Colleges should require scores if test is taken

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think scores should be required, period.

The "doesn't test well" is a myth. My son with special needs didn't test well until we got him diagnosed, taught him organizational skills and half-medicated (he couldn't take the optimal dose of meds due to medical concerns, but a little was better than nothing).

So, without significant intervention, your kid didn't test well. It required diagnosis, training, and medication. What about kids without the resources and time and knowledge to get those things? For whom standardized tests don't actually reflect their cognitive abilities or their knowledge?

PP you replied to. Too bad for them. I think we should have universal healthcare and neuropsychs should be covered by insurance. I think meds should be cheaper.

But it’s incredibly frustrating to dumb down the whole process just for a minority of kids.

***I would feel that way EVEN if my kid had bad scores!***

My native country has no accommodations or services in school for kids with disabilities. My ADHD hindered me significantly. But I do appreciate that they still hold students to high academic standards. It’s all about grades and test scores. No extra-curriculars, hooks or nonsense allowed.

Yes, yes we know where you are from. Could you put that in the OP next time and every time in these college threads so we can skip them? And feel free to send your child to college in India.

wow, what a racist statement! I'm from a European country and our school system is as the PP described hers. No EC, hooks, URM, legacy. It's all about test scores!

Go ahead and restrict your kid to applying only to schools you think have legitimate admissions practices.

Guess what? No one else cares.

Yeah, we get it. You love the TO revolution. It allows your kid to cloak a critical area of weakness, and unlocks accessibility to prestigious educational opportunities that they would never have been considered eligible for in the past. Just say "Works for me!" and save all of us the time wondering whether you had these hardened views before or after the TO era began.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think scores should be required, period.

The "doesn't test well" is a myth. My son with special needs didn't test well until we got him diagnosed, taught him organizational skills and half-medicated (he couldn't take the optimal dose of meds due to medical concerns, but a little was better than nothing).

The fact that you have a “special needs” child and the process of getting him help didn’t teach you a damn dose of empathy or understanding for similar or even worse off kids for whom the “solution” isn’t so neat and tidy says a lot about you. The universe tried to teach you a lesson to make you a better person and you failed.

No. You are wrong. The only way we can keep making progress in this world is to push the high-achieving people to the top of the chain, to give them opportunities to change the world.

I am humble enough to recognize that this may not be my family. My kids will find their place in the world, I don't worry about that. But as a species, we need to stay competitive, figure out a way to mitigate climate change, manage massive financial upheavals, travel to other planets, cure diseases, harness AI, etc. If you deliberately prevent the talented from rising, by eliminating the easiest, simplest and most efficient filters at our disposal, then you are NOT helping our species survive.

This isn't about my kid or your kid. It's about a more long-term approach to specie evolution.

You know who is innovative? Creative people. Who may or may not test well. Lets have a test that demonstrates innovation. The SAT/ACT is not it.

I’m all for restoring the ACT/SAT and adding a creativity measure that’s been validated. Sure, why not?

Certainly better than TO, which will just go down as the defective “everyone gets a trophy” era.

+1. TO is the equivalent to “everyone gets a trophy”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think scores should be required, period.

The "doesn't test well" is a myth. My son with special needs didn't test well until we got him diagnosed, taught him organizational skills and half-medicated (he couldn't take the optimal dose of meds due to medical concerns, but a little was better than nothing).

So, without significant intervention, your kid didn't test well. It required diagnosis, training, and medication. What about kids without the resources and time and knowledge to get those things? For whom standardized tests don't actually reflect their cognitive abilities or their knowledge?

PP you replied to. Too bad for them. I think we should have universal healthcare and neuropsychs should be covered by insurance. I think meds should be cheaper.

But it’s incredibly frustrating to dumb down the whole process just for a minority of kids.

***I would feel that way EVEN if my kid had bad scores!***

My native country has no accommodations or services in school for kids with disabilities. My ADHD hindered me significantly. But I do appreciate that they still hold students to high academic standards. It’s all about grades and test scores. No extra-curriculars, hooks or nonsense allowed.

Yes, yes we know where you are from. Could you put that in the OP next time and every time in these college threads so we can skip them? And feel free to send your child to college in India.

wow, what a racist statement! I'm from a European country and our school system is as the PP described hers. No EC, hooks, URM, legacy. It's all about test scores!

Go ahead and restrict your kid to applying only to schools you think have legitimate admissions practices.

Guess what? No one else cares.

Guess what? my kid knows how to play the game and is at a top school by dcum standard. I just laugh at all those of you who claim that your DC is a straight A student but is not a good test taker. Yeah right! Pretty sure that many of these kids have also prepped like crazy but couldn't hack a decent score because guess what? not everyone has the ability to get to 1500s. For all those who argue that GPA is a better indicator of college success, I guess you've never heard of grade inflation and unlimited retakes until students get an A. I'm in a parents facebook group for DC's college, and there are so many parents complaining about their previously straight A students struggling or failing their intro classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think scores should be required, period.

The "doesn't test well" is a myth. My son with special needs didn't test well until we got him diagnosed, taught him organizational skills and half-medicated (he couldn't take the optimal dose of meds due to medical concerns, but a little was better than nothing).

The fact that you have a “special needs” child and the process of getting him help didn’t teach you a damn dose of empathy or understanding for similar or even worse off kids for whom the “solution” isn’t so neat and tidy says a lot about you. The universe tried to teach you a lesson to make you a better person and you failed.

No. You are wrong. The only way we can keep making progress in this world is to push the high-achieving people to the top of the chain, to give them opportunities to change the world.

I am humble enough to recognize that this may not be my family. My kids will find their place in the world, I don't worry about that. But as a species, we need to stay competitive, figure out a way to mitigate climate change, manage massive financial upheavals, travel to other planets, cure diseases, harness AI, etc. If you deliberately prevent the talented from rising, by eliminating the easiest, simplest and most efficient filters at our disposal, then you are NOT helping our species survive.

This isn't about my kid or your kid. It's about a more long-term approach to specie evolution.

This, right here, is where the thread got WILD.

[Anonymous]

+1. Such a bleak and Darwinistic perspective. And who’s to say the elite-enough-for-DCUM-parent-to-not-hide-in-shame are the pathways to fixing climate change and massive financial upheavals. Because last time I checked, the last several financial upheavals not caused by a pandemic were in fact CREATED by a bunch of HYPSM* alums. The VCs in the dot com and telecom bubble and bankers in the RMBS debacle. And Long Term Capital Management not far before those. All industries that are so-called fed by HYPSM+.

Being smart is important. But it’s also important to spend as much effort thinking about what one should do, instead of just what one can do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think scores should be required, period.

The "doesn't test well" is a myth. My son with special needs didn't test well until we got him diagnosed, taught him organizational skills and half-medicated (he couldn't take the optimal dose of meds due to medical concerns, but a little was better than nothing).

So, without significant intervention, your kid didn't test well. It required diagnosis, training, and medication. What about kids without the resources and time and knowledge to get those things? For whom standardized tests don't actually reflect their cognitive abilities or their knowledge?

PP you replied to. Too bad for them. I think we should have universal healthcare and neuropsychs should be covered by insurance. I think meds should be cheaper.

But it’s incredibly frustrating to dumb down the whole process just for a minority of kids.

***I would feel that way EVEN if my kid had bad scores!***

My native country has no accommodations or services in school for kids with disabilities. My ADHD hindered me significantly. But I do appreciate that they still hold students to high academic standards. It’s all about grades and test scores. No extra-curriculars, hooks or nonsense allowed.

Yes, yes we know where you are from. Could you put that in the OP next time and every time in these college threads so we can skip them? And feel free to send your child to college in India.

wow, what a racist statement! I'm from a European country and our school system is as the PP described hers. No EC, hooks, URM, legacy. It's all about test scores!

Go ahead and restrict your kid to applying only to schools you think have legitimate admissions practices.

Guess what? No one else cares.

Guess what? my kid knows how to play the game and is at a top school by dcum standard. I just laugh at all those of you who claim that your DC is a straight A student but is not a good test taker. Yeah right! Pretty sure that many of these kids have also prepped like crazy but couldn't hack a decent score because guess what? not everyone has the ability to get to 1500s. For all those who argue that GPA is a better indicator of college success, I guess you've never heard of grade inflation and unlimited retakes until students get an A. I'm in a parents facebook group for DC's college, and there are so many parents complaining about their previously straight A students struggling or failing their intro classes.

Oh no- grade inflation! Do you think you’ve uncovered some great secret that college admissions offices are blind to? You don’t think they track everything? Good grief - if you think colleges are this inept, including the “top” college your child attends, then you should have sent them abroad.

And all of those supposed straight A students failing intro classes could also have had test scores - unless you expect us to believe the parents are posting “my straight A test optional student is failing - oh how I wish they took the SAT since it’s a curb against grade inflation”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think scores should be required, period.

The "doesn't test well" is a myth. My son with special needs didn't test well until we got him diagnosed, taught him organizational skills and half-medicated (he couldn't take the optimal dose of meds due to medical concerns, but a little was better than nothing).

So, without significant intervention, your kid didn't test well. It required diagnosis, training, and medication. What about kids without the resources and time and knowledge to get those things? For whom standardized tests don't actually reflect their cognitive abilities or their knowledge?

PP you replied to. Too bad for them. I think we should have universal healthcare and neuropsychs should be covered by insurance. I think meds should be cheaper.

But it’s incredibly frustrating to dumb down the whole process just for a minority of kids.

***I would feel that way EVEN if my kid had bad scores!***

My native country has no accommodations or services in school for kids with disabilities. My ADHD hindered me significantly. But I do appreciate that they still hold students to high academic standards. It’s all about grades and test scores. No extra-curriculars, hooks or nonsense allowed.

Yes, yes we know where you are from. Could you put that in the OP next time and every time in these college threads so we can skip them? And feel free to send your child to college in India.

wow, what a racist statement! I'm from a European country and our school system is as the PP described hers. No EC, hooks, URM, legacy. It's all about test scores!

Go ahead and restrict your kid to applying only to schools you think have legitimate admissions practices.

Guess what? No one else cares.

Yeah, we get it. You love the TO revolution. It allows your kid to cloak a critical area of weakness, and unlocks accessibility to prestigious educational opportunities that they would never have been considered eligible for in the past. Just say "Works for me!" and save all of us the time wondering whether you had these hardened views before or after the TO era began.

Ah the old “well your kid must be a bad test taker” defense. It’s of such value on an anonymous forum. I don’t think my kids’ standardized test scores somehow give me extra credibility.

The point is that no one is stopping your kid from applying abroad. If you think colleges here are devalued because they don’t mandate testing, apply to ones that do. The US has done things differently for years. Just like we do in health care, guns, etc. But none of that matters because Buffy got rejected from Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think scores should be required, period.

The "doesn't test well" is a myth. My son with special needs didn't test well until we got him diagnosed, taught him organizational skills and half-medicated (he couldn't take the optimal dose of meds due to medical concerns, but a little was better than nothing).

The fact that you have a “special needs” child and the process of getting him help didn’t teach you a damn dose of empathy or understanding for similar or even worse off kids for whom the “solution” isn’t so neat and tidy says a lot about you. The universe tried to teach you a lesson to make you a better person and you failed.

No. You are wrong. The only way we can keep making progress in this world is to push the high-achieving people to the top of the chain, to give them opportunities to change the world.

I am humble enough to recognize that this may not be my family. My kids will find their place in the world, I don't worry about that. But as a species, we need to stay competitive, figure out a way to mitigate climate change, manage massive financial upheavals, travel to other planets, cure diseases, harness AI, etc. If you deliberately prevent the talented from rising, by eliminating the easiest, simplest and most efficient filters at our disposal, then you are NOT helping our species survive.

This isn't about my kid or your kid. It's about a more long-term approach to specie evolution.

You know who is innovative? Creative people. Who may or may not test well. Lets have a test that demonstrates innovation. The SAT/ACT is not it.

I’m all for restoring the ACT/SAT and adding a creativity measure that’s been validated. Sure, why not?

Certainly better than TO, which will just go down as the defective “everyone gets a trophy” era.

+1. TO is the equivalent to “everyone gets a trophy”.

And these threads are the equivalent of complaining about the refs when you lose.

[Anonymous]

All of this just boils down to - "why do you care" what my child does or doesn't do in the college admissions process? Our kid took what he was given or earned and found colleges that fit HIM. He wasn't competing with the status-obsessed kids and parents. He was realistic about what he wanted from a college, what he was capable of and what strategy worked best FOR HIM. Good lord. And you know what. He's doing great and is SO glad to be done with the insanity of the college application process and the DMV college obsessions. Perhaps spend a little more time looking at your own child and thinking about what works for them instead of worrying about others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think scores should be required, period.

The "doesn't test well" is a myth. My son with special needs didn't test well until we got him diagnosed, taught him organizational skills and half-medicated (he couldn't take the optimal dose of meds due to medical concerns, but a little was better than nothing).

The fact that you have a “special needs” child and the process of getting him help didn’t teach you a damn dose of empathy or understanding for similar or even worse off kids for whom the “solution” isn’t so neat and tidy says a lot about you. The universe tried to teach you a lesson to make you a better person and you failed.

No. You are wrong. The only way we can keep making progress in this world is to push the high-achieving people to the top of the chain, to give them opportunities to change the world.

I am humble enough to recognize that this may not be my family. My kids will find their place in the world, I don't worry about that. But as a species, we need to stay competitive, figure out a way to mitigate climate change, manage massive financial upheavals, travel to other planets, cure diseases, harness AI, etc. If you deliberately prevent the talented from rising, by eliminating the easiest, simplest and most efficient filters at our disposal, then you are NOT helping our species survive.

This isn't about my kid or your kid. It's about a more long-term approach to specie evolution.

You know who is innovative? Creative people. Who may or may not test well. Lets have a test that demonstrates innovation. The SAT/ACT is not it.

I’m all for restoring the ACT/SAT and adding a creativity measure that’s been validated. Sure, why not?

Certainly better than TO, which will just go down as the defective “everyone gets a trophy” era.

+1. TO is the equivalent to “everyone gets a trophy”.

And these threads are the equivalent of complaining about the refs when you lose.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think scores should be required, period.

The "doesn't test well" is a myth. My son with special needs didn't test well until we got him diagnosed, taught him organizational skills and half-medicated (he couldn't take the optimal dose of meds due to medical concerns, but a little was better than nothing).

So, without significant intervention, your kid didn't test well. It required diagnosis, training, and medication. What about kids without the resources and time and knowledge to get those things? For whom standardized tests don't actually reflect their cognitive abilities or their knowledge?

PP you replied to. Too bad for them. I think we should have universal healthcare and neuropsychs should be covered by insurance. I think meds should be cheaper.

But it’s incredibly frustrating to dumb down the whole process just for a minority of kids.

***I would feel that way EVEN if my kid had bad scores!***

My native country has no accommodations or services in school for kids with disabilities. My ADHD hindered me significantly. But I do appreciate that they still hold students to high academic standards. It’s all about grades and test scores. No extra-curriculars, hooks or nonsense allowed.

Yes, yes we know where you are from. Could you put that in the OP next time and every time in these college threads so we can skip them? And feel free to send your child to college in India.

wow, what a racist statement! I'm from a European country and our school system is as the PP described hers. No EC, hooks, URM, legacy. It's all about test scores!

Go ahead and restrict your kid to applying only to schools you think have legitimate admissions practices.

Guess what? No one else cares.

Yeah, we get it. You love the TO revolution. It allows your kid to cloak a critical area of weakness, and unlocks accessibility to prestigious educational opportunities that they would never have been considered eligible for in the past. Just say "Works for me!" and save all of us the time wondering whether you had these hardened views before or after the TO era began.

There it is: You somehow think that the SAT is this amazing window into which kids are smart and which kids aren’t. It is this all-knowing decider between which kids can handle a prestigious school and which kids can’t. You don’t believe there are any biases or flaws with this test. And the best part is that kids who have enough money can pay one of the hundreds of test prep programs and personal tutors to help them uncloak their critical area of weakness.

Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think scores should be required, period.

The "doesn't test well" is a myth. My son with special needs didn't test well until we got him diagnosed, taught him organizational skills and half-medicated (he couldn't take the optimal dose of meds due to medical concerns, but a little was better than nothing).

So, without significant intervention, your kid didn't test well. It required diagnosis, training, and medication. What about kids without the resources and time and knowledge to get those things? For whom standardized tests don't actually reflect their cognitive abilities or their knowledge?

PP you replied to. Too bad for them. I think we should have universal healthcare and neuropsychs should be covered by insurance. I think meds should be cheaper.

But it’s incredibly frustrating to dumb down the whole process just for a minority of kids.

***I would feel that way EVEN if my kid had bad scores!***

My native country has no accommodations or services in school for kids with disabilities. My ADHD hindered me significantly. But I do appreciate that they still hold students to high academic standards. It’s all about grades and test scores. No extra-curriculars, hooks or nonsense allowed.

Yes, yes we know where you are from. Could you put that in the OP next time and every time in these college threads so we can skip them? And feel free to send your child to college in India.

wow, what a racist statement! I'm from a European country and our school system is as the PP described hers. No EC, hooks, URM, legacy. It's all about test scores!

Go ahead and restrict your kid to applying only to schools you think have legitimate admissions practices.

Guess what? No one else cares.

Yeah, we get it. You love the TO revolution. It allows your kid to cloak a critical area of weakness, and unlocks accessibility to prestigious educational opportunities that they would never have been considered eligible for in the past. Just say "Works for me!" and save all of us the time wondering whether you had these hardened views before or after the TO era began.

Ah the old “well your kid must be a bad test taker” defense. It’s of such value on an anonymous forum. I don’t think my kids’ standardized test scores somehow give me extra credibility.

The point is that no one is stopping your kid from applying abroad. If you think colleges here are devalued because they don’t mandate testing, apply to ones that do. The US has done things differently for years. Just like we do in health care, guns, etc. But none of that matters because Buffy got rejected from Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Whoops hit submit too soon. The “your kid must be a bad test taker” argument demonstrates a real lack of reasoning. But I’m not so sure OP is trying to reason. This thread is about something else, something that’s clearly much more emotionally loaded for OP

[Anonymous]

Here’s my take. Some people are obsessed with limiting access to the most elite institutions: schools, neighborhoods, jobs. It’s comforting to know that whatever position you’ve secured in life is ultra competitive and off limits to the masses. But here’s the thing: many people go to college, most people succeed at work and there are a zillion different ways to measure brilliance, creativity, drive, etc that certainly can’t be captured in a standardized test score. I’d argue grades are modestly better as an assessment. And while I agree that TO takes away one of many arbitrary measures, it’s beyond me why any parent of a good test taker cares. Your 1560 score will still serve you. But the reality is that many many kids can thrive at these institutions … yes including many poor test takers. But for some reason that threatens you. Are you the same person who feels threatened when your investment bank hires a (gasp) state school graduate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think scores should be required, period.

The "doesn't test well" is a myth. My son with special needs didn't test well until we got him diagnosed, taught him organizational skills and half-medicated (he couldn't take the optimal dose of meds due to medical concerns, but a little was better than nothing).

So, without significant intervention, your kid didn't test well. It required diagnosis, training, and medication. What about kids without the resources and time and knowledge to get those things? For whom standardized tests don't actually reflect their cognitive abilities or their knowledge?

PP you replied to. Too bad for them. I think we should have universal healthcare and neuropsychs should be covered by insurance. I think meds should be cheaper.

But it’s incredibly frustrating to dumb down the whole process just for a minority of kids.

***I would feel that way EVEN if my kid had bad scores!***

My native country has no accommodations or services in school for kids with disabilities. My ADHD hindered me significantly. But I do appreciate that they still hold students to high academic standards. It’s all about grades and test scores. No extra-curriculars, hooks or nonsense allowed.

Yes, yes we know where you are from. Could you put that in the OP next time and every time in these college threads so we can skip them? And feel free to send your child to college in India.

wow, what a racist statement! I'm from a European country and our school system is as the PP described hers. No EC, hooks, URM, legacy. It's all about test scores!

Go ahead and restrict your kid to applying only to schools you think have legitimate admissions practices.

Guess what? No one else cares.

Guess what? my kid knows how to play the game and is at a top school by dcum standard. I just laugh at all those of you who claim that your DC is a straight A student but is not a good test taker. Yeah right! Pretty sure that many of these kids have also prepped like crazy but couldn't hack a decent score because guess what? not everyone has the ability to get to 1500s. For all those who argue that GPA is a better indicator of college success, I guess you've never heard of grade inflation and unlimited retakes until students get an A. I'm in a parents facebook group for DC's college, and there are so many parents complaining about their previously straight A students struggling or failing their intro classes.

My HS senior attends a DMV school where there are NO test retakes. How do I know? I teach at a DMV public. So forgetting this little debate regarding TO or not, I am so sick of my kid having to compete against all of those who have been retaking their tests since middle school. See how this all works? There will always be something to compare to and complain about so if not TO it will surely be something else.