So the SAT has some value after all
- Thread starter GrimReaper
- Start date
can they reset it to the standards it had before the various dumbing downs?
Which mean next to nothing. The value of the test is in its ability to measure the relative preparedness and likelihood of success of applicants in a discrete class. Comparing current applicants to those of years ago is meaningless to an admissions officer.
It's not an achievement test. There are any number of those used by researchers, states and school districts.
I graduated high school in 1978. One of my classmates was a really good student. He got a 1540 and was devastated. He couldn't believe that he got anything wrong. We tried to tell him that was a good score, but he couldn't accept imperfection. Whenever someone mentions the SAT, I see him lamenting his imperfect score.
Last edited:
Even if he scored 1600, there would be no way of knowing whether he'd answered all of the questions correctly. A lower score confirms that he didn't.
It will always have value because I outscored my sister and she's still sore about it.
I still remember receiving my SAT score in the mail. It included a hand-written note from the head of The College Board thanking me for a good laugh.
I outscored my sister too- but she graduated Magna and I didn't- so she got the last laugh.
Ha - my brother always outscored me on everything. He became 1st in his class in law school. But I became wealthy!
Last edited:
I didn't apply myself in high school until my senior year so my GPA wasn't good. I also got an F for selling my bug collection. The kid who bought it didn't even rearrange them. Somehow I did great on my SAT. Top 5% math and top 20% verbal. I remember getting called to the guidance counselor office and being asked how this could be possible.I still remember receiving my SAT score in the mail. It included a hand-written note from the head of The College Board thanking me for a good laugh.
I took the SATs in 1969. Never got the results. I assume it was 1600 and they were astonished. They probably figured I cheated, so they held the results.
Yours sounds similar to my own. Our guidance counselor told me he couldn't help but wonder what my score would have been had I actually applied myself more in school. Being the smart *** I was at the time, I said something to the effect that none of that mattered too much then. What a jerk I was (or maybe still am).
I didn't make a smart *** remark to my guidance counselor but I later dated her daughter. She was polite but it was easy to tell that she thought her daughter could do better than me.
Get in line. The bs I threw around back in the day, I cringe to recollect.
I also graduated in 1978! I got a 1600…but I took it 2x!
The SAT is, by far, the most effective single predictive tool for student success - especially for the "tier 2" schools, like a PSU (more so than for the "elites", the Ivies and what not).
And that has become even more dramatic - has become even MORE strongly the top predictor - in recent years, as grade inflation has gone absolutely crazy in secondary schools.
Are there other useful data points and considerations? Sure. And they also should have a "place at the table".
FWIW: The data at PSU since going "test optional" are proof positive. Clear, significant, and impactful between those who do - and those who don't - submit test scores prior to admission (and, as always, the parameters for those with higher vs lower scores)
Non-elite schools that have dropped the standardized test score from being a PART of the acceptance process (they never have been, and never should be, the only metric) do so for 1 or more of 5 reasons:
1) To maximize applications
2) To allow for admission of more (lower quality) prospective students without having it reflected on their statistics
3) To increase revenue
4) To allow them to "social engineer" their acceptances
5) To make a political/ideological virtue statement
Period. End of f-ing story.
PSU Administration continues to refuse to even consider re-instituting required test score submission - even as a tracking mechanism, if not an acceptance metric (despite their never-ending lullabies about being "data driven"
)
They refuse for, probably, all five of the reasons listed above. It's all BS.
And that has become even more dramatic - has become even MORE strongly the top predictor - in recent years, as grade inflation has gone absolutely crazy in secondary schools.
Are there other useful data points and considerations? Sure. And they also should have a "place at the table".
FWIW: The data at PSU since going "test optional" are proof positive. Clear, significant, and impactful between those who do - and those who don't - submit test scores prior to admission (and, as always, the parameters for those with higher vs lower scores)
Non-elite schools that have dropped the standardized test score from being a PART of the acceptance process (they never have been, and never should be, the only metric) do so for 1 or more of 5 reasons:
1) To maximize applications
2) To allow for admission of more (lower quality) prospective students without having it reflected on their statistics
3) To increase revenue
4) To allow them to "social engineer" their acceptances
5) To make a political/ideological virtue statement
Period. End of f-ing story.
PSU Administration continues to refuse to even consider re-instituting required test score submission - even as a tracking mechanism, if not an acceptance metric (despite their never-ending lullabies about being "data driven"
)They refuse for, probably, all five of the reasons listed above. It's all BS.
Misses the forest for the trees. Argues as if the the test score is the be-all and end-all. It's not,and shouldn't be. It's another piece of information to consider in the contest of a larger application profile.
Tell me about his parents. Did they drive him to be a perfectionist?
That’s the usual source.
The SAT is an artifact of white, colonialist meritocratic supremacy.
The world is moving on from the chains of selective advancement and recognition.
Last edited:
"many colleges have dropped their SAT and ACT requirements. But now that decision is creating problems – because the tests contain real information about students’ likelihood of doing well in college."
This shouldn't be a surprise
Exactly. Had he scored 1600, he would have assumed perfection. Believe me.
My uncle got a 1580. They thought he cheated so they made him take it again and he got a 1600. Then he slacked off and got an MIT degree with a masters in 3 years.
Ahhh. It’s a topic I actually know a great deal about. (D3 level in charge of student data)
Without going too far in the weeds I’ll just say you are technically ‘mostly right’
The SAT is a GREAT predictor. Probably one ofthe best of what I am allowed to report and better than GPA. We are test optional too.
however if you look at the numbers and run it through a predictive AI model there are over 10 factors that place above it. However they are ALL Socioeconomic and race based, therefore we can’t look at them to make an actual decision. (Note this analysis did help us find one of our sports teams was Horrid at retaining kids for a long time and no one had noticed) for those that care: some things like your high school’s rep and fafsa affinity are scored and weighted and can get you most of the way there…
the ‘troll’ comment about the SAT being racially biased isn’t completely wrong’ either. And the data backs it up….its just they don’t retain and they (low socioeconomic status) don’t graduate at the same rates… sad on many levels.
Last edited:
My beautiful wife scored a 1600 on the SAT and missed one question on the LSAT (still argues about the wording of the question btw). Clearly I out kicked my coverage.
Was applying to VA Tech in addition to other schools. VA Tech required the ACT. Was out late at a party the night before. About halfway through taking the ACT I had a pounding headache. I got up and left the test and decided I wasn’t going to VA Tech.
Last edited:
