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.

BRING BACK THE ASTERISK +1000

Can we put asterisks on resumes of women of childbearing age too?

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.

But I can ride the elevator, too, so it's not discriminatory.

How about we require you to use a wheel chair and wear glasses too strong to see through and see how you do for a week.

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.

BRING BACK THE ASTERISK +1000

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.

so do glasses and ramps and sign language interpreters... oh wait no they don't .

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.

But I can ride the elevator, too, so it's not discriminatory.

Anonymous wrote:WTF is a Tesrs

Oh, F off. that is clearly a typo.

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.

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.

It's not based on labels or membership. It is based on the opinion of a psychologist who is trained to evaluate and diagnose these disorders. You people are too much...what an ugly group of people posting on this thread.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exposing accommodations to colleges should never happen. At least I am glad it hasn't happened yet because both my kids benefitted from it, but they both have severe ADHD. Sharing a student has accommodations puts them at a deep disadvantage....maybe even more of a disadvantage than getting a lower score without accommodations. FWIW my oldest got extra time on the ACT, got a very good score, and was admitted to a T20 and did very well. Not a superstar, but gainfully employed now making 6 figures.

Those of you who are pissed off about it...keep steaming lol. It's not changing any time soon.

disagree. colleges should know about the applicants as they are as students. if they need accommodations on the SAT, logic would say they'll need accommodations in school. colleges can decide if that's a non-issue for them or it is.

Nope. As an applicant, they are not yet students. Students who are accepted and enroll may, if they choose, seek accommodations with the university, where they would then share their disabilities with the accommodations office.

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.

+1

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).

While we're at it, make the changes more impactful:

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.
=> No practice test should be allowed before the real test. I mean, you want to test what the students know or predict future college success. Let's keep it as pure as possible by having the students see the SAT format and questions for the first time at the time of the first attempt.

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.
=> People who have tutors for school subjects should be docked. People who go to expensive private schools, especially those feeder schools, should be docked. People who use expensive private college application counselor should be docked. We should use the same logic you use here to test what people learn in school.

3. The reading portion is too culturally bias; they need to make it more universal.
=> Have the SAT available in different languages and tailor to the cultures for the language used to make it more universal.

4. There should be a small portion where it captures IQ score (this might be controversial).
=> Have students take the IQ test separately... in different languages ofc. Having just a small portion may not give you enough data to assess students' intelligence.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, accommodations such as for ADHD are NOT revealed to colleges? That is news to me.

Nope

you're pretty uninformed if that's news to you.

Anonymous wrote:So, accommodations such as for ADHD are NOT revealed to colleges? That is news to me.

Nope