Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve always thought this, I believe some are bad test takers but not in the numbers people claim. It’s hard to swallow when my B private school student got a 33 act with no prep, but looks “bad” in a sea of 4.0’s. Mine likes the test, struggles more on regular class tests and memorization of material.

If the article is correct and A students are average and should expect mediocre tests scores, your B-average student with high test scores looks like someone who happens to test well on standardized but isn’t actually a very good student. I’m not sure that’s the better problem to have.

No, it just means they’re lazy and wasting their potential. That’s all.

There are many ways someone could be not a very good student, and that’s one of them, sure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve always thought this, I believe some are bad test takers but not in the numbers people claim. It’s hard to swallow when my B private school student got a 33 act with no prep, but looks “bad” in a sea of 4.0’s. Mine likes the test, struggles more on regular class tests and memorization of material.

Is there a change your kid is a little bit adhd?
I was great at tests but struggled with the daily grind of classwork.
I had undiagnosed adhd. No one diagnoses it when the kid is doing above average.

Yes, diagnosed but not until high school, straight A girl prior with great behavior and didn’t show typical signs until workload became super intense. Does much better on projects versus tests, keeps up with homework thankfully, trouble focusing in content areas they aren’t interested in. Excels in areas they enjoy, very creative. Goes to a rigorous private with no retakes or fluff to pad grades.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve always thought this, I believe some are bad test takers but not in the numbers people claim. It’s hard to swallow when my B private school student got a 33 act with no prep, but looks “bad” in a sea of 4.0’s. Mine likes the test, struggles more on regular class tests and memorization of material.

If the article is correct and A students are average and should expect mediocre tests scores, your B-average student with high test scores looks like someone who happens to test well on standardized but isn’t actually a very good student. I’m not sure that’s the better problem to have.

No, it just means they’re lazy and wasting their potential. That’s all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this topic has been discussed several times before on this board, but this article was fairly persuasive to me. Sure, the testing agencies have financial skin in this game, but you can't deny the fact the grade inflation has devalued the reliability of GPAs.

https://thehill.com/opinion/education/4953230-parents-misconception-gpa-sat-act/

So you think test scores have not been manipulated?

The least manipulable part of your application is the test score.

GPAs can be inflated
Extracurriculars can be purchased
Essays can be professionally drafted
But unless you cheat (and this is as rare as voter fraud), you are the one that has to perform on that test.

Anonymous wrote:The SAT is geared towards *average* college bound students. It’s basic and pretty useless for assessing high fliers.

This is not true according to research from harvard and brown.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

In fact SAT scores seem even MORE important at selective colleges than non-selective colleges where GPA seems to be more important.

Anonymous wrote:I’ve always thought this, I believe some are bad test takers but not in the numbers people claim. It’s hard to swallow when my B private school student got a 33 act with no prep, but looks “bad” in a sea of 4.0’s. Mine likes the test, struggles more on regular class tests and memorization of material.

Is there a change your kid is a little bit adhd?
I was great at tests but struggled with the daily grind of classwork.
I had undiagnosed adhd. No one diagnoses it when the kid is doing above average.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this topic has been discussed several times before on this board, but this article was fairly persuasive to me. Sure, the testing agencies have financial skin in this game, but you can't deny the fact the grade inflation has devalued the reliability of GPAs.

https://thehill.com/opinion/education/4953230-parents-misconception-gpa-sat-act/

So you think test scores have not been manipulated?

Not as much as GPAs have been inflated and made less predictive.

+1 and there are plenty that do very well without needing pricey tutors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this topic has been discussed several times before on this board, but this article was fairly persuasive to me. Sure, the testing agencies have financial skin in this game, but you can't deny the fact the grade inflation has devalued the reliability of GPAs.

https://thehill.com/opinion/education/4953230-parents-misconception-gpa-sat-act/

So you think test scores have not been manipulated?

Not as much as GPAs have been inflated and made less predictive.

How do you explain students faking disabilities for extra time and doing better because of this? It’s not merely college aptitude. Everyone would do better w more time, especially on the ACT. Things are not standardized, unfortunately; and college’s don’t who has had extra time. It tests parental aggressiveness and wealth—who can pay $7k for neurological testing to shady doctors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve always thought this, I believe some are bad test takers but not in the numbers people claim. It’s hard to swallow when my B private school student got a 33 act with no prep, but looks “bad” in a sea of 4.0’s. Mine likes the test, struggles more on regular class tests and memorization of material.

If the article is correct and A students are average and should expect mediocre tests scores, your B-average student with high test scores looks like someone who happens to test well on standardized but isn’t actually a very good student. I’m not sure that’s the better problem to have.

Good to know, thanks.

Anonymous wrote:I know this topic has been discussed several times before on this board, but this article was fairly persuasive to me. Sure, the testing agencies have financial skin in this game, but you can't deny the fact the grade inflation has devalued the reliability of GPAs.

https://thehill.com/opinion/education/4953230-parents-misconception-gpa-sat-act/

So you think test scores have not been manipulated?

Anonymous wrote:I’ve always thought this, I believe some are bad test takers but not in the numbers people claim. It’s hard to swallow when my B private school student got a 33 act with no prep, but looks “bad” in a sea of 4.0’s. Mine likes the test, struggles more on regular class tests and memorization of material.

If the article is correct and A students are average and should expect mediocre tests scores, your B-average student with high test scores looks like someone who happens to test well on standardized but isn’t actually a very good student. I’m not sure that’s the better problem to have.

The SAT is geared towards *average* college bound students. It’s basic and pretty useless for assessing high fliers.

I’ve always thought this, I believe some are bad test takers but not in the numbers people claim. It’s hard to swallow when my B private school student got a 33 act with no prep, but looks “bad” in a sea of 4.0’s. Mine likes the test, struggles more on regular class tests and memorization of material.

I know this topic has been discussed several times before on this board, but this article was fairly persuasive to me. Sure, the testing agencies have financial skin in this game, but you can't deny the fact the grade inflation has devalued the reliability of GPAs.

https://thehill.com/opinion/education/4953230-parents-misconception-gpa-sat-act/