Reply to Colleges should require scores if test is taken

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Colleges should require scores if test is taken"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
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).

[/quote]

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?[/quote]

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!***

[b]My native country [/b]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.
[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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! 
[/quote]

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

Guess what? No one else cares. [/quote]

Yeah, we get it. You love the TO revolution.[b] It allows your kid to cloak a critical area of weakness, [/b]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.[/quote]

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.  :roll: [/quote]

The actual issue is that YOU think that a student's GPA and class ranking, which are both subjected to a tremendous amount of pressure - specifically, grading variability and manipulation by students, parents and teachers, alike - from school to school, etch that student's achievement capacity in stone. They clearly don't.

There is so much unregulated jockeying for grades that occurs at the HS level these days. That's why the GPA is only directionally helpful, and barely so. And that's why a better method of assessing students during college application season would be to establish broader ranges of achievement / thresholds that directionally indicate how well an applicant is likely to do in college.

Everyone seems to want to say a 1540 is essentially the same as a 1600, but I don't hear anyone saying that a 3.8 is essentially the same as a 4.00 unweighted GPA.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics