My Opinion on the SATs/Standardized Tesrs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think employers now have so many tests for job applicants? They’re trying to weed out people who need accommodations.

What employer has tests? I have two kids who recently got jobs and they didn't have to take tests. One is an engineer and the other one works for a big consulting firm.

Almost every consulting firm has assessments these days, along with the technical interview. Complete BS.

The only assessment my kid had was interviewing for his top secret clearance. No assessments. He's big time ADHD too and he is thriving. Surprise!!

Yes. I’m certain that you are lying. Go check any consulting app- you need to complete an assessment

Jesus! The assessments are not aptitude, it’s testing EQ and personality,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think employers now have so many tests for job applicants? They’re trying to weed out people who need accommodations.

+1. They don’t want to hire someone who needs extra time to do everything.

Yes I want the person with the best and most innovative design not the fastest design.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:you can take SAT once a year, like APs

all "extra time" are noted on test results.

That's entirely false--extra time hasn't been noted on SAT results since 2002 to prevent discrimination and protect student privacy. Don't post garbage on this site.

Extra time is the very definition of discrimination. And what student privacy when they already judge you based on some combination of name, gender, race, wealth, and family?

That's your opinion. And not a very intelligent one in my opinion. Thankfully, your opinion does not matter, and the guidelines on testing are clear to all. You will not see extra time noted on the SAT, ACT, or GRE.

+1 Disability accomodations are not discriminatory. There is no arguing with someone so stupid that they would frame it as such.

They create different rules for different students based on labels and group membership. The definition of discrimination.

You think it’s discriminatory to have an elevator for wheelchair users? But somehow it’s not discriminatory to only have stairs so wheelchair users just can’t get in? Because that’s the equivalent. It’s about access to material. If my kid has dyslexia and simply cannot read the test fast enough to complete it, giving them extra time to do that task allows them to access the material — reading the test questions. It does not give an unfair advantage, it corrects an existing disadvantage.

+1 It's leveling the playing field for kids who medical professionals have assessed as struggling. Some people on this thread are missing both brains and a functioning value system.

If you're going in for life-saving surgery, do you want a doctor who needed the playing field leveled for them?

My kid just finished his residency. He got extra time on the ACT. He will probably perform surgery on one of you at some point in the future and there's nothing you can do to find out if he had the accommodations. LOLOLOL

And it might take an hour and 15 minutes instead of an hour. Lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wholeheartedly agree that kids should be able to get accommodations that they need. But it should be noted on the test that the student had an accommodation. There is a lot of data out there about how many wealthy families have gamed the system to get accommodations for their kids to get them extra time on standardized tests (and wealthy families are also much more likely to afford the evaluations that are required). If it was noted on the test that the student had an accommodation, this problem would pretty much disappear.

So punish the smart, hard-working kids because a few rich kids lie? Only the smart, ADHD kids benefit from the extra time anyway. A dumb rich kid isn't going to do any better with extra time than without. I'm sorry that your one-dimensional striving kid is jealous that a smart kid with ADHD got into a better school, but you sound like an idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you think employers now have so many tests for job applicants? They’re trying to weed out people who need accommodations.

+1. They don’t want to hire someone who needs extra time to do everything.

Yes I want the person with the best and most innovative design not the fastest design.

Right? Plus they took 1.5 hours instead of 1 to do it. Big deal.

[Anonymous]

The company that’s managing SAT needs to get it together. They keep trying to tweak it and it’s a sh@t show.

Kids get 1550s on all practice tests, then get 1300 on the real one. Different sections’ difficulty level is inconsistent - easy in September, very hard in October and vice versa.

They are definitely using some AI algorithms for question selection and it’s impossible to prove that this algorithm is flawed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The company that’s managing SAT needs to get it together. They keep trying to tweak it and it’s a sh@t show.

Kids get 1550s on all practice tests, then get 1300 on the real one. Different sections’ difficulty level is inconsistent - easy in September, very hard in October and vice versa.

They are definitely using some AI algorithms for question selection and it’s impossible to prove that this algorithm is flawed.

+1, exact same experience here, mid 1500s practice, mid 1300s on the real thing. We'll see how the PSAT shakes out. My kid one year older had a mid 1500s score on the real thing in line with practice tests, but that was followed by a nearly 200 point drop on the psat two months later, well outside any standardized window of expected scoring. Makes me wonder if they are trying to ratchet down scores, but then they come along with an easy test every now and then.

For the 2016 paper test, College Board fired ETS and took writing questions in-house. I don't know what the current status is of their contractual relationship for the digital test. The current scoring and adaptive nature of section 2 are, indeed, a sh@t show. You're exactly right that it is impossible to prove flaws.

It's hard not to go full-tilt conspiracy theory on College Board using a student's bluebook practice testing in some way; while I have no clue what they would do with it, it's a pile of data. No trust.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The company that’s managing SAT needs to get it together. They keep trying to tweak it and it’s a sh@t show.

Kids get 1550s on all practice tests, then get 1300 on the real one. Different sections’ difficulty level is inconsistent - easy in September, very hard in October and vice versa.

They are definitely using some AI algorithms for question selection and it’s impossible to prove that this algorithm is flawed.

+1, exact same experience here, mid 1500s practice, mid 1300s on the real thing. We'll see how the PSAT shakes out. My kid one year older had a mid 1500s score on the real thing in line with practice tests, but that was followed by a nearly 200 point drop on the psat two months later, well outside any standardized window of expected scoring. Makes me wonder if they are trying to ratchet down scores, but then they come along with an easy test every now and then.

For the 2016 paper test, College Board fired ETS and took writing questions in-house. I don't know what the current status is of their contractual relationship for the digital test. The current scoring and adaptive nature of section 2 are, indeed, a sh@t show. You're exactly right that it is impossible to prove flaws.

It's hard not to go full-tilt conspiracy theory on College Board using a student's bluebook practice testing in some way; while I have no clue what they would do with it, it's a pile of data. No trust.

It’s pretty clear that the colleges don't trust the tests either. Most colleges don’t require scores, and the ones that do treat everything over about 1450 as essentially the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wholeheartedly agree that kids should be able to get accommodations that they need. But it should be noted on the test that the student had an accommodation. There is a lot of data out there about how many wealthy families have gamed the system to get accommodations for their kids to get them extra time on standardized tests (and wealthy families are also much more likely to afford the evaluations that are required). If it was noted on the test that the student had an accommodation, this problem would pretty much disappear.

So punish the smart, hard-working kids because a few rich kids lie? Only the smart, ADHD kids benefit from the extra time anyway. A dumb rich kid isn't going to do any better with extra time than without. I'm sorry that your one-dimensional striving kid is jealous that a smart kid with ADHD got into a better school, but you sound like an idiot.

Woah, way to take it down and make this personal. Now I understand why people say this site is toxic. My kid is at an Ivy, but thank you for your kind thoughts. And no - it's not just the 'smart' kids who "benefit from extra time anyway". Time is a huge factor in these tests, particularly the ACT. If time wasn't a key element, then nobody would have a time restriction. So - given the designed constraint, the school should absolutely be made aware when the constraint is lifted. (I DO NOT agree with another poster who said there should be a medical explanation and link to the doctor). A simple denotation would work fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:you can take SAT once a year, like APs

all "extra time" are noted on test results.

That's entirely false--extra time hasn't been noted on SAT results since 2002 to prevent discrimination and protect student privacy. Don't post garbage on this site.

Extra time is the very definition of discrimination. And what student privacy when they already judge you based on some combination of name, gender, race, wealth, and family?

That's your opinion. And not a very intelligent one in my opinion. Thankfully, your opinion does not matter, and the guidelines on testing are clear to all. You will not see extra time noted on the SAT, ACT, or GRE.

+1 Disability accomodations are not discriminatory. There is no arguing with someone so stupid that they would frame it as such.

They create different rules for different students based on labels and group membership. The definition of discrimination.

You think it’s discriminatory to have an elevator for wheelchair users? But somehow it’s not discriminatory to only have stairs so wheelchair users just can’t get in? Because that’s the equivalent. It’s about access to material. If my kid has dyslexia and simply cannot read the test fast enough to complete it, giving them extra time to do that task allows them to access the material — reading the test questions. It does not give an unfair advantage, it corrects an existing disadvantage.

+1 It's leveling the playing field for kids who medical professionals have assessed as struggling. Some people on this thread are missing both brains and a functioning value system.

If you're going in for life-saving surgery, do you want a doctor who needed the playing field leveled for them?

My kid just finished his residency. He got extra time on the ACT. He will probably perform surgery on one of you at some point in the future and there's nothing you can do to find out if he had the accommodations. LOLOLOL

And it might take an hour and 15 minutes instead of an hour. Lol.

Great. So my infection risk goes up because I have to stay cut open longer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that they can be useful in predicting college success, but if we’re going to mandate it back, we must apply it more responsibly so that all prospective students are given a fair shot.

1. Limit attempts to two. I remember taking that thing twice then my mom said, “that’s good enough, that should get you into Davis or something. I’m not gonna keep paying 70-100 bucks for that thing.” I read somewhere that the average Ivy admit takes that thing on average 5x. How is that even impressive? At that point they’re just remembering the test structure and some of the questions. That doesn’t capture what they really know or predict future college success.

2. Either people should get docked for taking expensive SAT prep courses, or make them available to everyone free of charge. If we’re really testing what people have learned, test them, not whatever they learned from some SAT expert.

3. The reading portion is too culturally bias; they need to make it more universal.

4. There should be a small portion where it captures IQ score (this might be controversial).

1. You forgot to get rid of superscoring.

2. Can actually do all the test prep you need online for free.

3. There's no cultural bias that hinders testing. Asian-Americans and East Asians in Asia don't seem to have any trouble.

4. It should be more than a little IQ score for the verbal section. Or just go back to the 1990 verbal section.

Additionally
5. Math should go up to precalc at least

6. Any accommodation on the test should require some notation. Doesn't have to say what the accommodation is.

Who do you think is the type of person in east Asia to take the sat and what English do you think they learn? It's the most proper form of English taught outside of the continent, so im not sure what point you thought you were making.

Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Have you lived in any of these countries? Do you know how their education systems work? They learn English grammar from their own compatriots; i.e., Koreans learn from Korean English teachers, Chinese learn from Chinese English teachers, etc. It's why Asians have distinct English accents depending on which country they come from, and sometimes even which regional dialect in their native tongue. Yes, there's an English conversation industry in these countries but the vast majority of the native English teachers are mouth breathers with barely a diploma and they don't emphasize grammar, and it's mostly an aftercare scam. Generally speaking, they don't pay enough for K-12 to attract native speakers that can speak in complete sentences or those who can actually find a job stateside. Yes, there are a minority who go to international schools but they're usually wealthy or expat parents, themselves. And those kids have a different college admissions process, anyhow.

These are not the people going to college in the US. Most Asian applicants are American. If they aren’t, they went to international schools that are entirely in English. Random people don’t come to the US to study at a top college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:you can take SAT once a year, like APs

all "extra time" are noted on test results.

That's entirely false--extra time hasn't been noted on SAT results since 2002 to prevent discrimination and protect student privacy. Don't post garbage on this site.

Extra time is the very definition of discrimination. And what student privacy when they already judge you based on some combination of name, gender, race, wealth, and family?

That's your opinion. And not a very intelligent one in my opinion. Thankfully, your opinion does not matter, and the guidelines on testing are clear to all. You will not see extra time noted on the SAT, ACT, or GRE.

+1 Disability accomodations are not discriminatory. There is no arguing with someone so stupid that they would frame it as such.

They create different rules for different students based on labels and group membership. The definition of discrimination.

You think it’s discriminatory to have an elevator for wheelchair users? But somehow it’s not discriminatory to only have stairs so wheelchair users just can’t get in? Because that’s the equivalent. It’s about access to material. If my kid has dyslexia and simply cannot read the test fast enough to complete it, giving them extra time to do that task allows them to access the material — reading the test questions. It does not give an unfair advantage, it corrects an existing disadvantage.

+1 It's leveling the playing field for kids who medical professionals have assessed as struggling. Some people on this thread are missing both brains and a functioning value system.

If you're going in for life-saving surgery, do you want a doctor who needed the playing field leveled for them?

My kid just finished his residency. He got extra time on the ACT. He will probably perform surgery on one of you at some point in the future and there's nothing you can do to find out if he had the accommodations. LOLOLOL

And it might take an hour and 15 minutes instead of an hour. Lol.

Great. So my infection risk goes up because I have to stay cut open longer.

You sound dim. In most cases, patients know next to nothing about their doctor as a person--their health, their personal life and any stressors that may be impacting them are none of your business--you can check their credentials and ask people who have been treated them, but that's it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wholeheartedly agree that kids should be able to get accommodations that they need. But it should be noted on the test that the student had an accommodation. There is a lot of data out there about how many wealthy families have gamed the system to get accommodations for their kids to get them extra time on standardized tests (and wealthy families are also much more likely to afford the evaluations that are required). If it was noted on the test that the student had an accommodation, this problem would pretty much disappear.

Agree. Getting extra time accommodations has been a norm for a lot of private school students. There should be an asterisk with the attendant medical explanation and the name of the doctor that's signing off on this. Wealthy families have been abusing this loophole for a long time.

HIPAA would like a word.

+1. If you have evidence that students are abusing the system, you can report those students to the schools. But you can’t force people to disclose accommodations for diagnoses made by a medical professional.

This exactly. Do some abuse the system? Yes. But note that ACT and SAT are pretty strict about giving students accommodations if they have no significant history of having those accommodations at the school level. A kid who suddenly gets a diagosis in his junior year is quite suspect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:you can take SAT once a year, like APs

all "extra time" are noted on test results.

That's entirely false--extra time hasn't been noted on SAT results since 2002 to prevent discrimination and protect student privacy. Don't post garbage on this site.

Extra time is the very definition of discrimination. And what student privacy when they already judge you based on some combination of name, gender, race, wealth, and family?

That's your opinion. And not a very intelligent one in my opinion. Thankfully, your opinion does not matter, and the guidelines on testing are clear to all. You will not see extra time noted on the SAT, ACT, or GRE.

+1 Disability accomodations are not discriminatory. There is no arguing with someone so stupid that they would frame it as such.

They create different rules for different students based on labels and group membership. The definition of discrimination.

You think it’s discriminatory to have an elevator for wheelchair users? But somehow it’s not discriminatory to only have stairs so wheelchair users just can’t get in? Because that’s the equivalent. It’s about access to material. If my kid has dyslexia and simply cannot read the test fast enough to complete it, giving them extra time to do that task allows them to access the material — reading the test questions. It does not give an unfair advantage, it corrects an existing disadvantage.

+1 It's leveling the playing field for kids who medical professionals have assessed as struggling. Some people on this thread are missing both brains and a functioning value system.

If you're going in for life-saving surgery, do you want a doctor who needed the playing field leveled for them?

My kid just finished his residency. He got extra time on the ACT. He will probably perform surgery on one of you at some point in the future and there's nothing you can do to find out if he had the accommodations. LOLOLOL

And it might take an hour and 15 minutes instead of an hour. Lol.

Actually kids who have ADHD tend to hyper-focus on things they enjoy. So a surgeon with ADHD could be quite extraordinary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wholeheartedly agree that kids should be able to get accommodations that they need. But it should be noted on the test that the student had an accommodation. There is a lot of data out there about how many wealthy families have gamed the system to get accommodations for their kids to get them extra time on standardized tests (and wealthy families are also much more likely to afford the evaluations that are required). If it was noted on the test that the student had an accommodation, this problem would pretty much disappear.

So punish the smart, hard-working kids because a few rich kids lie? Only the smart, ADHD kids benefit from the extra time anyway. A dumb rich kid isn't going to do any better with extra time than without. I'm sorry that your one-dimensional striving kid is jealous that a smart kid with ADHD got into a better school, but you sound like an idiot.

Woah, way to take it down and make this personal. Now I understand why people say this site is toxic. My kid is at an Ivy, but thank you for your kind thoughts. And no - it's not just the 'smart' kids who "benefit from extra time anyway". Time is a huge factor in these tests, particularly the ACT. If time wasn't a key element, then nobody would have a time restriction. So - given the designed constraint, the school should absolutely be made aware when the constraint is lifted. (I DO NOT agree with another poster who said there should be a medical explanation and link to the doctor). A simple denotation would work fine.

Thankfully your opinion doesn't matter. Kids with medical conditions do not need to make them public, and just because you have some mistaken sense that it's not fair that they get accommodations that are medically indicated does not make you correct or mean that you have an appropriate value system in place. I am glad we live in a world where blind students can use assistive technology like screen readers, where people with severe anxiety can take tests in quiet rooms if needed, and where students with documented processing disorders can get extra time.