Comments on: The Times Changin’…Follow Up

By: Matt Engine

Matt Engine — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 00:12:50 +0000

I can see the merit of both traditional and holistic approaches to admissions. There can be a wide disparity in school quality. A holistic approach probably allows folks who have potential to achieve but have not yet achieved the chance they need.

By: Ronnie

Ronnie — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:08:45 +0000

The issue is the additional factors involved that only counselors can gather up. THere are some smart kids out there that just dont have any care to strive to be better and therefore flop in school whereas others who just need the opportunity and can excel.

By: Justin Phillips

Justin Phillips — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 07:44:29 +0000

I agree with the responders point of view, the SAT is not an objective test and it will not demonstrate a students success future success with college.

High school is a time of learning and developing ones self. The SAT’s don’t demonstrate someones dedication, determination or will to succeed in college. Many of my friends that did well on the SAT’s didn’t do well in college. In fact I’d say 25% or so completely dropped out of college altogether.

By: heather

heather — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 18:51:42 +0000

I think the system is fine just the way it is. I would take too long to sit there and evaluate each student and by the time you gave out all your scholarships there would still be better qualified students left out. This is a fast, easy and for the most part effective way in determining quickly if this student fits the requirements of a certain university.

By: alice

alice — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:04:05 +0000

Its tough to say how we should test our students to see who and who isnt qualified for universities. I must say though in the recent years as a teacher, I dont think schools weigh too much on student SAT scores. Yes they do matter but its just another piece of content they can use for evaluation. GPA and Honor courses can heavily over weight a bad SAT score.

By: anthony

anthony — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:23:15 +0000

I dont think these SATs should determine if you get into a college or not. Many people that are able to get into these schools are still taking community classes so they dont have to pay the large university fees.

By: franco

franco — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:23:40 +0000

This testing test nothing but how bad you can fail, i always do really bad on them!

By: Larry M.

Larry M. — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:14:53 +0000

God I hate standardized testing! Please make this stuff go away!

By: John P.

John P. — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 13:30:07 +0000

I agree that this measuring tool is completely misguided. It should be overhauled or eliminated

By: James

James — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 06:48:23 +0000

@ Jeff:

1) I am not sure how mychances.net provides any objective data at all on SAT reliability across racial and SES groups. Pretty much every major study of SAT validity shows a clear bias against people of color and low income folks. While mychances.net may be a wonderful site…I’ll stick with the actual research. It’s pretty clear that the SAT drives admission decisions at many schools…But that’s the point. Schools who are using the SAT as a gold standard are barking up the wrong tree in the wrong forest.

2) Given the overwhelming evidence against using the current standardized tests and the College Board’s own call to move admission towards holistic measures and away from the SAT (along with CB’s pledge to spend millions researching holistic measures) I think it’s pretty clear that the SAT as we know it ain’t long for this shindig.

3) Standardization is crucial. Without standardization and repeatability the measure is a failure. We need to replace the SAT with a HOLISTIC MEASURE that is standardized and FAIR. Enter the Insight Resume: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/03/02/holistic.

Ultimately, I think you are missing the point because you keep referring to “performance” in a good/bad context. Look, the point isn’t WHO does well and who doesn’t…The point is that the measuring tool isn’t even right for the job in the first place. Imagine trying to measure the length of a beam with a gram scale. Standardized tests fail to measure what colleges intend because they are outmoded and not meant to infer the information colleges infer about students from their results.

That’s the crux of the bias argument; students from disadvantaged groups do poorly because the test was written with advantaged students in mind. Would you really argue that disadvantaged students do worse than their advantaged peers because they’re simply dumber? The point is to measure potential…Right? Just because a kid comes from the poorest most rural school in America with bad test scores doesn’t mean that she couldn’t whip anyone in a mental throwdown given a good education.

-jm