Do ACT and SAT scores really matter? New study says they shouldn’t

[Disir]

Teens across the U.S. are standing by their mailboxes, waiting anxiously for the envelopes that will seal their academic fate. It’s college admissions season and for many students a lot hinges on how well they performed in standardized testing.

But how much should exams like the SAT and ACT really matter?

A study published Tuesday that probed the success of “test-optional” admissions policies in 33 public and private universities calls into question the need for such testing.

What should college admissions officers look for instead? Hiss says GPA matters the most.

“The evidence of the study clearly shows that high school GPA matters. Four-year, long-term evidence of self-discipline, intellectual curiosity and hard work; that’s what matters the most. After that, I would say evidence that someone has interests that they have brought to a higher level, from a soccer goalie to a debater to a servant in a community to a linguist. We need to see evidence that the student can bring something to a high level of skill,” Hiss said.

According to the data, if high school grades are not high, good testing does not promise college success. Students with good grades and modest testing did better in college than students with higher testing and lower high school grades.

“The human mind is simply so complex and so multifaceted and fluid, that trying to find a single measurement tool that will be reliable across the enormous populations of American students is simply a trip up a blind alley. I would never say the SATs and ACTs have no predictive value for anybody; they have predictive value for some people. We just don’t find them reliable cross populations,” says Hiss.

Do ACT and SAT scores really matter? New study says they shouldn't | The Rundown | PBS NewsHour | PBS

For the terminally lazy:
http://www.nacacnet.org/research/research-data/nacac-research/Documents/DefiningPromise.pdf

 

[DGS49]

This is yet another example of people who had low SAT scores when they were in high school, trying to convince the world that SAT scores don't matter. Just like teachers - who mainly have middling IQ scores themselves - preaching that IQ is not important. Pathetic, really.

Using grades as the main criteria would be a joke. The level of learning achievement that gets an "A" in an "inner city" school would get a "C" at a good suburban school.

It is easy to forget that college is an academic challenge, and the best way to see if someone is prepared for a new academic challenge is to see how well they have met their previous academic challenges. Fortunately, we have ways of measuring that success: WRITTEN TESTS!

To propose that anything other than a written test is better than a written test is stupid on its face.

The results of the Test (say, the SAT's) MUST be looked at in conjunction with other tangible measures - grades in high school, for example - but to discount or ignore the results of written tests is just stupid. How do you think their success in college is going to be measured? Mainly by TESTS!

Allow me to illustrate my point with an example: Me. I had a very high Math SAT score, an above-average Verbal score, and "B" grades in high school. During my first interview with my college academic counselor he told me that I would probably have a hard time in college. My profile indicated to him (correctly, sorry to say) that I was a person with above average intelligence who had "floated along" through high school. In college, where I would have much greater personal responsibility for learning (rather than just listening closely to the teacher), I would have much less success, since I hadn't had to work hard in high school. Without going into the bloody details, he was correct.

But tossing out the SAT (or comparable) test is nonsense. If you have mediocre SAT's, the best you can hope for in college is a degree in Education.

Lord save us.

 

[Imperious]

You have to understand too that teachers commonly help students grade wise, they don't necessarily push them to their full limits, and simply give them beyond easy work if they are failing. Teachers will commonly just give retakes on tests that the students previously bombed, thus raising their grade.

SAT's really challenge this, it puts kids on the direct spotlight, if they do not put forth the effort and study, then they wont pass, simple as that. There is no going back, you need to actually work hard and there is no one there with you holding your hand.

 

[DGS49]

Maybe I'm being too gullible, but the people at the ETS have worked for decades to refine and improve the SAT's in response to every new generation of criticisms that are levied. When I was young, there were complaints about the tests being "culturally biased," and any questions that could even be considered as favoring the majority culture were re-cast. I just don't think there are any remaining valid criticisms of those tests. They are a damned good indication of the students' ABILITY to do college work. Whether they actually do good college work is up to human factors like motivation, distractions, maturity, and so forth. But the tests are valid.

 

[martybegan]

Maybe I'm being too gullible, but the people at the ETS have worked for decades to refine and improve the SAT's in response to every new generation of criticisms that are levied. When I was young, there were complaints about the tests being "culturally biased," and any questions that could even be considered as favoring the majority culture were re-cast. I just don't think there are any remaining valid criticisms of those tests. They are a damned good indication of the students' ABILITY to do college work. Whether they actually do good college work is up to human factors like motivation, distractions, maturity, and so forth. But the tests are valid.

Agreed, there has to be a standard, level playing field as part of the college admission process, and the SAT is the best thing available at the current time.

On a side note, here in NYC there is something similar to get into the elite public high schools (Bronx Science, Styvusant, etc). For these schools ONLY a test matters, nothing else.

 

[Disir]

This is yet another example of people who had low SAT scores when they were in high school, trying to convince the world that SAT scores don't matter. Just like teachers - who mainly have middling IQ scores themselves - preaching that IQ is not important. Pathetic, really.

Using grades as the main criteria would be a joke. The level of learning achievement that gets an "A" in an "inner city" school would get a "C" at a good suburban school.

It is easy to forget that college is an academic challenge, and the best way to see if someone is prepared for a new academic challenge is to see how well they have met their previous academic challenges. Fortunately, we have ways of measuring that success: WRITTEN TESTS!

To propose that anything other than a written test is better than a written test is stupid on its face.

The results of the Test (say, the SAT's) MUST be looked at in conjunction with other tangible measures - grades in high school, for example - but to discount or ignore the results of written tests is just stupid. How do you think their success in college is going to be measured? Mainly by TESTS!

Allow me to illustrate my point with an example: Me. I had a very high Math SAT score, an above-average Verbal score, and "B" grades in high school. During my first interview with my college academic counselor he told me that I would probably have a hard time in college. My profile indicated to him (correctly, sorry to say) that I was a person with above average intelligence who had "floated along" through high school. In college, where I would have much greater personal responsibility for learning (rather than just listening closely to the teacher), I would have much less success, since I hadn't had to work hard in high school. Without going into the bloody details, he was correct.

But tossing out the SAT (or comparable) test is nonsense. If you have mediocre SAT's, the best you can hope for in college is a degree in Education.

Lord save us.

Oh, it is much worse than you think. Many people move into education after they have failed at everything else. It is a second career. Many others hate kids but do not realize this until they get into the schools.

The ACT/SAT testing only measures one type of skill. The writing section (added in 2006) is controversial because it is graded subjectively. Do you find that subjectivity to be an issue? Finally, the kids that take the ACT/SAT tests are taking these in combination with other standardized tests. Is there a point where the kids just stop caring?

 

[Disir]

You have to understand too that teachers commonly help students grade wise, they don't necessarily push them to their full limits, and simply give them beyond easy work if they are failing. Teachers will commonly just give retakes on tests that the students previously bombed, thus raising their grade.

SAT's really challenge this, it puts kids on the direct spotlight, if they do not put forth the effort and study, then they wont pass, simple as that. There is no going back, you need to actually work hard and there is no one there with you holding your hand.

I don't necessarily agree with that. Some teachers and classes allow students to retake a test. I don't think that this is allowed for those states that have standardized end of course testing.

 

[Unkotare]

Teens across the U.S. are standing by their mailboxes, waiting anxiously for the envelopes that will seal their academic fate. It’s college admissions season and for many students a lot hinges on how well they performed in standardized testing.

But how much should exams like the SAT and ACT really matter?

A study published Tuesday that probed the success of “test-optional” admissions policies in 33 public and private universities calls into question the need for such testing.

What should college admissions officers look for instead? Hiss says GPA matters the most.

“The evidence of the study clearly shows that high school GPA matters. Four-year, long-term evidence of self-discipline, intellectual curiosity and hard work; that’s what matters the most. After that, I would say evidence that someone has interests that they have brought to a higher level, from a soccer goalie to a debater to a servant in a community to a linguist. We need to see evidence that the student can bring something to a high level of skill,” Hiss said.

According to the data, if high school grades are not high, good testing does not promise college success. Students with good grades and modest testing did better in college than students with higher testing and lower high school grades.

“The human mind is simply so complex and so multifaceted and fluid, that trying to find a single measurement tool that will be reliable across the enormous populations of American students is simply a trip up a blind alley. I would never say the SATs and ACTs have no predictive value for anybody; they have predictive value for some people. We just don’t find them reliable cross populations,” says Hiss.

Do ACT and SAT scores really matter? New study says they shouldn't | The Rundown | PBS NewsHour | PBS

For the terminally lazy:
http://www.nacacnet.org/research/research-data/nacac-research/Documents/DefiningPromise.pdf

"Should" doesn't mean a whole lot to a high school senior trying to get into the college of his or her choice.

 

[Unkotare]

The writing section (added in 2006) is controversial because it is graded subjectively.

Not exactly.

 

[Unkotare]

SAT's really challenge this, it puts kids on the direct spotlight, if they do not put forth the effort and study, then they wont pass, simple as that. There is no going back, you need to actually work hard and there is no one there with you holding your hand.

It is not a pass/fail test, and there IS going back since you can take it several times.

 

[Moonglow]

I dropped out of high school at 17 and entered college at 18, no SAT test was necessary, only cash.Which is the way it should be...

 

[Disir]

The writing section (added in 2006) is controversial because it is graded subjectively.

Not exactly.

Are you waiting for me to ask?

 

[Unkotare]

The writing section (added in 2006) is controversial because it is graded subjectively.

Not exactly.

Are you waiting for me to ask?

No, I was just informing you.

 

[Disir]

Not exactly.

Are you waiting for me to ask?

No, I was just informing you.

Not really. Welcome to ignore.

 

[Unkotare]

Are you waiting for me to ask?

No, I was just informing you.

Not really. Welcome to ignore.

Yes, really. The writing section involves more than just the essay, and the essay itself is scored based on a rubric rather than mere subjective impression. If you don't want the facts to interfere with your mistaken understanding then enjoy your ignorance.

 

[Moonglow]

I don't see what the big deal about the written part is, in law classes I had to write thesis papers on tests all the time.

 

[Unkotare]

I don't see what the big deal about the written part is, in law classes I had to write thesis papers on tests all the time.

There is a certain mind-set that finds any form of accountability 'oppressive.'

 

[Disir]

No, I was just informing you.

Not really. Welcome to ignore.

Yes, really. The writing section involves more than just the essay, and the essay itself is scored based on a rubric rather than mere subjective impression. If you don't want the facts to interfere with your mistaken understanding then enjoy your ignorance.

I don't have a problem with facts when they are presented. As it stands you were not presenting information. You were being a prick. If it is your intention to engage in discussion that is one thing. If it is your intention to troll then I'll just save us both the time and ignore you. The ball is in your court.

Controversial:

2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/04/education/04education.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

2013
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/10/the-folly-of-the-sat-writing-section/280510/

 

[whitehall]

What study? Bates college William Hiss? Why are people conditioned to accept crazy theories because when they are labeled as "a new study"?

 

[Moonglow]

I don't see what the big deal about the written part is, in law classes I had to write thesis papers on tests all the time.

There is a certain mind-set that finds any form of accountability 'oppressive.'

reminds me of my third wife, she thought saying no was abuse.