Because it involves ever increasing study strategies without actually learning new material. They are just mastering the unique formats of the SAT/ACT |
This was my first time posting so I don't keep calling it that--it's not a great analogy but basically just referring to the idea that making SAT a high stakes continuous merit indicator--you end up with people going to great lengths to best the opposition--much like in an arms race between countries. Nothing wrong with competition, but the time spent prepping for a fairly narrow test could be better spent doing things that will actually benefit the student/community--pursuing interests, working on meaningful academic projects etc. Just like a country not so focused on an arms race can better spend its resources on other valued outcomes. It has distorting effects--distinctions between scores at the high level are not the most meaningful predictors of academic/career success and have increasingly more to do with time/resources spent prepping. This distorts the test's intended purpose as an indicator of achievement (and/or ability depending on your pov) gained through years of math and reading work in and out of school. If you view the SAT as a threshold (and at some schools it could be a very high threshold), you are not trying to best the competition with your score, rather to indicate you are capable of doing the work at the intended level. Your other application dimensions are where you are trying to best the competition and/or demonstrate more personal qualities that help a university build a community. |
It’s ridiculous that we have to expend energy, time and resources to go back to what we always historically did, because a group of progressive radicals in education shouted enough about some ridiculous theory that went against common sense, but somehow had enough support to get implemented.
Why do educational institutions cater to the loudest, dumbest most unproven voices? |
ECs are a unavoidable factor when selecting from applicants who have more or less identical academic profile. Imagine your child and another applicant with identical GPA, AP/SAT scores, class rank, etc, and same ethnic race, but the other applicant has ECs and your child does not, and only one spot to fill at a competitive university major. who should they make the offer to? |
What about the arms race with extra-curricularss, which are a lot more expensive and less accessible than the SAT, or AP classes? |
Are you being deliberately obtuse? Using your example, they could of course say “we need to see a 1400 AND at least a 750 in math” or whatever. But splitting hairs between a 770 and 790 is nonsense. So, MIT could just ask TCB to report whether, both, one, or none of the conditions are met. They can still admit whomever they want if they think the SAT doesn’t reflect true ability. Maybe the math competition champ had a bad SAT day or didn’t like the format. |
+1. I know a family easily spending $40,000 on a sport. Of course, she’s good. It would be embarrassing if she wasn’t. Meanwhile, a kid can buy $60 worth of test prep books use Kahn academy for free and they are the villains in this? |
I’d love to understand too. I think by nature they are conflict-averse and believe they are obligated to “explore” new theories. Hence, educational consultants will always have clients! |
Because test optional allows a school to admit a full-pay student with a 1200 over a middle class student with a 1350, while flattering the full-pay family by maintaining that admissions are based on merit. |
But there's no one good EC--many elite colleges say they look favorably on someone whose ECs was they babysat their younger siblings and/or worked a part time job in HS. It doesn't have to be $$ travel sports. |
Nothing obtuse about it. "We want to see a range of 25-36 ACT" and the student that got 19 Math, 17 Science, but 36 on English and reading gets admitted to the honors Engineering program. |
Actions speak louder than words. |
🙄🙄🙄🙄 whatever. I literally said they could include subscore thresholds. You’re not even disagreeing in good faith. |
Colleges have always had the power and flexibility to admit students with a wide range of test scores above and below their average. I know this because when I was a college applicant 20 years ago, my SAT score was below the average and I still was admitted. TO is much more about signaling that you are willing to make life easier for students because we’ve all decided as a society that life is too hard and unfair for them so we lower or remove expectations and standards left and right in an attempt to appear or seem modern and progressive. |
Your original statement was not in good faith. |