NO SATs or ACTs???? | Page 3 | The Boneyard

NO SATs or ACTs????

navery12 said:
Paying someone to take the tests is an extreme example. SAT prep classes are another way the privilege materializes
Expand ...
You realize any theoretical cultural deviation that exists between one class and another over the application of the Pythagorean to a triangle is more than made up by the SAT admission score disparities between groups. Could you imagine if sports where played that way? Sorry coach, you’re team isn’t diverse enough so, you start down 24-0. Them short kids slower kids will never aspire to play basketball if they don’t get a fair shot to win.
 
XLCenterFan said:
Even the wording on these tests can be skewed towards the wealthy, as noted by @Travelman32.


For example: I come from the suburbs and I have worked with people who grew up in the city. There were instances where both of us were ignorant to what the other was saying, or words that we were using. The kids from the city didn't know what pine sap was, because they had no trees around. They called it "sticky tree juice." They didn't know what poison ivy was - they had never had it. One of them had never heard the word jacuzzi. Conversely, there were many words and terms that they used that I didn't know. It doesn't make either of us less smart, it just means we know different things, and tests really need to account for that. Is this an intelligence/ability test, or just a contest to see how many words and math formulas one can remember?
Expand ...
Does math change from cities to suburbs?

You are also talking about extremes. Comparing people who can afford to spend a million dollars paying for collegE scams to someone that has to worry about getting shot walking home.

What about the millions of kids from avg backgrounds? Parents work blue collar jobs and they happen to have really smart kids that won’t get noticed because there’d is no sat so no one notices the kid from butfck Texas. But if that kid scores in the 99th percentile schools will notice.
 
NJHusky said:
Does math change from cities to suburbs?

You are also talking about extremes. Comparing people who can afford to spend a million dollars paying for collegE scams to someone that has to worry about getting shot walking home.

What about the millions of kids from avg backgrounds? Parents work blue collar jobs and they happen to have really smart kids that won’t get noticed because there’d is no sat so no one notices the kid from butfck Texas. But if that kid scores in the 99th percentile schools will notice.
Expand ...
You're missing the point, the kid from butfck Texas can take the SAT, score in the 99th percentile and send it to schools. It's being changed to optional, not eliminated
 
BlueDogs said:
Could you imagine if sports where played that way? Sorry coach, you’re team isn’t diverse enough so, you start down 24-0. Them short kids slower kids will never aspire to play basketball if they don’t get a fair shot to win.
Expand ...
I'm playing golf on Monday with a buddy who is better than me. He gives me strokes to make it a fair match. If only life were handicapped like golf we would have some more equity across the board.
 
XLCenterFan said:
You're gonna be banging your head against the wall for awhile @navery12. He will always miss the point.
Expand ...
If objective measures are missing the point then yes I missed the point. People here are suggesting eliminating the sat is a good because they are dying. My point is they are a measure. My assumption is that smart kids will do better on those tests. I’m not an educator.

So next time you cross a bridge I hope it’s not designed by an engineer that couldn’t score above 400 on the math section of the sat. There are folks that are book smart, some that are more savvy with business and others that excel in athletics. Why is it ok to test a kid in the 40 yd dash but not ok to see if he can solve a quadratic equation?
 
.-.
NJHusky said:
My assumption is that smart kids will do better on those tests
Expand ...
You're ignoring how people become "smart." People take these tests around the age of 17, and the structure that they came up in will allow them to do better or worse. You're also conflating "high scores on a test" with "smart." Some of the smartest people I know didn't go to college and couldn't pass a test. Some of the dumbest people I know did well on tests and went to college. Also, the score on a test should be considered in relation to where someone started. In my opinion, a kid from an underserved community that scores just below a kid from a privileged community is WAY smarter. They also probably work harder and can handle some adversity. If I'm doing admitting or hiring, I'm taking that kid.
 
Last edited:
XLCenterFan said:
You're ignoring how people become "smart." You're also conflating "high scores on a test" with "smart." Some of the smartest people I know didn't go to college and couldn't pass test. Some of the dumbest people I know did well on tests and went to college.
Expand ...
And I'm definitely in the second group. Killed the ACT and SAT but many here can attest to the fact I'm dumb
 
Standardized tests tend to focus more on crystallized intelligence (Gc in the literature), which is absolutely skewed by external factors. These tests do show some ability to predict which kids will do well in college, which is a whole other problem- unless you’re cool with just writing off tons of kids with unlimited potential.

There’s a lot to this topic but I mainly wanted to comment because some people confuse me with the other NJ and I do NOT want that to happen here.
 
Standardized tests such as SAT's also demonstrate to a degree the quality of pre-college education someone is getting. I went to school in CT and college in NYC. CT overall had an exceptionally rated education system but NY State was better. High School students wanting to take college courses had to take a standardized test for every subject (Regents) in addition to their own high school testing. My older sisters went to NY grammar schools and when our family moved to CT they were about a year ahead in all their classes. The majority of the students I went to college with grew up in NY and I can tell you they were well prepared whether from upstate, Long Island or NYC. I personally believe that standardized testing measures objective learning (reading, writing arithmetic) vs subjective learning (opinions, feelings etc.) I did not do particularly well on SAT tests though I had high scores on aptitude etc. (Iowa tests). I went to private schools and my parents were OK with me getting B's when I was capable of doing better. I had a teacher in college once say in terms of the business world I was about to enter: "you don't really know much when you get out of college but if you apply yourself in college you are very good at learning when you get out". This is what will help you in the real world. Of course this does not apply to subjects like science if that is your career. Overall, being required to learn how to learn is incredibly valuable because it allows you to apply your education to all kind of areas in your life. LOL, I am now learning a lot about health as my age is showing me its effects over time. In summary, standardized tests are failing because of a lack of discipline in schools and in homes. Not the kids fault. It's systemic. Getting rid of the tests will allow universities to enable education systems that are failing to continue to fail instead of glaringly pointing out which schools are not performing up to standards. One last comment. I taught in a religious ed class a few years ago and a kid came in with his hat on and soda and doughnuts. I asked him if he did that when he went to school. Answer: yes. Cased closed. Education should send the message that what we are learning here is very important for their future and ours; not "whatever."
 
XLCenterFan said:
In my opinion, a kid from an underserved community that scores just below a kid from a privileged community is WAY smarter. They also probably work harder and can handle some adversity. If I'm doing admitting or hiring, I'm taking that kid.
Expand ...
I agree 1000%
 
.-.
NJHusky said:
So every priveleged kid does well on std tests? Didn’t know that. Figured there would be a range of scores. Is the correlation linear between level of privilege and scores? So the top 1% $$ Are all in the top 1% of test scores?
Expand ...
Having the discretionary income to have a tutor work with a kid to familiarize him or her with the test is definitely an advantage. That said, there are plenty of kids at all socio-economic levels who can do well without that.

[/old_guy-rant] I feel like were were more self-reliant back in the day. If you wanted to do well on the SAT, you'd just figure it out yourself. I also think we'd be less like to panic during the test. You'd just go and take it.
[/end old_guy-rant]
 
navery12 said:
And I'm definitely in the second group. Killed the ACT and SAT but many here can attest to the fact I'm dumb
Expand ...
There's definitely a mindset that helps on the test independent of intelligence and accumulated knowledge. It's like being a shooter and being able to ignore your past misses and keep on shooting. I'd guess it is an ability to compartmentalize and maybe time management?
 
XLCenterFan said:
Not all of them. But it’s more likely as household income increases. I would be willing to bet that there is a statistically significant correlation between household income and performance on standardized tests. I would also be willing to bet that if you set up a regression model with “performance on standardized tests” as the dependant variable, and controlled for household income, educational attainment of parents, and zip code, that you would account for a majority of the variance in scores on standardized tests.
Expand ...

If you take away objective standards, schools will be left with "who you know" as a criteria for admission.
 
TheChamps990411 said:
How so?
Expand ...

My 2 smartest friends in high school had very comparable grades/GPAs. One was from a very low income single parent household. One was from a very rich family who paid over $4K in test prep. The first friend finished in ~85th percentile while the friend who had extensive prep finished in the 99th percentile. Very similar intelligence levels, one could afford test prep and one couldn’t...
 
Last edited:
husky429 said:
Hearing people talk about how appealing a kids "extracurriculars" are is a problem to me. It's revolting (the system, not any individuals). Kids shouldn't be doing clubs or sports only to boost a resume. Some parents treat kids like college admissions machines.
Expand ...
Colleges look at how involved and passionate you are in an extracurricular. They would rather see you getting heavily involved and take a leadership position in 1 or 2 things you like rather than a long list of extracurriculars just for the sake of having them on a resume. It makes sense. They want kids who will be future leaders and involved in things they like. They say there is a correlation between that and being successful in your career after college.
 
.-.
XLCenterFan said:
I'm playing golf on Monday with a buddy who is better than me. He gives me strokes to make it a fair match. If only life were handicapped like golf we would have some more equity across the board.
Expand ...
No. You are not equal in skill. That isn’t equity. In fact if you cover the handicap, you’ve won nothing but the delusion you did. Apply that to medical school slots, law school, engineers, fighter pilots, etc. You want the most capable and skilled. Not feel goodism.
 
Question.

What exactly can you learn in an SAT prep course that you can't gain by taking one abbreviated sample test? (I was of an era when these prep courses did not exist.)

Besides answering as many questions correctly as possible in the given time, what other arcane knowledge is being transferred in these courses that somehow trumps one's prior ten years of formal learning?
 
lne001 said:
Question.

What exactly can you learn in an SAT prep course that you can't gain by taking one abbreviated sample test? (I was of an era when these prep courses did not exist.)

Besides answering as many questions correctly as possible in the given time, what other arcane knowledge is being transferred in these courses that somehow trumps one's prior ten years of formal learning?
Expand ...

Types of test questions. Common questions. Study techniques. How to "read" the questions.

You haven't taken a standardized test in a LONG LONG time if you think that just knowing material from class is going to cut it.
 
husky429 said:
Types of test questions. Common questions. Study techniques. How to "read" the questions.
Expand ...

Study techniques have nothing to do with taking an SAT test, but with what you have been doing for the past ten or more years. Types of questions (really the same as common questions) can be gleaned from a practice test in fifteen minutes. I have no clue what "how to read the question" means.

husky429 said:
You haven't taken a standardized test in a LONG LONG time if you think that just knowing material from class is going to cut it.
Expand ...

Sorry, this is hilarious. What else exactly would I need besides a strong understanding of Math and the English language? That is all I had in 1964 in order to do quite well on the SAT's.
 
Our youngest daughter is still pissed she missed one question on her math SAT... That was 6 years ago.
She's got a Finance Masters, a fiance, a nice house in the hills of CT and a nice job now. But she still brings up that SAT 770. LOL
 
.-.
navery12 said:
You're clearly missing the point, whether it's intentional or not I have no idea. Nobody is saying only privileged kids can do well on the SAT. Access to better resources gives people advantages in so many aspects of life, it's not just testing
Expand ...

Sure. So? I don’t have a problem with that.
 
lne001 said:
Study techniques have nothing to do with taking an SAT test, but with what you have been doing for the past ten or more years. Types of questions (really the same as common questions) can be gleaned from a practice test in fifteen minutes. I have no clue what "how to read the question" means.



Sorry, this is hilarious. What else exactly would I need besides a strong understanding of Math and the English language? That is all I had in 1964 in order to do quite well on the SAT's.
Expand ...

Honestly you just need to do a little bit of research on the subject. Your experience 56 years ago is *probably* not relevant any more, I daresay. Also... one persons experience is irrelevant anyways. We're talking about the effects on millions of kids.

I do this for a living. I taught SAT prep as a second job until I got enough extra 1:1 coaching clients in the off season. I've done the research. I have a masters degree in education admin.

Yes, what you've done for 10 years is important--duh. That's why 4th graders don't take the SAT. You think SAT prep companies are staying in business if they can't improve scores? That's the entire business model man.

There are a heck of a lot of kids with fine math and reading ability. The courses are deisgned to get there scores to the next level
 
JimHurley said:
My 2 smartest friends in high school had very comparable grades/GPAs. One was from a very low income single parent household. One was from a very rich family who paid over $4K in test prep. The first friend finished in ~85th percentile while the friend who had extensive prep finished in the 99th percentile. Very similar intelligence levels, one could afford test prep and one couldn’t...
Expand ...
I myself also noticed a big difference in the quality of education between my nephews who live in Meriden and those who live in Somers. Unfortunate.
 
husky429 said:
Honestly you just need to do a little bit of research on the subject. Your experience 56 years ago is *probably* not relevant any more, I daresay. Also... one persons experience is irrelevant anyways. We're talking about the effects on millions of kids.
Expand ...

Honestly, I asked a simple question, which you answered poorly so I followed up. Your above response is even poorer yet. I feel sorry for your students if this is the best you can do, and clearly understand why teaching is a job you can handle.

husky429 said:
I do this for a living. I taught SAT prep as a second job until I got enough extra 1:1 coaching clients in the off season. I've done the research. I have a masters degree in education admin.
Expand ...

All this proves is that you are biased and wasted the time you spent on a MA (excluding the automatic pay increase teachers are given).

husky429 said:
Yes, what you've done for 10 years is important--duh. That's why 4th graders don't take the SAT.
Expand ...

Then it seems you should be giving it the overwhelming importance in test results that it deserves.

husky429 said:
You think SAT prep companies are staying in business if they can't improve scores? That's the entire business model man.
Expand ...

Yes, that is exactly what I believe, man. It is just another in a long line of scams perpetrated by scammers on ignorant and desperate people.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,214
Messages
4,557,452
Members
10,443
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom