If all testing goes away, how will students know where to apply?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
DP - Let me guess, you are someone who has few friends and is invited to very few social gatherings! Also you probably have a strange body odor! (My guess is about as likely as your guess. See how that works? You should apologize. If you do, I will also.) |
Anonymous
Of course employers don’t ask for test scores. What I mean is that test scores are a common language for students, parents, employers, and colleges to know what kind of student goes where. Look, part of the prestige of Harvard is that you know that smart people go there. Yes, in turn, they have experiences at the college, etc., but the initial criteria is that they are smart. Do great colleges spend a lot of time with test scores? No, because they are easy to assess. Test scores are a gateway for deeper review. Which colleges to apply to or recruit from seems “obvious” now because all the data is present. Without the data and 10 years hence, it may be less clear. Who will benefit? The schools with currently great reputations will become entrenched. Who will lose? Any school trying to climb the ladder and the students who attend them. |
Anonymous
You think Harvard grads are desired by employers because of their peer cohort’s test scores? This may be the most unintentionally funny thing I have read on this forum. |
Anonymous
Ranking doesn't work though because you have schools with a class of 40, 75, 150, 250, 400, and 600 students. Rank makes no sense in the smaller schools. |
Anonymous
|
[
Of course employers don’t ask for test scores. What I mean is that test scores are a common language for students, parents, employers, and colleges to know what kind of student goes where. Look, part of the prestige of Harvard is that you know that smart people go there. Yes, in turn, they have experiences at the college, etc., but the initial criteria is that they are smart. Do great colleges spend a lot of time with test scores? No, because they are easy to assess. Test scores are a gateway for deeper review. Which colleges to apply to or recruit from seems “obvious” now because all the data is present. Without the data and 10 years hence, it may be less clear. Who will benefit? The schools with currently great reputations will become entrenched. Who will lose? Any school trying to climb the ladder and the students who attend them. I didn't think that employers would ask for test scores but my son who is currently a senior and going through recruiting says that he is asked about his SATs. One of the companies he is applying for is SpaceX and they even ask for test scores on the application. |
Anonymous
This sounds cute, but it’s not helpful. For the last 100 years, American colleges have used some type of examination to gauge student preparation (see https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/281336/). Examinations started when common people wanted to attend. Prior to that, there were economic barriers, like cost, social circles, and ability to read Greek and Latin (definitely not needed for farm workers’ and shop keepers’ children). The point is, you may not like test scores, but at least they’re on target for the issue at hand (academics), not unrelated factors like legacy, large donations, personal references, etc. |
Anonymous
|
My child wasn't able to take the SAT before applying (she's a senior) to colleges but the high school advisor gave her a list of 10 schools to apply to based on what the counselor knew about the child and the colleges. In addition to not testing, she has not toured any colleges so my child is relying very heavily on the college advisor's knowledge. I suspect that is more important than testing.
So far she's been deferred to two and in at one-- waiting to hear back about all the others. One of the deferrals is University of Michigan-- considered a reach for our child. If she gets in and finds it a struggle,she will not be alone. Colleges must anticipate a significant number of those they admitted are not a good fit and must nurture or establish relationships with other colleges that they will respectfully and responsibly transfer overwhelmed students to. There could be a lot of movement both ways. Those kids that missed out for some reason on getting into a higher ranked school will be invited to play in the Big League, while those that are struggling will be advised to try some time in the minors with an understanding that if certain classes are taken and grades improve to a certain point, then they will automatically get back into the original school. For Michigan, perhaps this would be with a community college close by, or perhaps with Michigan State. For an Ivy League school, perhaps it would be with a SLAC in the area. In sum, high school students will depend upon their college counselor to know where to apply. If that advice turns out to be misplaced, colleges will provide a "warm handover" of the student to another school that will be a better fit. |
Anonymous
It wasn’t intended to be helpful beyond pointing out the ludicrous points it makes fun of. In that respect, apparently, it was very helpful. As for test scores being “on target for the issue at hand” I hope you realize the opinions of the folks that matter — college officials — vary widely on that topic. I do not claim to be an expert and in fact I think colleges should be allowed to use whatever criteria they want. But the “we’re doomed! Idiot kids who took my kid’s spot are gonna fail out now!!” Is patently absurd and should stop. |
Anonymous
I’m glad I made you laugh. However, I think you are either a bit dense or just trying to be difficult. No college or employer wants a student for their test score, per se. The test score is a signaling device. If a college admits high scorers only, employers know that students are the caliber that they want. I know you’ll probably respond that employers want problem solvers, blah, blah, blah, but if all starts with capability. |
Anonymous
| Universities will end up with their own entrance exams to be able to narrow down the candidates. |
Anonymous
It's great that this student had high quality college counseling. Most high school students aren't getting that level of advice from their counselors. Maybe at some privates, but not even all of those. Most public high schools don't have the counseling manpower for that, nor the expertise. |
Anonymous
I’m dense? You are the one doubling down that employers want Harvard grads because of their test scores, whether a “signaling device” or not. It’s so ridiculous I can’t think you are a real poster. |
Anonymous
Whereas other countries make it simple with test scores and concentrations of test scores. I find it interesting that UK schools are mostly interested in US applicants' SAT and AP scores. |
Anonymous
I’m not concerned about your last point. If unqualified kids are accepted this year, they are few and on the margin. The reality is, college AOs are talking two games. On the one hand, they talk about test discrimination. On the other hand, they mostly accept kids with scores. This year, 75% of the students accepted in UPenn’s ED round submitted scores. The other 25% is close to UPenn’s typical non-Asian minority admit rate. Did anything really change this year? Probably not, except Penn had more flexibility to choose the marginal candidates they desired. However, that scenario is very different from a world where NO ONE SUBMITS SCORES. I don’t think most selective schools want to go there. Instead, I think they will continue the test optional language as long as the expected candidates -white, Asian, and wealthy (of any race) - submit scores. |
Anonymous
And 99% of them will not reinvent the wheel and agree to a common exam which, not surprisingly, will look just like the SAT. |