Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 23:07     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Absent a disability, if your daughter performs poorly on tests, then she is not near the 99th percentile that needs to be at a top school.


Anonymous wrote:You have any clue about how my daughter performed on tests and her intelligence to boot from some generic post information? Talk about dumb and uneducated.


I taught in the Ivy League, and you are calling me uneducated? You are in denial about me and probably about your daughter.

The SAT has proven predictive power for freshman college performance. It does not measure everything, but there are limits to a 3-hour test. It is the same test for everyone. By contrast, students have different teachers with different grading curves. That is quite unfair.

Colleges dropped tests because of declining enrollments during Covid. They also wanted to fill their diversity goals under BLM political pressure. Basically, they wanted to covertly lower standards. It is too bad, because standardized tests are an excellent way of finding talented poor kids from bad schools. Admission is like triage. Some kids are obvious admits; some are obvious rejects. But it is hard to fill all the seats with capable students. Without tests, colleges admit more mediocre students from safe, reliable "W" schools, and overlook poor, smart, first-generation kids. Or they admit bad URM's who flunk out.


Nonsense.

I guess Ivy League "teachers" can be ignorant.


You are living proof. You demonstrated your own ignorance by jumping to unsubstantiated conclusions in general and with regard to my child. That trumps whatever credentials you may claim.

Much of what you are stating is bogus propaganda. You seem more like a poorly sourced paid political troll than an Ivy (or any) professor. Though, you did clearly avoid the word "professor, " so that's noted.

Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 21:34     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:Absent a disability, if your daughter performs poorly on tests, then she is not near the 99th percentile that needs to be at a top school.


Anonymous wrote:You have any clue about how my daughter performed on tests and her intelligence to boot from some generic post information? Talk about dumb and uneducated.


I taught in the Ivy League, and you are calling me uneducated? You are in denial about me and probably about your daughter.

The SAT has proven predictive power for freshman college performance. It does not measure everything, but there are limits to a 3-hour test. It is the same test for everyone. By contrast, students have different teachers with different grading curves. That is quite unfair.

Colleges dropped tests because of declining enrollments during Covid. They also wanted to fill their diversity goals under BLM political pressure. Basically, they wanted to covertly lower standards. It is too bad, because standardized tests are an excellent way of finding talented poor kids from bad schools. Admission is like triage. Some kids are obvious admits; some are obvious rejects. But it is hard to fill all the seats with capable students. Without tests, colleges admit more mediocre students from safe, reliable "W" schools, and overlook poor, smart, first-generation kids. Or they admit bad URM's who flunk out.


Nonsense.

I guess Ivy League "teachers" can be ignorant.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 20:56     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:Absent a disability, if your daughter performs poorly on tests, then she is not near the 99th percentile that needs to be at a top school.


Anonymous wrote:You have any clue about how my daughter performed on tests and her intelligence to boot from some generic post information? Talk about dumb and uneducated.


I taught in the Ivy League, and you are calling me uneducated? You are in denial about me and probably about your daughter.

The SAT has proven predictive power for freshman college performance. It does not measure everything, but there are limits to a 3-hour test. It is the same test for everyone. By contrast, students have different teachers with different grading curves. That is quite unfair.

Colleges dropped tests because of declining enrollments during Covid. They also wanted to fill their diversity goals under BLM political pressure. Basically, they wanted to covertly lower standards. It is too bad, because standardized tests are an excellent way of finding talented poor kids from bad schools. Admission is like triage. Some kids are obvious admits; some are obvious rejects. But it is hard to fill all the seats with capable students. Without tests, colleges admit more mediocre students from safe, reliable "W" schools, and overlook poor, smart, first-generation kids. Or they admit bad URM's who flunk out.


Nope, if colleges thought they needed tests to predict success, they would require them.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 20:41     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Absent a disability, if your daughter performs poorly on tests, then she is not near the 99th percentile that needs to be at a top school.


Anonymous wrote:You have any clue about how my daughter performed on tests and her intelligence to boot from some generic post information? Talk about dumb and uneducated.


I taught in the Ivy League, and you are calling me uneducated? You are in denial about me and probably about your daughter.

The SAT has proven predictive power for freshman college performance. It does not measure everything, but there are limits to a 3-hour test. It is the same test for everyone. By contrast, students have different teachers with different grading curves. That is quite unfair.

Colleges dropped tests because of declining enrollments during Covid. They also wanted to fill their diversity goals under BLM political pressure. Basically, they wanted to covertly lower standards. It is too bad, because standardized tests are an excellent way of finding talented poor kids from bad schools. Admission is like triage. Some kids are obvious admits; some are obvious rejects. But it is hard to fill all the seats with capable students. Without tests, colleges admit more mediocre students from safe, reliable "W" schools, and overlook poor, smart, first-generation kids. Or they admit bad URM's who flunk out.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 19:28     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So I just did an SAT math practice test. Just to let my DC know what math subjects are on it. It’s not particularly difficult but it also not a good gauge of who is “good” at math. It’s set up to make you rush. It tests who can do math quickly. But that’s a pretty poor proxy for overall math knowledge. So it basically tells you who is better AT THAT KIND OF TEST. Which doesn’t resemble any actual math exam I’ve ever had. And even less so real world use of math.

It may not have 0 value but it’s certainly not as important as DCUM land seems to think it is.


Agreed. Another major factor is wording. The test writers like to word questions in a way that is not always straightforward. Answer choices also have lure answers sometimes. Having taught SAT prep (and GRE and GMAT), there really is an aspect of performance tgat is unrelated to intelligence or content.


+1000

That is why (if you can afford it) private one-one test prep is the most helpful. My kid went from 1330 to 1500 with one baseline test and 4 hours of "tutoring". That tutoring looked at the specific errors and taught the "tricks for question formats". After another 4 hours my kid was still hovering at 1500. So basically all we needed was 4 hours and just taking practice tests to ensure they knew the "techniques". That's not testing overall Intelligence---that's testing how well you learn the tricks.


My kids got straight A's with some tutoring.  
Yes, the SAT is relatively easier to improve with tutoring and prep.

So a couple of things.

1 SAT/ACT is a great tool for low income/URMs. 
Again, you need relatively minimal effort to boost your scores when you have the basics of 11-12 years old education. 
Test optional is for rich ALDC folks and disadvantageous for low income/URMs.  There are even a lot of great free sources.  

2. If you can't get a minimum 1500 score, it must mean you didn't even put minimal effort or your intelligence level is way below average. 
Good colleges should have a cut off score of 1500.



Wrong on both fronts.


And wholly disingenuous
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 17:38     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So I just did an SAT math practice test. Just to let my DC know what math subjects are on it. It’s not particularly difficult but it also not a good gauge of who is “good” at math. It’s set up to make you rush. It tests who can do math quickly. But that’s a pretty poor proxy for overall math knowledge. So it basically tells you who is better AT THAT KIND OF TEST. Which doesn’t resemble any actual math exam I’ve ever had. And even less so real world use of math.

It may not have 0 value but it’s certainly not as important as DCUM land seems to think it is.


Agreed. Another major factor is wording. The test writers like to word questions in a way that is not always straightforward. Answer choices also have lure answers sometimes. Having taught SAT prep (and GRE and GMAT), there really is an aspect of performance tgat is unrelated to intelligence or content.


+1000

That is why (if you can afford it) private one-one test prep is the most helpful. My kid went from 1330 to 1500 with one baseline test and 4 hours of "tutoring". That tutoring looked at the specific errors and taught the "tricks for question formats". After another 4 hours my kid was still hovering at 1500. So basically all we needed was 4 hours and just taking practice tests to ensure they knew the "techniques". That's not testing overall Intelligence---that's testing how well you learn the tricks.


My kids got straight A's with some tutoring.  
Yes, the SAT is relatively easier to improve with tutoring and prep.

So a couple of things.

1 SAT/ACT is a great tool for low income/URMs. 
Again, you need relatively minimal effort to boost your scores when you have the basics of 11-12 years old education. 
Test optional is for rich ALDC folks and disadvantageous for low income/URMs.  There are even a lot of great free sources.  

2. If you can't get a minimum 1500 score, it must mean you didn't even put minimal effort or your intelligence level is way below average. 
Good colleges should have a cut off score of 1500.



Absolutely incorrect
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 17:32     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So I just did an SAT math practice test. Just to let my DC know what math subjects are on it. It’s not particularly difficult but it also not a good gauge of who is “good” at math. It’s set up to make you rush. It tests who can do math quickly. But that’s a pretty poor proxy for overall math knowledge. So it basically tells you who is better AT THAT KIND OF TEST. Which doesn’t resemble any actual math exam I’ve ever had. And even less so real world use of math.

It may not have 0 value but it’s certainly not as important as DCUM land seems to think it is.


Agreed. Another major factor is wording. The test writers like to word questions in a way that is not always straightforward. Answer choices also have lure answers sometimes. Having taught SAT prep (and GRE and GMAT), there really is an aspect of performance tgat is unrelated to intelligence or content.


+1000

That is why (if you can afford it) private one-one test prep is the most helpful. My kid went from 1330 to 1500 with one baseline test and 4 hours of "tutoring". That tutoring looked at the specific errors and taught the "tricks for question formats". After another 4 hours my kid was still hovering at 1500. So basically all we needed was 4 hours and just taking practice tests to ensure they knew the "techniques". That's not testing overall Intelligence---that's testing how well you learn the tricks.


My kids got straight A's with some tutoring.  
Yes, the SAT is relatively easier to improve with tutoring and prep.

So a couple of things.

1 SAT/ACT is a great tool for low income/URMs. 
Again, you need relatively minimal effort to boost your scores when you have the basics of 11-12 years old education. 
Test optional is for rich ALDC folks and disadvantageous for low income/URMs.  There are even a lot of great free sources.  

2. If you can't get a minimum 1500 score, it must mean you didn't even put minimal effort or your intelligence level is way below average. 
Good colleges should have a cut off score of 1500.



Please stop with the ignorant judgments (or maybe this is just propaganda).

People relate to testing differently than content mastery. Especially with SATs, there isn't really a definitive sense of not knowing content or knowing content or intelligence for that matter based on test results. So much is in how you interact with the test and question wording in addition to preparation. Nothing wrong with including test scores on an app, but they just don't mean all the things you want them to mean.
--test prep teacher
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 17:24     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So I just did an SAT math practice test. Just to let my DC know what math subjects are on it. It’s not particularly difficult but it also not a good gauge of who is “good” at math. It’s set up to make you rush. It tests who can do math quickly. But that’s a pretty poor proxy for overall math knowledge. So it basically tells you who is better AT THAT KIND OF TEST. Which doesn’t resemble any actual math exam I’ve ever had. And even less so real world use of math.

It may not have 0 value but it’s certainly not as important as DCUM land seems to think it is.


Agreed. Another major factor is wording. The test writers like to word questions in a way that is not always straightforward. Answer choices also have lure answers sometimes. Having taught SAT prep (and GRE and GMAT), there really is an aspect of performance tgat is unrelated to intelligence or content.


+1000

That is why (if you can afford it) private one-one test prep is the most helpful. My kid went from 1330 to 1500 with one baseline test and 4 hours of "tutoring". That tutoring looked at the specific errors and taught the "tricks for question formats". After another 4 hours my kid was still hovering at 1500. So basically all we needed was 4 hours and just taking practice tests to ensure they knew the "techniques". That's not testing overall Intelligence---that's testing how well you learn the tricks.


My kids got straight A's with some tutoring.  
Yes, the SAT is relatively easier to improve with tutoring and prep.

So a couple of things.

1 SAT/ACT is a great tool for low income/URMs. 
Again, you need relatively minimal effort to boost your scores when you have the basics of 11-12 years old education. 
Test optional is for rich ALDC folks and disadvantageous for low income/URMs.  There are even a lot of great free sources.  

2. If you can't get a minimum 1500 score, it must mean you didn't even put minimal effort or your intelligence level is way below average. 
Good colleges should have a cut off score of 1500.



Wrong on both fronts.


Which part? Disagree with PP?



Disagree with both points (not PP).

1) Sat is not a great tool for low income students/URMS. your UMC privilege is showing.

2) plenty of great colleges with kids less than 1500 SAT. SAT is NOT the great indicator of success or intelligence. Data demonstrates this. That is why most colleges will stay TO for the future (UCs and many others)---sure MIT feels the need to add it back, but most will not for good reasons. GPA is a much better indicator, along with the rigor compared with what rigor is offered.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 17:21     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So I just did an SAT math practice test. Just to let my DC know what math subjects are on it. It’s not particularly difficult but it also not a good gauge of who is “good” at math. It’s set up to make you rush. It tests who can do math quickly. But that’s a pretty poor proxy for overall math knowledge. So it basically tells you who is better AT THAT KIND OF TEST. Which doesn’t resemble any actual math exam I’ve ever had. And even less so real world use of math.

It may not have 0 value but it’s certainly not as important as DCUM land seems to think it is.


Agreed. Another major factor is wording. The test writers like to word questions in a way that is not always straightforward. Answer choices also have lure answers sometimes. Having taught SAT prep (and GRE and GMAT), there really is an aspect of performance tgat is unrelated to intelligence or content.


+1000

That is why (if you can afford it) private one-one test prep is the most helpful. My kid went from 1330 to 1500 with one baseline test and 4 hours of "tutoring". That tutoring looked at the specific errors and taught the "tricks for question formats". After another 4 hours my kid was still hovering at 1500. So basically all we needed was 4 hours and just taking practice tests to ensure they knew the "techniques". That's not testing overall Intelligence---that's testing how well you learn the tricks.


My kids got straight A's with some tutoring.  
Yes, the SAT is relatively easier to improve with tutoring and prep.

So a couple of things.

1 SAT/ACT is a great tool for low income/URMs. 
Again, you need relatively minimal effort to boost your scores when you have the basics of 11-12 years old education. 
Test optional is for rich ALDC folks and disadvantageous for low income/URMs.  There are even a lot of great free sources.  

2. If you can't get a minimum 1500 score, it must mean you didn't even put minimal effort or your intelligence level is way below average. 
Good colleges should have a cut off score of 1500.



Wrong on both fronts.


+1000
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 17:19     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So I just did an SAT math practice test. Just to let my DC know what math subjects are on it. It’s not particularly difficult but it also not a good gauge of who is “good” at math. It’s set up to make you rush. It tests who can do math quickly. But that’s a pretty poor proxy for overall math knowledge. So it basically tells you who is better AT THAT KIND OF TEST. Which doesn’t resemble any actual math exam I’ve ever had. And even less so real world use of math.

It may not have 0 value but it’s certainly not as important as DCUM land seems to think it is.


Agreed. Another major factor is wording. The test writers like to word questions in a way that is not always straightforward. Answer choices also have lure answers sometimes. Having taught SAT prep (and GRE and GMAT), there really is an aspect of performance tgat is unrelated to intelligence or content.


+1000

That is why (if you can afford it) private one-one test prep is the most helpful. My kid went from 1330 to 1500 with one baseline test and 4 hours of "tutoring". That tutoring looked at the specific errors and taught the "tricks for question formats". After another 4 hours my kid was still hovering at 1500. So basically all we needed was 4 hours and just taking practice tests to ensure they knew the "techniques". That's not testing overall Intelligence---that's testing how well you learn the tricks.


My kids got straight A's with some tutoring.  
Yes, the SAT is relatively easier to improve with tutoring and prep.

So a couple of things.

1 SAT/ACT is a great tool for low income/URMs. 
Again, you need relatively minimal effort to boost your scores when you have the basics of 11-12 years old education. 
Test optional is for rich ALDC folks and disadvantageous for low income/URMs.  There are even a lot of great free sources.  

2. If you can't get a minimum 1500 score, it must mean you didn't even put minimal effort or your intelligence level is way below average. 
Good colleges should have a cut off score of 1500.



Wrong on both fronts.


Which part? Disagree with PP?

Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 17:17     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So I just did an SAT math practice test. Just to let my DC know what math subjects are on it. It’s not particularly difficult but it also not a good gauge of who is “good” at math. It’s set up to make you rush. It tests who can do math quickly. But that’s a pretty poor proxy for overall math knowledge. So it basically tells you who is better AT THAT KIND OF TEST. Which doesn’t resemble any actual math exam I’ve ever had. And even less so real world use of math.

It may not have 0 value but it’s certainly not as important as DCUM land seems to think it is.


Agreed. Another major factor is wording. The test writers like to word questions in a way that is not always straightforward. Answer choices also have lure answers sometimes. Having taught SAT prep (and GRE and GMAT), there really is an aspect of performance tgat is unrelated to intelligence or content.


+1000

That is why (if you can afford it) private one-one test prep is the most helpful. My kid went from 1330 to 1500 with one baseline test and 4 hours of "tutoring". That tutoring looked at the specific errors and taught the "tricks for question formats". After another 4 hours my kid was still hovering at 1500. So basically all we needed was 4 hours and just taking practice tests to ensure they knew the "techniques". That's not testing overall Intelligence---that's testing how well you learn the tricks.


My kids got straight A's with some tutoring.  
Yes, the SAT is relatively easier to improve with tutoring and prep.

So a couple of things.

1 SAT/ACT is a great tool for low income/URMs. 
Again, you need relatively minimal effort to boost your scores when you have the basics of 11-12 years old education. 
Test optional is for rich ALDC folks and disadvantageous for low income/URMs.  There are even a lot of great free sources.  

2. If you can't get a minimum 1500 score, it must mean you didn't even put minimal effort or your intelligence level is way below average. 
Good colleges should have a cut off score of 1500.



Wrong on both fronts.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 17:08     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So I just did an SAT math practice test. Just to let my DC know what math subjects are on it. It’s not particularly difficult but it also not a good gauge of who is “good” at math. It’s set up to make you rush. It tests who can do math quickly. But that’s a pretty poor proxy for overall math knowledge. So it basically tells you who is better AT THAT KIND OF TEST. Which doesn’t resemble any actual math exam I’ve ever had. And even less so real world use of math.

It may not have 0 value but it’s certainly not as important as DCUM land seems to think it is.


Agreed. Another major factor is wording. The test writers like to word questions in a way that is not always straightforward. Answer choices also have lure answers sometimes. Having taught SAT prep (and GRE and GMAT), there really is an aspect of performance tgat is unrelated to intelligence or content.


+1000

That is why (if you can afford it) private one-one test prep is the most helpful. My kid went from 1330 to 1500 with one baseline test and 4 hours of "tutoring". That tutoring looked at the specific errors and taught the "tricks for question formats". After another 4 hours my kid was still hovering at 1500. So basically all we needed was 4 hours and just taking practice tests to ensure they knew the "techniques". That's not testing overall Intelligence---that's testing how well you learn the tricks.


My kids got straight A's with some tutoring.  
Yes, the SAT is relatively easier to improve with tutoring and prep.

So a couple of things.

1 SAT/ACT is a great tool for low income/URMs. 
Again, you need relatively minimal effort to boost your scores when you have the basics of 11-12 years old education. 
Test optional is for rich ALDC folks and disadvantageous for low income/URMs.  There are even a lot of great free sources.  

2. If you can't get a minimum 1500 score, it must mean you didn't even put minimal effort or your intelligence level is way below average. 
Good colleges should have a cut off score of 1500.

Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 14:23     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So I just did an SAT math practice test. Just to let my DC know what math subjects are on it. It’s not particularly difficult but it also not a good gauge of who is “good” at math. It’s set up to make you rush. It tests who can do math quickly. But that’s a pretty poor proxy for overall math knowledge. So it basically tells you who is better AT THAT KIND OF TEST. Which doesn’t resemble any actual math exam I’ve ever had. And even less so real world use of math.

It may not have 0 value but it’s certainly not as important as DCUM land seems to think it is.


Agreed. Another major factor is wording. The test writers like to word questions in a way that is not always straightforward. Answer choices also have lure answers sometimes. Having taught SAT prep (and GRE and GMAT), there really is an aspect of performance tgat is unrelated to intelligence or content.


Another +1, I did the same thing took an entire practice test. It's enlightening. There are no hard questions on the test, at all, it's just there are enough questions that slip ups are nearly guaranteed. Sure it says something about the person who does not slip up, but that's very different from demonstrating someone is very good at math or reading comprehension.


This. The ACT/SAT aren’t necessary useless but they aren’t the leading indicator that DCUM land wants them to be.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 14:21     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So I just did an SAT math practice test. Just to let my DC know what math subjects are on it. It’s not particularly difficult but it also not a good gauge of who is “good” at math. It’s set up to make you rush. It tests who can do math quickly. But that’s a pretty poor proxy for overall math knowledge. So it basically tells you who is better AT THAT KIND OF TEST. Which doesn’t resemble any actual math exam I’ve ever had. And even less so real world use of math.

It may not have 0 value but it’s certainly not as important as DCUM land seems to think it is.


Quick thinking and judgment is a very important skill especially in the real world


DP: But not really for doing math problems. And quick thinking is not typically what is needed in college which is what the tests are supposed to be for. There are a few jobs where quick thinking is needed, use timed assessments for recruiting for those when the time comes.


All of the tests. exams, midterms, finals in colleges are under tight time limits. When you have meetings, presentations, taking questions, etc, at work places, quick thinking is very important.



No they aren’t. I finished most quantitative exams with time to spare. The exceptions were things like history where it was trying to get as much information out as possible into a blue book in 3 hours.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2023 13:37     Subject: No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So I just did an SAT math practice test. Just to let my DC know what math subjects are on it. It’s not particularly difficult but it also not a good gauge of who is “good” at math. It’s set up to make you rush. It tests who can do math quickly. But that’s a pretty poor proxy for overall math knowledge. So it basically tells you who is better AT THAT KIND OF TEST. Which doesn’t resemble any actual math exam I’ve ever had. And even less so real world use of math.

It may not have 0 value but it’s certainly not as important as DCUM land seems to think it is.


Agreed. Another major factor is wording. The test writers like to word questions in a way that is not always straightforward. Answer choices also have lure answers sometimes. Having taught SAT prep (and GRE and GMAT), there really is an aspect of performance tgat is unrelated to intelligence or content.


Another +1, I did the same thing took an entire practice test. It's enlightening. There are no hard questions on the test, at all, it's just there are enough questions that slip ups are nearly guaranteed. Sure it says something about the person who does not slip up, but that's very different from demonstrating someone is very good at math or reading comprehension.