University Of California Reaches Final Decision: No More Standardized Admission Testing

[Anonymous]

I want to see the data CA has. Do SAT scores predict success in college? Do they predict who gets jobs? How much money people make? Quality of life? Job satisfaction? I’d like to know and it seems there must be decades of data. I just don’t have time to research it, but if anyone has links? I doubt they matter ultimately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this will hurt kids who are late bloomers.

How so? I’d think it would help them.

I had untreated adhd resulting in mediocre grades and high scores. This policy hurts people like that but helps many other kids, I think.

Does it hurt? Untreated adhd is not a recipe for success in college so maybe low grades and high scores is useful to get the bottom of why that is happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

Have you ever heard of IQ tests? What do you think SAT and ACT measure, if not IQ? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/

That's interesting because my son with an IQ of 158 scored poorly on SAT. Likely due to ADHD and Autism but it doesn't make him any less smart. His 4.9 GPA still stands.

SAT can't measure "slow thinker" intelligence. It only measures "quick thinker" intelligence. These are very different. Some of the most brilliant minds we have are slow thinkers, but they would do badly on the SAT.

Which is why SAT does not correlate to intelligence and is certainly not an IQ test.

Ugh; it is one measure of the kind of intelligence colleges care about. That there are smart people who do poorly on it does not mean that it doesn't measure intelligence and academic ability. Genius students can have terrible GPAs for a variety of reason too. And yet, that is still used as one measure of academic ability. Do you think kids who were born on third base don't also have advantages and game the system when it comes to GPA? They do. Should colleges throw out every aspect of a student's profile that can be effected by their parent's education and wealth? What would be left? Height?

[Anonymous]

Why would anyone want the college board to have so much influence and power?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can prep the heck out of these test and score well. Any parent with multiple kids knows which ones are academically inclined and which are more challenged. Yet my own were all able to score well on these standardized tests. One without much prep at all and others after prep and multiple tries.

On paper from the scores...they look identical but I know quite well that they are not. This test can be gamed so what good is it?

Why not ask MIT? You can't really game your way into a truly superior SAT score.

"Another popular misconception is that one can “buy” a better SAT score through costly test prep. Yet research has consistently demonstrated that it is remarkably difficult to increase an individual’s SAT score, and the commercial test prep industry capitalizes on, at best, modest changes [13,17]. Short of outright cheating on the test, an expensive and complex undertaking that may carry unpleasant legal consequences, high SAT scores are generally difficult to acquire by any means other than high ability."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/

Whatever this study concluded, and to add to what other parents have already mentioned on this thread about their kids increasing their scores, my DC raised their ACT score NINE points after expensive tutoring in math. DC scored very high on the other sections on the first try, but bombed the math. DC always hated math and had a lot of math anxiety. We hired an ACT tutor focusing only on math for the test and it worked. DC also attended a private school that did not have standardized testing at all and the ACT was one of the first multiple choice tests DC had ever taken! So DC had to get used to that type of test, which the tutoring helped a lot with as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

Have you ever heard of IQ tests? What do you think SAT and ACT measure, if not IQ? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/

That's interesting because my son with an IQ of 158 scored poorly on SAT. Likely due to ADHD and Autism but it doesn't make him any less smart. His 4.9 GPA still stands.

SAT can't measure "slow thinker" intelligence. It only measures "quick thinker" intelligence. These are very different. Some of the most brilliant minds we have are slow thinkers, but they would do badly on the SAT.

Which is why SAT does not correlate to intelligence and is certainly not an IQ test.

Ugh; it is one measure of the kind of intelligence colleges care about. That there are smart people who do poorly on it does not mean that it doesn't measure intelligence and academic ability. Genius students can have terrible GPAs for a variety of reason too. And yet, that is still used as one measure of academic ability. Do you think kids who were born on third base don't also have advantages and game the system when it comes to GPA? They do. Should colleges throw out every aspect of a student's profile that can be effected by their parent's education and wealth? What would be left? Height?

No they do not. This is why the schools are dropping them. Do you even know the history of these test? They were never an intelligence test of any kind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the point is, are they actually voluntarily deciding not to use SAT scores, and, for a public intsitution, who does that hurt? Public colleges are not private employers who can hire and fire at whim. As for private selective institutions - the truly selective ones like MIT affirm that SAT scores are still important.

No you still miss my point entirely.

The colleges can accept whoever they want for whatever reason they want as long as they don't break the law. Employers - both private AND public - can hire whoever they want for whatever reason they want as long as they don't break the law.

What is important is up the THEM, not you. Any criteria, test scores being one.

And I disagree with you. Public institutions serve the public, so this is all a valid question. Plus UCs don't seem to be doing this voluntarily anyway.

You disagree with me? How? It's not up to me, or to you. How can you disagree with that?

You can have the opinion they should have different criteria, but you don't get to dictate it.

You agree with this for employment, but disagree on college admissions, and that is the hypocrisy.

Yes, I disagree that a public institution is unaccountable to the public. Not sure why that's hard to understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this will hurt kids who are late bloomers.

How so? I’d think it would help them.

High IQ late bloomers who didn't get great grades, didn't kiss up to teachers, didn't found a nonprofit ... will not longer benefit from being able to show their aptitude that overcomes less than stellar other elements of their application.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

Have you ever heard of IQ tests? What do you think SAT and ACT measure, if not IQ? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/

That's interesting because my son with an IQ of 158 scored poorly on SAT. Likely due to ADHD and Autism but it doesn't make him any less smart. His 4.9 GPA still stands.

SAT can't measure "slow thinker" intelligence. It only measures "quick thinker" intelligence. These are very different. Some of the most brilliant minds we have are slow thinkers, but they would do badly on the SAT.

Which is why SAT does not correlate to intelligence and is certainly not an IQ test.

Ugh; it is one measure of the kind of intelligence colleges care about. That there are smart people who do poorly on it does not mean that it doesn't measure intelligence and academic ability. Genius students can have terrible GPAs for a variety of reason too. And yet, that is still used as one measure of academic ability. Do you think kids who were born on third base don't also have advantages and game the system when it comes to GPA? They do. Should colleges throw out every aspect of a student's profile that can be effected by their parent's education and wealth? What would be left? Height?

No they do not. This is why the schools are dropping them. Do you even know the history of these test? They were never an intelligence test of any kind.

California is apparently dropping it due to a law suit. Schools that actually target high IQ students like MIT still say they are important. And I'll post this for the third time:


"Although the principal finding of Frey and Detterman has been established for 15 years, it bears repeating: the SAT is a good measure of intelligence [1]. Despite scientific consensus around that statement, some are remarkably resistant to accept the evidence of such an assertion. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this will hurt kids who are late bloomers.

How so? I’d think it would help them.

I had untreated adhd resulting in mediocre grades and high scores. This policy hurts people like that but helps many other kids, I think.

Does it hurt? Untreated adhd is not a recipe for success in college so maybe low grades and high scores is useful to get the bottom of why that is happening.

College is so different, though. Adhd made me bad at remembering/turning in worksheets and what not but I always did well on tests and papers. In college it was all tests and papers and I got straight As.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want to see the data CA has. Do SAT scores predict success in college? Do they predict who gets jobs? How much money people make? Quality of life? Job satisfaction? I’d like to know and it seems there must be decades of data. I just don’t have time to research it, but if anyone has links? I doubt they matter ultimately.

Look earlier in thread for link, the uc system conducted a published study and actually found that SAT plus grades materially more predictive of college performance than high school gpa alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This will just force all the schools that have held out on grade inflation to jump on the grade inflation bandwagon. They have to to survive now. No more pointing to the SAT scores to balance the equation.

Don’t worry, colleges know which schools/counties have inflated grades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

Have you ever heard of IQ tests? What do you think SAT and ACT measure, if not IQ? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/

That's interesting because my son with an IQ of 158 scored poorly on SAT. Likely due to ADHD and Autism but it doesn't make him any less smart. His 4.9 GPA still stands.

SAT can't measure "slow thinker" intelligence. It only measures "quick thinker" intelligence. These are very different. Some of the most brilliant minds we have are slow thinkers, but they would do badly on the SAT.

Which is why SAT does not correlate to intelligence and is certainly not an IQ test.

Ugh; it is one measure of the kind of intelligence colleges care about. That there are smart people who do poorly on it does not mean that it doesn't measure intelligence and academic ability. Genius students can have terrible GPAs for a variety of reason too. And yet, that is still used as one measure of academic ability. Do you think kids who were born on third base don't also have advantages and game the system when it comes to GPA? They do. Should colleges throw out every aspect of a student's profile that can be effected by their parent's education and wealth? What would be left? Height?

No they do not. This is why the schools are dropping them. Do you even know the history of these test? They were never an intelligence test of any kind.

California is apparently dropping it due to a law suit. Schools that actually target high IQ students like MIT still say they are important. And I'll post this for the third time:


"Although the principal finding of Frey and Detterman has been established for 15 years, it bears repeating: the SAT is a good measure of intelligence [1]. Despite scientific consensus around that statement, some are remarkably resistant to accept the evidence of such an assertion. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/

Ok, but if that research is 15 years old, it’s not based in the current iteration of the SAT. It was revised and made more preppable. Not sure that research is on point any more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this will hurt kids who are late bloomers.

How so? I’d think it would help them.

I had untreated adhd resulting in mediocre grades and high scores. This policy hurts people like that but helps many other kids, I think.

Does it hurt? Untreated adhd is not a recipe for success in college so maybe low grades and high scores is useful to get the bottom of why that is happening.

Low grades does not mean lack of success. C students are running the world. They just weren't great at handing things in on time, even though the work was correct, amazing even.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fantastic. Study after study after study has confirmed the high correlation between family income and parental education and SAT and ACT scores. Generally speaking, high scores were born on third base. It doesn't make them any smarter.

Have you ever heard of IQ tests? What do you think SAT and ACT measure, if not IQ? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/

That's interesting because my son with an IQ of 158 scored poorly on SAT. Likely due to ADHD and Autism but it doesn't make him any less smart. His 4.9 GPA still stands.

SAT can't measure "slow thinker" intelligence. It only measures "quick thinker" intelligence. These are very different. Some of the most brilliant minds we have are slow thinkers, but they would do badly on the SAT.

Which is why SAT does not correlate to intelligence and is certainly not an IQ test.

Ugh; it is one measure of the kind of intelligence colleges care about. That there are smart people who do poorly on it does not mean that it doesn't measure intelligence and academic ability. Genius students can have terrible GPAs for a variety of reason too. And yet, that is still used as one measure of academic ability. Do you think kids who were born on third base don't also have advantages and game the system when it comes to GPA? They do. Should colleges throw out every aspect of a student's profile that can be effected by their parent's education and wealth? What would be left? Height?

No they do not. This is why the schools are dropping them. Do you even know the history of these test? They were never an intelligence test of any kind.

California is apparently dropping it due to a law suit. Schools that actually target high IQ students like MIT still say they are important. And I'll post this for the third time:


"Although the principal finding of Frey and Detterman has been established for 15 years, it bears repeating: the SAT is a good measure of intelligence [1]. Despite scientific consensus around that statement, some are remarkably resistant to accept the evidence of such an assertion. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/

Ok, but if that research is 15 years old, it’s not based in the current iteration of the SAT. It was revised and made more preppable. Not sure that research is on point any more.

lol…more preppable. Give it a rest.