leon Thurstone, at 10:25 am EDT on October 6, 2006

Isn’t it ironic...

Isn’t the federal government discussing standardized tests to evaluate students’ knowledge when they graduate from college?

Dominick, at 10:25 am EDT on October 6, 2006

Origins and History

The early College Board exams (not the SAT, the came later) were intended to be a college admissions sorting device. They were devised to address the problems that the new high schools (preparatory schools in the Northeast, actually) were having trying to figure out what they needed to be teaching THEIR students in order to have them admitted into college.

And the colleges wanted something that would ease the massive bureaucratic burden of admitting students. There was something for everyone. That the “neutral” tests gave the *appearance* of fairness, and justified the appearance of American meritocracy that the tests gave was also a plus. This turned out to be a boon for standardized testing as well.

But now this is changing. We know now, for example, that SATs reflect social class, race, etc., since those that can afford it get SAT tutoring classes, and those in better school districts also do better.

We now realize the SATs are just another social stratification device whereby the rich and privileged keep their benefits (Pierre Bourdieu). This reality, of course, demolishes the SAT’s egalitarian aura, and I guess people realize that it is time to move on.

Glen McGhee, at 11:00 am EDT on October 6, 2006

the real losers

The big losers will be unconventional thinkers, especially in the sciences. Now, this may seem counterintuitive, because what could be more conventional than filling in a bunch of boxes correctly? Answer: four years of high school classes, with all the organization and color-coded folders and tolerance for meaningless assignments that they require. Of course, expensive prep schools and wealthy suburban schools tend to have the resources to hold interesting classes with fewer by-the-numbers homeworks, so unconventional thinkers lucky enough to attend one of those may still do okay.

jcl, grad student, at 11:00 am EDT on October 6, 2006

Well, I’m certainly confused now. My child is in the process of applying for different universities and is planning to take the SAT. Should she continue with this process or not? No need in spending all the time and money if it’s not going to make a difference on her getting admitted to an elite or ivy league school.

Penny, at 11:45 am EDT on October 6, 2006

Take this test

UNIVERSITY:SAT a) idiot:horoscope b) referee:coin-toss c) child:magic 8-balld) liquor:fake ID

Rodrigo, at 12:55 pm EDT on October 6, 2006

I believe they are saying that test scores are not the only way to show student learning or their potential for future success. Now if we as a country could just move forward to that point with the No Child Left Behind standards we might be making some real progress as a nation.

CTL, at 4:00 pm EDT on October 6, 2006

Well, I realize that these schools aren’t — yet — talking about eliminating the SAT entirely, but they also aren’t talking about making transcripts or recommendations optional. And I’m arguing more against the idea that the SAT measures absolutely nothing of value, expressed by some here, than the idea that it measures things that shouldn’t be the only criteria for evaluating students.

jcl, grad student, at 4:20 pm EDT on October 6, 2006

missing the SAT

As someone growing up in the rural South in the 1980s, I found the SAT to be the great equalizer. My small public high school certainly wouldn’t distinguish me in college admissions; no one had ever heard of it. My grades wouldn’t, either; mostly A’s from such a small, rural place wouldn’t mean much to the better colleges. (After all, how hard could such a school be, especially since more advanced courses like physics weren’t even offered there?) The SAT, though, was the same test taken by high school students all over the country, regardless of where they went to school. While not a perfect measure of intellectual ability, the SAT was still the best chance I had to show the better colleges what I was capable of. For the sake of students today who are in the position I was, I’m sad to see colleges drop the SAT.

Mike, math prof, at 6:30 am EDT on October 7, 2006

SAT

I have been teaching at an institution without competitive admissions for over five years, and we no longer require SAT scores. What “Cynic” calls “heart, will, capacity, and maturity” has proven far more important to student success, and at our school, the term academic literacy applies loosely to the same idea. I infer perhaps wrongly from Thurstone that everyone does not deserve a chance at higher education; not everyone has the environmental advantages that lead to competitive SAT scores, and his patrician attitude, if I read it correctly, saddens me. I am, furthermore, a bit irked at the non sequitur in connecting a low quality of instruction with non-competitive admissions. The SAT measures something about students, not instructors, and I would argue that those teaching at institutions without competitive admissions might actually be better teachers. Logically speaking, the merits of a college ought to be based on graduation standards, not admissions standards.

Steve, Professor, at 6:35 am EDT on October 7, 2006

$$$ = higher scores?

[Dropping SATs may not be lowering the bar; it may be removing a financial bar. Students with high incomes can pay SAT coaches—I worked for one who charged $250/hour—while others may not even be able to afford a Kaplan course (about $1000). Yes, being coached does make a difference.]

Interesting, but not always true. I came from a lower-income family, and had relatively low high school grades due to a lack of focus and a particularly poor small-town school system. There was no coaching or prepping for me, much less any high-$$$ classes or tutors.

However, without any of that, my SAT score was the highest in my year both at my high school and at the college I ended up attending, and was probably the only reason the school accepted me. This led to a bachelor’s degree, followed by grad school.

25 years later, I am in middle management with a Fortune 500 company, have significant investments, and could reasonably be considered successful. Without the SAT score to show my potential, I would probably be flipping burgers somewhere right now.

Draw your own conclusions.

RaceDriver, at 10:20 am EDT on October 7, 2006

Not Missing the SAT

I agree that the SAT can be a useful tool for evaluation, but that it also appears to be given too much power in the admissions process.

My daughter, who is now in her first year of college at UVa, took the last of the old SAT format exams last February (the January date was snowed out here), and the first in the new SAT format in March. Her scores dropped over 100 points in each section with the advent of the new format exam. Since the exams were only a month apart it isn’t because she suddenly had less ability in that time span.

One of the stated purposes of reformatting the SAT exam was to make it more hospitable to non-native English speakers. It was felt that it would level the admissions playing field. I haven’t seen anyone address whether that intended result is in fact the case.

Now after having taught college seniors this past year, and having to grade their essays, which for the most part were deplorable, I must say there is a huge need to encourage our high school students to take their writing skills more seriously. If the new requisite essays on both the SAT and the ACT will accomplish that goal, I say there is value in that.

Does anybody want to comment on the value of perhaps elevating the ACT over the SAT?

University Mom, at 9:00 am EDT on October 8, 2006

Martin said:"I would much prefer to teach a room full of slow learners who want to learn than to have just one super bright kid who thinks he knows everything. We should not forget what we got into higher education for in the first place, to teach.”

As a student, I would much prefer to be in a room full of bright kids, rather than in a room full of slow learners. Don’t forget, we’re there to learn.

The advantage of different colleges accepting students of varying preparation/aptitude levels is that students of varying levels can be together, and the bright kid who wants to learn can do so at his own pace, rather than being bored out of the classroom. I agree with the concerns of the other commenters as far as unconventional learners and impatient, bright students. If a bright student is stuck at a high school where the teachers insist “you shouldn’t contradict me, even if I’m wrong” (they do exist!) should his poor teacher recommendations be the only thing colleges see? Or his poor grades, if he refuses to do the worthless busy-work assignments ("Color in this map of europe. Shading counts toward your grade.")? These students deserve a chance to show their talent.

Note I am not saying that the teacher’s letters or the student’s grades should be ignored; these are valuable tools. But standardized tests offer important information as well, and talk about getting rid of them all too often ignores this fact.

Lisa, at 5:50 am EDT on October 9, 2006

mike...the sat is not the best predictor of college success. not sure what research you’ve executed and seen, but if that’s your conclusion you haven’t seen enough. the act, for instance, works better as a measure. the sat is a decent measure for first-year grades. after that it’s predictive validity falls apart. high school grades, especially taken in context of the high school pool and pool of students applying to a specific institution, are a much more valuable measure. the sat is sueful, but not the end-all-and-be-all that you make it out to be.

policy wonk, at 1:15 pm EDT on October 9, 2006