SAT no longer standardized

[Apocalypse]

Still, the math thing doesn't bother me as much of the writing. There is too much of a chance for someone to get screwed over in all times he or she takes the SAT.

[SnowFire]

Yah. All it takes are 3-4 questions on an Algebra II level. People who don't know the course can miss 'em and if they do well elsewhere, will still do fine (can easily get a 650+, certainly). But I agree with DanS, for those who have taken some REAL advanced math, which is getting more and more common these days (I've heard of HS freshman taking Calc I!), the SAT is beyond super-easy for Math.

I wonder why they're getting rid of analogies though. They are an excellent measure of vocabulary, and were always the hardest and my favorite part of the Writing test.

And I can't be in favor of the Writing section either. Take the freakin' SATII writing, lots of colleges want it anyway. That way the SAT itself isn't polluted.

[Shi Huangdi]

One of the biggest effects these revisions will have has not yet been mentioned. Reading now counts for 800 points on the test, Math counts for 800 points, and writing counts for another 800 points for a total possible score of 2400. This means that English skills now count for twice as much as Math skills. It is possible that colleges could give the math portion more weight to make up for this, however this seems unlikely due to the colleges' belief in writing being very important and that nobody has suggested such an approach so far. This will of course help women since they tend to be better at English skills, but I think this is unfair to people who score better with math(even though they will be helped with the addition of Algebra II)

I also think a writing test would be very problematic. The thing is you cannot test someone's writing skills in 50-60 minutes. Good writing should be a slow process, usually requiring revisions and proofreading. Writing is also generally done on topics which the writer is familiar with or has studied. The writing that you do for the SAT is about very vauge topics- one example topic used by a College board official was: "Humankind has had plenty of great mistakes, but also many great moments. I think one of the great moments was _________"- and you wouldn't know the topic beforehand, you are just supposed to write about one of humanity's great moments from the time you read the essay question. This type of writing under pressure is completely different from normal writing.

What is worse is that this type of writing can also be coached for rather easily, and appropriately the test prep companies are expecting to making tons of money due to this change. ETS essays are graded by means of a rubric, and test-prep people can help you fit the rubric's demand. While it is hard for a test prep course to make you a better writer all of a sudden, in can make you a lot better at writing under pressure to fufill the specific requirements of a rubric to inflate your scores. And of course, the wealthier you are, the better test-prep you can afford. Plus, since the test is no long objective, the more times you take it(wealthier people usually take it more times as they can afford it), the better the chance of getting the reader who grades easy.

I also don't like the addition of Algebra II to the exam. Although many on this board have complained that Algebra I makes it too easy, the reality is that the vast majority of test takers do not get abover 700, so there is sufficent gradation. By testing basic math but having harder versions of those questions aptitude can be better tested. Also, many students who aren't as advanced don't take Algebra II until their senior year. because the SAT is usually taken Junior year or the very beginning of senior year, those students who are already on the math track to take Algebra II senior year are going to be at a severe disadvantage.

Removing analogies is also not a good idea IMO, because analogies are a good way of testing vocabulary, as well as testing a studen't ability to understand the English language and language in general.

[Apocalypse]

There have been many complaints about the analogies. I've been able to get pretty good with them, but I can understand people's problem with them.

[Ramo]

Excellent first step!

But we should push for raising the difficulty of the test further. Not allow smarter kids to show off, but to force our school systems into raise their standards.

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Ramo
Excellent first step!

But we should push for raising the difficulty of the test further. Not allow smarter kids to show off, but to force our school systems into raise their standards.

This won't raise standards. Like I said, it removes standardization. It screws too many people over.

[Ramo]

Only because the test is so crappy. Same goes for most other standardized tests.

[Apocalypse]

The test was fine. It accomplishes the job. You need a way to compare people on a level playing field. A person's GPA and class rank can very greatly depending on the school. It would be wrong to use those alone to judge people.

[Ramo]

No, I'm not saying we should do away with standardized tests, but that we should fix the ones we have by drastically increasing the difficulty of them.

[Ramo]

Many of our standardized tests have helped to dumb down school curriculums.

[Apocalypse]

Drastically increasing the difficulty would mean many more people would get really low scores. I don't believe these test dumbed down cirriculums. If you want to make the test harder, just make the questions harder. Don't add in horrible things like writing.

[Ramo]

Drastically increasing the difficulty would mean many more people would get really low scores.

Yep. Which doesn't hurt the students because the test is standardized. It only provides incentives for teachers and administrators to fix our education system.

I don't believe these test dumbed down cirriculums.

They forced teachers to focus on simplistic material, since school funding is based upon standardized tests.

Don't add in horrible things like writing.

I had the math part in mind... I don't like the writing part either.

[Shi Huangdi]

The SAT isn't meant to set the guidleines for school's curriculum, Ramo. The SAT is merely meant to test a student's aptitude. for testing of more advanced subjects, you have the AP exams and the SAT IIs. And because college administrators do like to see students take the hardest classes available, people taking AP classes is becoming more common and so people take harder classes that way.

[Victor Galis]

Algebra II is the highest or second highest math many people take. That is why I called it advanced. If people want to show that they are good in math, they can take the Math SAT and AP Calculus.

-Both ridiculously easy tests. It was about damn time they put in some decent math into the SAT.

I can't say I agree with the writing section as it can be entirely too subjective.

[Victor Galis]

The SAT isn't meant to set the guidleines for school's curriculum, Ramo. The SAT is merely meant to test a student's aptitude. for testing of more advanced subjects, you have the AP exams and the SAT IIs. And because college administrators do like to see students take the hardest classes available, people taking AP classes is becoming more common and so people take harder classes that way.

-Yes, but what if your school doesn't offer that many APs? Having AP tests cover for the failures of the SAT doesn't work that well, because people like me who had the opportunity to take up to 12 AP classes (I preffered to take German V and Multivariable over 2 easier APs) will be at a definite advantage over people whose schools offered say 2-3 AP classes.