Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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).

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?

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!***

My native country 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.

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.

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!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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).

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?

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!***

My native country 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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I”m all in favor of those who don’t test well deciding not to take the SAT or ACT. But I think colleges should require th3 scores for any test taken. I think Georgetown has it right - require all scores. That still leaves the decision with the student and his/her parent. But also allows the colleges to have the most complete information available to make decisions.

But that works against social engineering the class, which is what the schools want. They want URMs and first generations AND the high test scores that can be reported to USNWR. Viola! that is the system we have but no one wants to admit it.

+1 no one wants to say it but this is education in america. which is why I'm sending my kids overseas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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).

This is YOUR child's experience. I would wager not the norm for other kids with special needs. I want MY child to have the choice to test and decide if the scores are worth reporting not some misinformed parents making a case or schools deciding if they truly understand my kid's accommodations.

It's stunning when an adult has an experience and comes to dcum to proclaim that all people have that experience. How dumb can one be? My kid has special needs, was diagnosed young, has worked with executive functioning coaches forever and still struggles with test taking despite being brilliant. Nah, can't happen says prior poster who is clearly an expert in disabilities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Better idea.. Colleges should require scores. Period. Oh wait, that used to be the case.. wonder when the idiots showed up and changed that.

The dumbing down of America.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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).

This is YOUR child's experience. I would wager not the norm for other kids with special needs. I want MY child to have the choice to test and decide if the scores are worth reporting not some misinformed parents making a case or schools deciding if they truly understand my kid's accommodations.

Anonymous wrote:Test optional started slowly before Covid and then took off everywhere. It has remained because 1) colleges want to be able to admit low-income/URM students who would otherwise have low scores, and 2) because colleges love that their average SATs look so high now. This isn’t about applicants getting away with anything. It’s all about the benefits to colleges.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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).

The fact that you have a “special needs” child and the process of getting him help didn’t teach you a damn dose of empathy or understanding for similar or even worse off kids for whom the “solution” isn’t so neat and tidy says a lot about you. The universe tried to teach you a lesson to make you a better person and you failed.

No. You are wrong. The only way we can keep making progress in this world is to push the high-achieving people to the top of the chain, to give them opportunities to change the world.

I am humble enough to recognize that this may not be my family. My kids will find their place in the world, I don't worry about that. But as a species, we need to stay competitive, figure out a way to mitigate climate change, manage massive financial upheavals, travel to other planets, cure diseases, harness AI, etc. If you deliberately prevent the talented from rising, by eliminating the easiest, simplest and most efficient filters at our disposal, then you are NOT helping our species survive.

This isn't about my kid or your kid. It's about a more long-term approach to specie evolution.

You know who is innovative? Creative people. Who may or may not test well. Lets have a test that demonstrates innovation. The SAT/ACT is not it.

Anonymous wrote:It would be absurd to require all the scores to be reported. Kids would stop taking the test and apply to test optional programs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I”m all in favor of those who don’t test well deciding not to take the SAT or ACT. But I think colleges should require th3 scores for any test taken. I think Georgetown has it right - require all scores. That still leaves the decision with the student and his/her parent. But also allows the colleges to have the most complete information available to make decisions.

But that works against social engineering the class, which is what the schools want. They want URMs and first generations AND the high test scores that can be reported to USNWR. Viola! that is the system we have but no one wants to admit it.

+1 no one wants to say it but this is education in america. which is why I'm sending my kids overseas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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).

The fact that you have a “special needs” child and the process of getting him help didn’t teach you a damn dose of empathy or understanding for similar or even worse off kids for whom the “solution” isn’t so neat and tidy says a lot about you. The universe tried to teach you a lesson to make you a better person and you failed.

No. You are wrong. The only way we can keep making progress in this world is to push the high-achieving people to the top of the chain, to give them opportunities to change the world.

I am humble enough to recognize that this may not be my family. My kids will find their place in the world, I don't worry about that. But as a species, we need to stay competitive, figure out a way to mitigate climate change, manage massive financial upheavals, travel to other planets, cure diseases, harness AI, etc. If you deliberately prevent the talented from rising, by eliminating the easiest, simplest and most efficient filters at our disposal, then you are NOT helping our species survive.

This isn't about my kid or your kid. It's about a more long-term approach to specie evolution.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I”m all in favor of those who don’t test well deciding not to take the SAT or ACT. But I think colleges should require th3 scores for any test taken. I think Georgetown has it right - require all scores. That still leaves the decision with the student and his/her parent. But also allows the colleges to have the most complete information available to make decisions.

But that works against social engineering the class, which is what the schools want. They want URMs and first generations AND the high test scores that can be reported to USNWR. Viola! that is the system we have but no one wants to admit it.

Anonymous wrote:It's fascinating to see so many posters in this forum diminishing standardized tests, but then insisting that their DC aced them anyway.

Meanwhile, according to the 2023 Presidential Scholar program, the Delaware / Maryland / D.C. / Virginia region apparently produced less than 400 students who were able to achieve a composite 36 on the ACT (with perfect 36 subparts) or a composite 1600 on the SAT.

Not even enough candidates to occupy 1/2 the seats in the freshman class at the smallest of the T20 schools.