Putting the argument about the SAT scores in its place

[IM2]

"But the person who scored well on an SAT will not necessarily be the best doctor or the best lawyer or the best businessman. These tests do not measure character, leadership, creativity, perseverance." ​

William Julius Wilson​

William J. Wilson is the top of the line of our time expert in sociology. He has studied this issue thoroughly. None of you have. So let us discuss the SAT and what it doesn't do.

 

[frigidweirdo]

"But the person who scored well on an SAT will not necessarily be the best doctor or the best lawyer or the best businessman. These tests do not measure character, leadership, creativity, perseverance." ​

William Julius Wilson​

William J. Wilson is the top of the line of our time expert in sociology. He has studied this issue thoroughly. None of you have. So let us discuss the SAT and what it doesn't do.

The issue that the US and other countries need to acknowledge is that kids need certain skills to do well in the world. These skills can come in a variety of forms, not just traditional education routes.

 

[IM2]

"But the person who scored well on an SAT will not necessarily be the best doctor or the best lawyer or the best businessman. These tests do not measure character, leadership, creativity, perseverance." ​

William Julius Wilson​

William J. Wilson is the top of the line of our time expert in sociology. He has studied this issue thoroughly. None of you have. So let us discuss the SAT and what it doesn't do.

The issue that the US and other countries need to acknowledge is that kids need certain skills to do well in the world. These skills can come in a variety of forms, not just traditional education routes.

That's a very fair assessment.

 

[fncceo]

SAT isn’t a recognition of skill to succeed. It is a measurement of how well a student absorbed the common curriculum of secondary education.

For that reason, it’s a meaningful indicator of how well a student will absorb a post-secondary curriculum.

But, certainly not the only indicator.

 

[frigidweirdo]

"But the person who scored well on an SAT will not necessarily be the best doctor or the best lawyer or the best businessman. These tests do not measure character, leadership, creativity, perseverance." ​

William Julius Wilson​

William J. Wilson is the top of the line of our time expert in sociology. He has studied this issue thoroughly. None of you have. So let us discuss the SAT and what it doesn't do.

The issue that the US and other countries need to acknowledge is that kids need certain skills to do well in the world. These skills can come in a variety of forms, not just traditional education routes.

That's a very fair assessment.

But the sad thing is, it'll never happen. You don't win votes or money to buy votes by doing this, so very few politicians care.

 

[IM2]

SAT isn’t a recognition of skill to succeed. It is a measurement of how well a student absorbed the common curriculum of secondary education.

For that reason, it’s a meaningful indicator of how well a student will absorb a post-secondary curriculum.

But, certainly not the only indicator.

Actually its only a indicatior of what a student remembers from 8 am until noon on a particular Saturday morning. The SAT argument was never ever used while whites were denying people of color access into universities. It has been used as an exam since 1926 and it has never been the sole standard indicating anything.

 

[Esmeralda]

"But the person who scored well on an SAT will not necessarily be the best doctor or the best lawyer or the best businessman. These tests do not measure character, leadership, creativity, perseverance." ​

William Julius Wilson​

William J. Wilson is the top of the line of our time expert in sociology. He has studied this issue thoroughly. None of you have. So let us discuss the SAT and what it doesn't do.

The issue that the US and other countries need to acknowledge is that kids need certain skills to do well in the world. These skills can come in a variety of forms, not just traditional education routes.

SATs are standardized tests which students study for. They study vocabulary for the test, for one thing, most of which they don't retain. There are 5 basic types of knowledge: Empirical, Theological, Philosophical, Historical, and Experiential. SAT tests only cover empirical. Two things: 1) These kids study for the test, to pass the test, not to acquire knowledge, which means it is temporary, short term knowledge, and much of it not retained. 2) One needs a vast array of knowledge to succeed in life, not just empirical knowledge. So high SAT scores don't guarantee anything. The kid who scored highest in SATs in my graduating class was an alcoholic; his life was a failure.

 

[Esmeralda]

SAT isn’t a recognition of skill to succeed. It is a measurement of how well a student absorbed the common curriculum of secondary education.

For that reason, it’s a meaningful indicator of how well a student will absorb a post-secondary curriculum.

But, certainly not the only indicator.

It isn't even an indicator of what they learned in the 'common curriculum of secondary' school. They cram for SATs. They put it in short term memory and then forget most of it when the test is finished. It is a totally BS system.

I know this, I have worked with 11th and 12th graders for many years and talked to them about this. They get tutors, they buy books to practice with, they cram and cram. Test success is not an indicator of long term knowledge of anything. The most important thing in education is becoming a life long learner. SATs don't measure that: they measure short term memory.

 

[fncceo]

SAT isn’t a recognition of skill to succeed. It is a measurement of how well a student absorbed the common curriculum of secondary education.

For that reason, it’s a meaningful indicator of how well a student will absorb a post-secondary curriculum.

But, certainly not the only indicator.

It isn't even an indicator of what they learned in the 'common curriculum of secondary' school. They cram for SATs. They put it in short term memory and then forget most of it when the test is finished. It is a totally BS system.

I know this, I have worked with 11th and 12th graders for many years and talked to them about this. They get tutors, they buy books to practice with, they cram and cram. Test success is not an indicator of long term knowledge of anything. The most important thing in education is becoming a life long learner. SATs don't measure that: they measure short term memory.

You can't 'cram' for mathematics, reading comprehension, or writing without first obtaining a grasp of the subject in school.

No amount of 'cramming' will take a sub-par student and turn him or her into a high SAT performer if they failed to comprehend their secondary instruction.

 

[Esmeralda]

SAT isn’t a recognition of skill to succeed. It is a measurement of how well a student absorbed the common curriculum of secondary education.

For that reason, it’s a meaningful indicator of how well a student will absorb a post-secondary curriculum.

But, certainly not the only indicator.

It isn't even an indicator of what they learned in the 'common curriculum of secondary' school. They cram for SATs. They put it in short term memory and then forget most of it when the test is finished. It is a totally BS system.

I know this, I have worked with 11th and 12th graders for many years and talked to them about this. They get tutors, they buy books to practice with, they cram and cram. Test success is not an indicator of long term knowledge of anything. The most important thing in education is becoming a life long learner. SATs don't measure that: they measure short term memory.

You can't 'cram' for mathematics, reading comprehension, or writing without first obtaining a grasp of the subject in school.

No amount of 'cramming' will take a sub-par student and turn him or her into a high SAT performer if they failed to comprehend their secondary instruction.

You are a teacher are you? I've taught for 30 years. High school. I know what I'm talking about. Whatever level the kid is at, if they cram for SATs, they get a much higher score than they would if they didn't. As well, a lot of teachers, in their classes, cover SAT material to help kids do better. I have absolutely no respect for standardized testing. They don't just learn how to answer the questions, they learn test taking skills.

 

[fncceo]

They don't just learn how to answer the questions, they learn test taking skills.

Learning how to take a test is a valuable survival skill in any post-secondary environment. Like it or not, life is competitive environment.

Any school that denies teaching a student the skills to compete is damning him to at least a more difficult life than his peers.

 

[frigidweirdo]

"But the person who scored well on an SAT will not necessarily be the best doctor or the best lawyer or the best businessman. These tests do not measure character, leadership, creativity, perseverance." ​

William Julius Wilson​

William J. Wilson is the top of the line of our time expert in sociology. He has studied this issue thoroughly. None of you have. So let us discuss the SAT and what it doesn't do.

The issue that the US and other countries need to acknowledge is that kids need certain skills to do well in the world. These skills can come in a variety of forms, not just traditional education routes.

SATs are standardized tests which students study for. They study vocabulary for the test, for one thing, most of which they don't retain. There are 5 basic types of knowledge: Empirical, Theological, Philosophical, Historical, and Experiential. SAT tests only cover empirical. Two things: 1) These kids study for the test, to pass the test, not to acquire knowledge, which means it is temporary, short term knowledge, and much of it not retained. 2) One needs a vast array of knowledge to succeed in life, not just empirical knowledge. So high SAT scores don't guarantee anything. The kid who scored highest in SATs in my graduating class was an alcoholic; his life was a failure.

I know about the SAT test, and there are some good things, but as a test for overall knowledge, it's ridiculous. Most kids don't need or care about the SAT exam.

 

[westwall]

SAT isn’t a recognition of skill to succeed. It is a measurement of how well a student absorbed the common curriculum of secondary education.

For that reason, it’s a meaningful indicator of how well a student will absorb a post-secondary curriculum.

But, certainly not the only indicator.

It isn't even an indicator of what they learned in the 'common curriculum of secondary' school. They cram for SATs. They put it in short term memory and then forget most of it when the test is finished. It is a totally BS system.

I know this, I have worked with 11th and 12th graders for many years and talked to them about this. They get tutors, they buy books to practice with, they cram and cram. Test success is not an indicator of long term knowledge of anything. The most important thing in education is becoming a life long learner. SATs don't measure that: they measure short term memory.

You can't 'cram' for mathematics, reading comprehension, or writing without first obtaining a grasp of the subject in school.

No amount of 'cramming' will take a sub-par student and turn him or her into a high SAT performer if they failed to comprehend their secondary instruction.

You are a teacher are you? I've taught for 30 years. High school. I know what I'm talking about. Whatever level the kid is at, if they cram for SATs, they get a much higher score than they would if they didn't. As well, a lot of teachers, in their classes, cover SAT material to help kids do better. I have absolutely no respect for standardized testing. They don't just learn how to answer the questions, they learn test taking skills.

Yes, a friend of mine owns the southern California concession of The Princeton Review, probably the best known of the SAT prep classes and they are very good at maximizing the performance of their students.

 

[IM2]

They don't just learn how to answer the questions, they learn test taking skills.

Learning how to take a test is a valuable survival skill in any post-secondary environment. Like it or not, life is competitive environment.

Any school that denies teaching a student the skills to compete is damning him to at least a more difficult life than his peers.

I think kids already know how to take tests by the time they go to college without the ACT or SAT. You learn the skills to compete by actually performing the skills you need to compete.

 

[IM2]

They don't just learn how to answer the questions, they learn test taking skills.

Learning how to take a test is a valuable survival skill in any post-secondary environment. Like it or not, life is competitive environment.

Any school that denies teaching a student the skills to compete is damning him to at least a more difficult life than his peers.

I think kids already know how to take tests by the time they go to college without the ACT or SAT. You learn the skills to compete by actually performing the skills you need to compete.

And that's why over 800 colleges have either stopped using the SAT or made it optional.

 

[fncceo]

You learn the skills to compete by actually performing the skills you need to compete.

It's very difficult to master a skill without actually performing that skill ... which might explain why there aren't many purely theoretical courses on playing basketball.

 

[Esmeralda]

They don't just learn how to answer the questions, they learn test taking skills.

Learning how to take a test is a valuable survival skill in any post-secondary environment. Like it or not, life is competitive environment.

Any school that denies teaching a student the skills to compete is damning him to at least a more difficult life than his peers.

I think kids already know how to take tests by the time they go to college without the ACT or SAT. You learn the skills to compete by actually performing the skills you need to compete.

Kids do get some test taking skills taught in school, but the SAT cramming programs reinforce what they already know and add to it. You can improve your SAT score by having strong test taking skills.

 

[fncceo]

They don't just learn how to answer the questions, they learn test taking skills.

Learning how to take a test is a valuable survival skill in any post-secondary environment. Like it or not, life is competitive environment.

Any school that denies teaching a student the skills to compete is damning him to at least a more difficult life than his peers.

I think kids already know how to take tests by the time they go to college without the ACT or SAT. You learn the skills to compete by actually performing the skills you need to compete.

And that's why over 800 colleges have either stopped using the SAT or made it optional.

While 85% of colleges still require it (that's a SAT question).

 

[Esmeralda]

They don't just learn how to answer the questions, they learn test taking skills.

Learning how to take a test is a valuable survival skill in any post-secondary environment. Like it or not, life is competitive environment.

Any school that denies teaching a student the skills to compete is damning him to at least a more difficult life than his peers.

You don't understand. It is standardized testing that is the problem. I am in favor of students writing essays rather than taking standardized tests. The problem is that around 1.7 million kids take SAT each year. Many more than once if the first score is weaker than what they want. They can re-take it every 6 months. They will cram more and take it again. But standardized tests are easier and faster to score than essays, so SAT is about standardized testing. But it is not a good system. It doesn't truly or accurately assess real knowledge, aptitude or potential.

 

[IM2]

They don't just learn how to answer the questions, they learn test taking skills.

Learning how to take a test is a valuable survival skill in any post-secondary environment. Like it or not, life is competitive environment.

Any school that denies teaching a student the skills to compete is damning him to at least a more difficult life than his peers.

I think kids already know how to take tests by the time they go to college without the ACT or SAT. You learn the skills to compete by actually performing the skills you need to compete.

And that's why over 800 colleges have either stopped using the SAT or made it optional.

While 85% of colleges still require it (that's a SAT question).

Again the SAT has been around since 1926. I have seen no record to this day about the importance of this test until whites could not be given every college admission. So it really can't be all that important.