Putting the argument about the SAT scores in its place

[fncceo]

I am in favor of students writing essays rather than taking standardized tests.

A good reason to make the essay portion of the SAT exam mandatory instead of optional.

I had a unique experience. I received my first Bachelor's Degree in 1980 in Computer Science. I re-entered University in 2010 to get a Nursing degree. In the interim 30 years, I saw a big difference. Today, many more freshmen students are having to take remedial reading and mathematics courses just to get through the first year.

Students are being accepted into University woefully ill-prepared to learn at the University level.

 

[fncceo]

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.

Is everything about race? If you have to eliminate standarized testing to achieve racial equality in admissions then you're not making a good case for racial equality.

For as long as I remember, the message behind racial equality is that ALL races, colors, and ethnicity were equally capable of success given a level playing field.

You can't get playing field more level than standardized testing.

 

[Esmeralda]

I am in favor of students writing essays rather than taking standardized tests.

A good reason to make the essay portion of the SAT exam mandatory instead of optional.

I had a unique experience. I received my first Bachelor's Degree in 1980 in Computer Science. I re-entered University in 2010 to get a Nursing degree. In the interim 30 years, I saw a big difference. Today, many more freshmen students are having to take remedial reading and mathematics courses just to get through the first year.

Students are being accepted into University woefully ill-prepared to learn at the University level.

It's a very small part of the exam. Doesn't really deal with knowledge the way I think a college entrance exam should.

 

[Esmeralda]

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.

Is everything about race? If you have to eliminate standarized testing to achieve racial equality in admissions then you're not making a good case for racial equality.

For as long as I remember, the message behind racial equality is that ALL races, colors, and ethnicity were equally capable of success given a level playing field.

You can't get playing field more level than standardized testing.

One thing to consider is that the programs that offer the best prep for SATs are expensive and kids who don't come from families who can afford that are at a disadvantage.

If we are actually going to have racial equality, our schools would be all equal, and they are not. They depend on the tax dollars of the school district, and kids of color usually live in poorer school districts. Kids of color are less likely to be able to pay for the materials or programs to cram for the SAT.

Poverty is an endless cycle that needs to change through education, but the first thing is to make all of our schools equal, across the country, with money and teaching. You can say we throw money at education w/o results, but that isn't true: we can all see how much better schools are in the more affluent areas.

 

[fncceo]

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.

Is everything about race? If you have to eliminate standarized testing to achieve racial equality in admissions then you're not making a good case for racial equality.

For as long as I remember, the message behind racial equality is that ALL races, colors, and ethnicity were equally capable of success given a level playing field.

You can't get playing field more level than standardized testing.

One thing to consider is that the programs that offer the best prep for SATs are expensive and kids who don't come from families who can afford that are at a disadvantage.

If we are actually going to have racial equality, our schools would be all equal, and they are not. They depend on the tax dollars of the school district, and kids of color usually live in poorer school districts. Kids of color are less likely to be able to pay for the materials or programs to cram for the SAT.

Poverty is an endless cycle that needs to change through education, but the first thing is to make all of our schools equal, across the country, with money and teaching. You can say we throw money at education w/o results, but that isn't true: we can all see how much better schools are in the more affluent areas.

Throwing money at schools is a good thing ... which is precisely why my daughter attended private school and university.

As for making schools 'equal', good luck bringing all schools down to a common denominator and ensuring a rapid expansion of the private school market.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

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.

I took SATs in 1969. I don't recall cramming anything, nor anyone who did. We went in cold with what we had in our heads.

 

[gipper]

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.

The SAT is clearly racist and HATES blacks. After all, it was devised by white racists.

 

[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.

I took SATs in 1969. I don't recall cramming anything, nor anyone who did. We went in cold with what we had in our heads.

We didn't do it back then. I didn't do it, and I wasn't aware of anyone who did. But it has changed a great deal since then. I've taught many years of high school, mostly 11th and 12th grade and am very familiar with the SAT system now. Kids take a pre-SAT test called PSAT in 10th or 11th grade. The school orders PSAT text packets and gives the test just like it would be given in the 12th grade. Then they send them back to be scored.

There are all kinds of materials available for the kids to purchase and practice for the test. Books galore. There are programs they can go through. They may get a tutor, go to evening classes, etc. Depending on how much money their family has to pay for this stuff and how concerned they are about getting into the college of their choice (needing a high SAT score) they will put a ton of effort into preparing for SAT. Teachers are encouraged to put SAT material into the course in 11th and 12th grades. It is much different than it was in 1969.

best sat prep materials - Google Search

 

[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.

The SAT is clearly racist and HATES blacks. After all, it was devised by white racists.

I didn't say anything about race. Why are you bringing that in?

 

[gipper]

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.

The SAT is clearly racist and HATES blacks. After all, it was devised by white racists.

I didn't say anything about race. Why are you bringing that in?

The poster that is the OP, always does. Why can't I?

 

[IM2]

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.

Is everything about race? If you have to eliminate standarized testing to achieve racial equality in admissions then you're not making a good case for racial equality.

For as long as I remember, the message behind racial equality is that ALL races, colors, and ethnicity were equally capable of success given a level playing field.

You can't get playing field more level than standardized testing.

You are wrong according to the top sociologist in America and perhaps on earth.

In the case of college admissions, research reveals that standardized test scores may not measure real merit and their relation to an applicant's future performance is questionable. High school grades are a better reflection of college grades than SAT scores in both selective and non-selective colleges, but neither measure important attributes such as perseverance, motivation and interpersonal skills. Wilson said that while standardized tests should not be abandoned, they should be given less weight and considered alongside an applicant's initiative, leadership qualities, the ability to overcome personal hardship, honors and awards, among other criteria.

William Julius Wilson Speaks on Affirmative Opportunity

William Julius Wilson Speaks on Affirmative Opportunity at Hakim Lecture

.

 

[IM2]

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.

Is everything about race? If you have to eliminate standarized testing to achieve racial equality in admissions then you're not making a good case for racial equality.

For as long as I remember, the message behind racial equality is that ALL races, colors, and ethnicity were equally capable of success given a level playing field.

You can't get playing field more level than standardized testing.

One thing to consider is that the programs that offer the best prep for SATs are expensive and kids who don't come from families who can afford that are at a disadvantage.

If we are actually going to have racial equality, our schools would be all equal, and they are not. They depend on the tax dollars of the school district, and kids of color usually live in poorer school districts. Kids of color are less likely to be able to pay for the materials or programs to cram for the SAT.

Poverty is an endless cycle that needs to change through education, but the first thing is to make all of our schools equal, across the country, with money and teaching. You can say we throw money at education w/o results, but that isn't true: we can all see how much better schools are in the more affluent areas.

Throwing money at schools is a good thing ... which is precisely why my daughter attended private school and university.

As for making schools 'equal', good luck bringing all schools down to a common denominator and ensuring a rapid expansion of the private school market.

How about you look at it as bringing all students up instead of the usual whitebread thinking of if blacks are made to have equal facilities it brings down whites. That's bullshit.

 

[IM2]

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.

The SAT is clearly racist and HATES blacks. After all, it was devised by white racists.

I didn't say anything about race. Why are you bringing that in?

The poster that is the OP, always does. Why can't I?

.All you do is make up racist lies .You add nothing to any discussion ad should be banned from at discussion of race and racism.You don't study this issue. This guy does.

In the case of college admissions, research reveals that standardized test scores may not measure real merit and their relation to an applicant's future performance is questionable. High school grades are a better reflection of college grades than SAT scores in both selective and non-selective colleges, but neither measure important attributes such as perseverance, motivation and interpersonal skills. Wilson said that while standardized tests should not be abandoned, they should be given less weight and considered alongside an applicant's initiative, leadership qualities, the ability to overcome personal hardship, honors and awards, among other criteria.

William Julius Wilson Speaks on Affirmative Opportunity

William Julius Wilson Speaks on Affirmative Opportunity at Hakim Lecture

 

[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.

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.

I took SATs in 1969. I don't recall cramming anything, nor anyone who did. We went in cold with what we had in our heads.

Not everybody is you and your 2 friends. People do actually cram for that test.

 

[DGS49]

The SAT score is a measure of a student's potential to do well in college. It is not a predictor of college success, as many people with great potential are lazy, and many people with limited potential work hard and succeed in college.

But over the years, the ETS has refined their test protocols, and MOST COLLEGES ARE CONVINCED THAT THE SCORES HAVE SOME VALIDITY. Obviously.

But the SAT is an embarrassment to certain people in the Education Industry. Students in the Humanities are generally people who have pathetic SAT scores. (This is particularly true of people who study Education). So you have "Professors" who have risen to the top of their fields and still have to deal with their low SAT scores, and they do something that is entirely predictable: They disparage the value and validity of SAT scores.

This has been going on for a very long time. If you want to get a High School Teacher fired up, mention the low average SAT scores of college students studying Education. Mention that Education is not even a legitimate subject for study...like history, science, psychology, or even art.

The same thing applies to IQ. If I had a quarter for every time I've heard a sociology major rant about how meaningless IQ's are...I'd have a lot of quarters. Because sociology majors tend to have relatively low IQ's, even when they have Masters degrees or Doctorates.

 

[IM2]

The SAT score is a measure of a student's potential to do well in college. It is not a predictor of college success, as many people with great potential are lazy, and many people with limited potential work hard and succeed in college.

But over the years, the ETS has refined their test protocols, and MOST COLLEGES ARE CONVINCED THAT THE SCORES HAVE SOME VALIDITY. Obviously.

But the SAT is an embarrassment to certain people in the Education Industry. Students in the Humanities are generally people who have pathetic SAT scores. (This is particularly true of people who study Education). So you have "Professors" who have risen to the top of their fields and still have to deal with their low SAT scores, and they do something that is entirely predictable: They disparage the value and validity of SAT scores.

This has been going on for a very long time. If you want to get a High School Teacher fired up, mention the low average SAT scores of college students studying Education. Mention that Education is not even a legitimate subject for study...like history, science, psychology, or even art.

The same thing applies to IQ. If I had a quarter for every time I've heard a sociology major rant about how meaningless IQ's are...I'd have a lot of quarters. Because sociology majors tend to have relatively low IQ's, even when they have Masters degrees or Doctorates.

.Again, when the top of the line experts say SAT scores really aren't all that important those of us who haven' done the research need t o accept this instead f arguing how they must be. Apparently education is a legitimate study area. And if a person has a masters or Phd they have shown that IQ doesn't matter.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

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.

I took SATs in 1969. I don't recall cramming anything, nor anyone who did. We went in cold with what we had in our heads.

Not everybody is you and your 2 friends. People do actually cram for that test.

They did not in 1969. I don't recall there even being significant materials for such "cramming".

I didn't need them, myself. I learned the material the first time around.

 

[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.

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.

I took SATs in 1969. I don't recall cramming anything, nor anyone who did. We went in cold with what we had in our heads.

Not everybody is you and your 2 friends. People do actually cram for that test.

They did not in 1969. I don't recall there even being significant materials for such "cramming".

I didn't need them, myself. I learned the material the first time around.

I didn't cram in 1979. But that doesn't mean no one ever did.

 

[fncceo]

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.

Is everything about race? If you have to eliminate standarized testing to achieve racial equality in admissions then you're not making a good case for racial equality.

For as long as I remember, the message behind racial equality is that ALL races, colors, and ethnicity were equally capable of success given a level playing field.

You can't get playing field more level than standardized testing.

One thing to consider is that the programs that offer the best prep for SATs are expensive and kids who don't come from families who can afford that are at a disadvantage.

If we are actually going to have racial equality, our schools would be all equal, and they are not. They depend on the tax dollars of the school district, and kids of color usually live in poorer school districts. Kids of color are less likely to be able to pay for the materials or programs to cram for the SAT.

Poverty is an endless cycle that needs to change through education, but the first thing is to make all of our schools equal, across the country, with money and teaching. You can say we throw money at education w/o results, but that isn't true: we can all see how much better schools are in the more affluent areas.

Throwing money at schools is a good thing ... which is precisely why my daughter attended private school and university.

As for making schools 'equal', good luck bringing all schools down to a common denominator and ensuring a rapid expansion of the private school market.

How about you look at it as bringing all students up instead of the usual whitebread thinking of if blacks are made to have equal facilities it brings down whites. That's bullshit.

Is everything about race with you?

Silly question, of course it is.

 

[fncceo]

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.

Is everything about race? If you have to eliminate standarized testing to achieve racial equality in admissions then you're not making a good case for racial equality.

For as long as I remember, the message behind racial equality is that ALL races, colors, and ethnicity were equally capable of success given a level playing field.

You can't get playing field more level than standardized testing.

You are wrong according to the top sociologist in America and perhaps on earth.

In the case of college admissions, research reveals that standardized test scores may not measure real merit and their relation to an applicant's future performance is questionable. High school grades are a better reflection of college grades than SAT scores in both selective and non-selective colleges, but neither measure important attributes such as perseverance, motivation and interpersonal skills. Wilson said that while standardized tests should not be abandoned, they should be given less weight and considered alongside an applicant's initiative, leadership qualities, the ability to overcome personal hardship, honors and awards, among other criteria.

William Julius Wilson Speaks on Affirmative Opportunity

William Julius Wilson Speaks on Affirmative Opportunity at Hakim Lecture

.

Nothing Mr Wilson wrote contradicts my point. I never claimed that the SATs are a predictor of future success.

I said that standardised testing is a level playing field in that in that all students take the same exam regardless of race.

There has to be some non-subjective way for universities to chose students for admission. The least discriminatory tests must be standardised.