Anonymous
04/20/2021 16:45
Subject: I hate test optional!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:SAT scores do not measure intelligence. They do measure how prepared for college a student is. I always laugh at people who make the distinction that they or their student “isn’t good at taking tests” but deserve special attention because they are really smart otherwise and tests are designed to not help rich, privileged people. Pathetic really.
Those tests were designed to predict college performance...but it turns out they don't do that well.
GPA is a better predictor. I guess you did not read the studies posted earlier.
But you keep thinking your opinions are fact if that works for you.
It’s now cool and woke to believe that standardized tests are meaningless. That’s not true, as a task force of U of Cal faculty found after lengthy analysis. Especially with rampant grade inflation across the nation, it’s hard to say that GPA alone is a reliable predictor. Half of kids graduate HS with a 4.0 or better. They are not equally likely to perform similarly in college.
https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/underreview/sttf-report.pdf
Did you read this report? I'm not sure it says what you think it does.
Yes, the authors found that test scores are better than high school GPA at predicting college freshmen GPA.
But they also found that test scores and high school GPA were about equal in predicting first-year retention, overall college GPA, and graduation from college.
And their recommendations would result in LESS reliance on test scores in the admissions process. They recommend an expansion of the Eligibility in Local Context pathway, which currently guarantees admission to a UC school for students with a high school GPA that places them in the top 9% of their high school class, so that more than 9% would be admitted. While they don't recommend that the UC system go test optional at this time, the authors envision a time in the near future when test scores will cease to be considered. They recommend development of a new assessment system that doesn't rely on SAT/ACT scores.
PP said grades were “a better predictor” of college performance. Others have gone further to say that standardized tests are meaningless. Not according to this study, especially since 2007 with the rise of grade inflation. Sure, there’s more nuance in this lengthy report. But those are the key takeaways, which are nicely summarized in the executive summary:
“The STTF found that standardized test scores aid in predicting important aspects of student success, including undergraduate grade point average (UGPA), retention, and completion. At UC, test scores are currently better predictors of first-year GPA than high school grade point average (HSGPA), and about as good at predicting first-year retention, UGPA, and graduation.3 For students within any given (HSGPA) band, higher standardized test scores correlate with a higher freshman UGPA, a higher graduation UGPA, and higher likelihood of graduating within either four years (for transfers) or seven years (for freshmen). Further, the amount of variance in student outcomes explained by test scores has increased since 2007, while variance explained by high school grades has decreased, although altogether does not exceed 26%. Test scores are predictive for all demographic groups and disciplines, even after controlling for HSGPA. In fact, test scores are better predictors of success for students who are Underrepresented Minority students (URMs), who are first-generation, or whose families are low-income: that is, test scores explain more of the variance in UGPA and completion rates for students in these groups. One consequence of dropping test scores would be increased reliance on HSGPA in admissions. The STTF found that California high schools vary greatly in grading standards, and that grade inflation is part of why the predictive power of HSGPA has decreased since the last UC study.“
Anonymous
04/20/2021 16:28
Subject: I hate test optional!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Many are over their head and would be more successful if they went to their “match” schools.
That part is a total lie and the graduation statistics prove it. You are a sad propagandist.
Agree. I have read that the issue many fail is lack of support (generally economic but also academic) and perceptions that they do not belong or fit in socially (which is why you want to bring in enough students of a particular race/ethnicity to help them have community and support).
By the way, I have also heard that Ivy League schools for the most part, are not harder to stay in. They are just harder to get into. The academics may be very similar to the “match” school (depending on what that is).
Anonymous
04/20/2021 16:24
Subject: I hate test optional!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:SAT scores do not measure intelligence. They do measure how prepared for college a student is. I always laugh at people who make the distinction that they or their student “isn’t good at taking tests” but deserve special attention because they are really smart otherwise and tests are designed to not help rich, privileged people. Pathetic really.
Those tests were designed to predict college performance...but it turns out they don't do that well.
GPA is a better predictor. I guess you did not read the studies posted earlier.
But you keep thinking your opinions are fact if that works for you.
It’s now cool and woke to believe that standardized tests are meaningless. That’s not true, as a task force of U of Cal faculty found after lengthy analysis. Especially with rampant grade inflation across the nation, it’s hard to say that GPA alone is a reliable predictor. Half of kids graduate HS with a 4.0 or better. They are not equally likely to perform similarly in college.
https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/underreview/sttf-report.pdf
Did you read this report? I'm not sure it says what you think it does.
Yes, the authors found that test scores are better than high school GPA at predicting college freshmen GPA.
But they also found that test scores and high school GPA were about equal in predicting first-year retention, overall college GPA, and graduation from college.
And their recommendations would result in LESS reliance on test scores in the admissions process. They recommend an expansion of the Eligibility in Local Context pathway, which currently guarantees admission to a UC school for students with a high school GPA that places them in the top 9% of their high school class, so that more than 9% would be admitted. While they don't recommend that the UC system go test optional at this time, the authors envision a time in the near future when test scores will cease to be considered. They recommend development of a new assessment system that doesn't rely on SAT/ACT scores.
Anonymous
04/20/2021 16:21
Subject: I hate test optional!
Anonymous wrote:Many are over their head and would be more successful if they went to their “match” schools.
That part is a total lie and the graduation statistics prove it. You are a sad propagandist.
Anonymous
04/20/2021 15:59
Subject: I hate test optional!
I agree. Too many parents, students and hiring managers are brand snobs and the current “in”Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why not just make more colleges and universities at the same level? There's no reason to make schools so elite.
This statement, while likely made with very good intentions, is so ironic and illustrates the problem.
There are many more "colleges and universities at the same level". Hundreds of them. But 1) despite that some are more just desired than others and 2) colleges that have "risen" in prestige are often bashed by many for their presumptuousness in this very forum.
The "problem", people, is YOU. It's not self-evident, it's demand driven. This "problem" wouldn't exist if you didn't create it.
Schools thrive on that. Is there really a difference between Duke, Penn, Northwestern, Yale, Rice or Vanderbilt? No. Yet there are rankings that swap one out for the other every year.
Anonymous
04/20/2021 15:52
Subject: I hate test optional!
Because the traditional measures of college ready students (GPA, Rigor and Scores) are woefully low for URMs and would disqualify nearly all from admission. 15 years ago (latest study) there were less than 244 African Americans out of over 150k AAs that took the test, who scored 1500+ on the SAT. (Just 73 total in 2003) That is a problem for progressive schools that want to prove their commitment to diversity politically. Enter “holistic evaluations.” http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html The fact that they fail out and/or switch majors to less rigorous ones doesn’t matter. Many are over their head and would be more successful if they went to their “match” schools.Anonymous wrote:
Why are we subtracting for "hooks"? Why not just accept the smartest kids?
Anonymous
04/20/2021 09:25
Subject: I hate test optional!
Anonymous wrote:Why not just make more colleges and universities at the same level? There's no reason to make schools so elite.
This statement, while likely made with very good intentions, is so ironic and illustrates the problem.
There are many more "colleges and universities at the same level". Hundreds of them. But 1) despite that some are more just desired than others and 2) colleges that have "risen" in prestige are often bashed by many for their presumptuousness in this very forum.
The "problem", people, is YOU. It's not self-evident, it's demand driven. This "problem" wouldn't exist if you didn't create it.
Anonymous
04/20/2021 09:16
Subject: I hate test optional!
Anonymous wrote:Why not just make more colleges and universities at the same level? There's no reason to make schools so elite.
And also make all soccer teams the same level, and all movies, and all houses.
Anonymous
04/20/2021 09:14
Subject: I hate test optional!
Why not just make more colleges and universities at the same level? There's no reason to make schools so elite.
Anonymous
04/20/2021 09:00
Subject: I hate test optional!
^^^ But you can’t tell people that. It’s always that “athlete/URM/Legacy/Development admit” that cost my kid their spot.
Smart people not failing basic math but rather choosing to ignore it.
Smart people not failing basic math but rather choosing to ignore it.
Anonymous
04/19/2021 03:21
Subject: I hate test optional!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:35 ACT helped my DS get into schools.
Was that this year?
35 ACT didn’t do much for mine this admission season.
What colleges were they rejected from?
7 ivies, duke, and northwestern. GPA was way up there and activities also excellent. They're a crapshoot.
All "reaches for everyone" colleges. You realize that other 16,000 students got at 35 or 36, right? And that is more seats than are available in those 9 colleges? Add the 20,000 1500+ SAT kids (many overlap I know) then subtract for hooks, and you are talking about AT BEST, 8,000-9,000 seats at those colleges for 30,000 high test scoring kids. The majority of them get rejected.
What colleges accepted your kid?
This is not a criticism in any way, in fact it is just trying to show the math so people know what they are up against.
Why are we subtracting for "hooks"? Why not just accept the smartest kids?
PP here. "Smartest" is subjective. But for the purposes of this exchange I will assume your definition of "smartest" (despite the fact I would probably disagree). "We" are only subtracting for hooks because the colleges have decided what makes the best class for them. But let's remove them all, anyway. And then:
- There are about 20,000 ivy slots.
- There are about 30,000 high schools.
- The top 3 kids at every one of those means 70,000 kids are getting rejected (and 100% of applicants beyond them of course).
- That means nearly 3 out of 4 get rejected even with no slots for hooks.
- Even counting just the valedictorians means 10,000 kids have to attend elsewhere.
It's musical chairs. There are less seats than players of any qualification. Despite the simple math, many don't get it, and I do not know why. Even if every change you wish was made, and the process was streamlined for kids exactly like yours....
...they are still unlikely to get admitted.
Anonymous
04/18/2021 22:29
Subject: I hate test optional!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:35 ACT helped my DS get into schools.
Was that this year?
35 ACT didn’t do much for mine this admission season.
What colleges were they rejected from?
7 ivies, duke, and northwestern. GPA was way up there and activities also excellent. They're a crapshoot.
All "reaches for everyone" colleges. You realize that other 16,000 students got at 35 or 36, right? And that is more seats than are available in those 9 colleges? Add the 20,000 1500+ SAT kids (many overlap I know) then subtract for hooks, and you are talking about AT BEST, 8,000-9,000 seats at those colleges for 30,000 high test scoring kids. The majority of them get rejected.
What colleges accepted your kid?
This is not a criticism in any way, in fact it is just trying to show the math so people know what they are up against.
Why are we subtracting for "hooks"? Why not just accept the smartest kids?
Define smartest?
Anonymous
04/18/2021 21:59
Subject: I hate test optional!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:35 ACT helped my DS get into schools.
Was that this year?
35 ACT didn’t do much for mine this admission season.
What colleges were they rejected from?
7 ivies, duke, and northwestern. GPA was way up there and activities also excellent. They're a crapshoot.
All "reaches for everyone" colleges. You realize that other 16,000 students got at 35 or 36, right? And that is more seats than are available in those 9 colleges? Add the 20,000 1500+ SAT kids (many overlap I know) then subtract for hooks, and you are talking about AT BEST, 8,000-9,000 seats at those colleges for 30,000 high test scoring kids. The majority of them get rejected.
What colleges accepted your kid?
This is not a criticism in any way, in fact it is just trying to show the math so people know what they are up against.
Why are we subtracting for "hooks"? Why not just accept the smartest kids?
Anonymous
04/18/2021 21:23
Subject: I hate test optional!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:SAT scores do not measure intelligence. They do measure how prepared for college a student is. I always laugh at people who make the distinction that they or their student “isn’t good at taking tests” but deserve special attention because they are really smart otherwise and tests are designed to not help rich, privileged people. Pathetic really.
Those tests were designed to predict college performance...but it turns out they don't do that well.
GPA is a better predictor. I guess you did not read the studies posted earlier.
But you keep thinking your opinions are fact if that works for you.
This is false, according to a recent study by UC Berkeley.
"In its 2020 report, the UC academic senate found that the SAT was better than high school GPA at predicting first year GPA, and just as good as high school GPA at predicting undergraduate GPA, first year retention, and graduation. This predictive validity was found to hold across demographic groups.[70] A series of College Board reports similar predictive validity across demographic groups."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT#Predictive_validity_and_powers
If high school GPA is just as good as the SAT at predicting undergrad GPA ... then that means all of the expense and stress of taking the SAT (prepping, agonizing, repeat testing, etc) is totally unnecessary. You do get that, right?
reading comprehension or math deficiency? No wonder.
"A>= B" is not same as "B>=A. "
Anonymous
04/18/2021 20:21
Subject: I hate test optional!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:SAT scores do not measure intelligence. They do measure how prepared for college a student is. I always laugh at people who make the distinction that they or their student “isn’t good at taking tests” but deserve special attention because they are really smart otherwise and tests are designed to not help rich, privileged people. Pathetic really.
Those tests were designed to predict college performance...but it turns out they don't do that well.
GPA is a better predictor. I guess you did not read the studies posted earlier.
But you keep thinking your opinions are fact if that works for you.
It’s now cool and woke to believe that standardized tests are meaningless. That’s not true, as a task force of U of Cal faculty found after lengthy analysis. Especially with rampant grade inflation across the nation, it’s hard to say that GPA alone is a reliable predictor. Half of kids graduate HS with a 4.0 or better. They are not equally likely to perform similarly in college.
https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/underreview/sttf-report.pdf