More than anything, college admissions and college counseling professionals want to see the redesigned SAT do a better job at predicting academic success in college. For decades, SAT scores have not delivered in providing colleges with credible data to suggest who will succeed and who won't on their college campuses. If we were to apply the same SAT metric to the predictive nature of the old test, the College Board would score in the lowest percentile each year because high scores alone do not necessarily correlate with high academic performance in college. But until we have more data (which could take years to accumulate), we won't know how effective the redesigned SAT is. Until then, millions of students will continue to be at the mercy of a testing company which has made a living out of marginalizing our youth instead of empowering them about their future.
Who gets a phone fixed these days?
Well, for one, phone companies.
When you damage your phone and it's under a repair contract, chances are that it will be replaced not with a new phone, but with a refurbished phone. And the phone that you turned in because it was damaged will be repaired and given to someone else.
If you buy a "warranty" of any type ... read the provisions carefully! You never know where your next phone is coming from or where your old phone went!
Well, for one, phone companies.
When you damage your phone and it's under a repair contract, chances are that it will be replaced not with a new phone, but with a refurbished phone. And the phone that you turned in because it was damaged will be repaired and given to someone else.
If you buy a "warranty" of any type ... read the provisions carefully! You never know where your next phone is coming from or where your old phone went!
1
Bad picture. The SAT does not have calculus...
If it did, and students did as well, we would probably be in a better place as a country.
If it did, and students did as well, we would probably be in a better place as a country.
2
The nit picking and griping about the redesigned SAT is the least of the College Board's concerns. They have also revamped their AP tests and only they and a handful of their sycophants seems to think for the better. I will put this in perspective. Both the AP Chemistry and AP Physics exams were revamped. If you took the AP Chemistry test last year and did not bring a calculator to the 'Free Response' section, you did not have much of a chance to pass. If you took the AP Physics test last year and did not bring a calculator to the 'Free Response' section, that was A-Okay! Yes, you didn't need a calculator to get a 5 on the AP physics exam. And the College Board thinks this is perfectly fine and in line with what colleges want. Now ask your children who in college taking a physics class if they need to actually do any calculations on their tests. They will look at you in absolute disbelief that you could think to ask them such a question. College Board tests are becoming more of a game and less of a tool to evaluate student academic proficiency. In the 1960's when Tom Lehrer described "New Math" as being more concerned about understanding what you are doing rather than getting the right answer, people laughed. The college board is having the last laugh now.
2
To Ed Bloom: neophyte pilots are not thrown behind the controls of a plane alone without getting 10-30 hours of flight time with an instructor. If they are flying a larger jet, that number increases significantly. A learner's permit is usually given before a driver's license. It is assumed the person will have some number of hours of teaching and driving before the test takes place. Even licensed drivers are trained further when they are driving a truck.
Throwing the SAT at people who haven't been properly prepared is throwing a 747 at a new pilot and wishing him godspeed.
Throwing the SAT at people who haven't been properly prepared is throwing a 747 at a new pilot and wishing him godspeed.
It's the cart before the horse. The first thing that needs to be decided is what it is we want the SAT test to predict. Only by knowing precisely what it is we want to learn from test results are we in any position to evaluate those results or even design an appropriate test. Whether the tests are "fair" or are an inappropriate impediment to a particular group can only be determined when we are clear about the purpose of the tests themselves.
2
“Who gets a phone fixed these days?” Millions of US households have telephones. Whether or not they get them repaired matters little to the question, or a student's understanding of the question.
It seems to me objections to the SAT are primarily related to what it does well - provide a benchmark so colleges can know which students know the material vs. those who's grade are inflated.
It seems to me objections to the SAT are primarily related to what it does well - provide a benchmark so colleges can know which students know the material vs. those who's grade are inflated.
Meh
I'm the head of a school and think this is all crazy. The SAT is a gatekeeping device that harms education. Anxiety over and preparing for the SAT, ACT and other tests detracts from the more important aspects of school. In the humanities, students should be reading, discussing, arguing, debating, romanticizing and taking risks. They should be deeply curious and look for dimensions of literature, history and critical analysis that others, including the dull architects of SAT questions, have never considered. The entire process of reading in order to intuit the "right" answer is anti-education and stultifying.
The reasons many students are not richly literate is that this same dumbing down is daily fare in the testing and accountability era. Preparing kids to do well on tests is educational malpractice and has the rather ironic consequence of insuring that kids will actually do less well on tests in the future.
The College Board is an unelected, self-appointed, unaccountable plague on education.
Bah!
I'm the head of a school and think this is all crazy. The SAT is a gatekeeping device that harms education. Anxiety over and preparing for the SAT, ACT and other tests detracts from the more important aspects of school. In the humanities, students should be reading, discussing, arguing, debating, romanticizing and taking risks. They should be deeply curious and look for dimensions of literature, history and critical analysis that others, including the dull architects of SAT questions, have never considered. The entire process of reading in order to intuit the "right" answer is anti-education and stultifying.
The reasons many students are not richly literate is that this same dumbing down is daily fare in the testing and accountability era. Preparing kids to do well on tests is educational malpractice and has the rather ironic consequence of insuring that kids will actually do less well on tests in the future.
The College Board is an unelected, self-appointed, unaccountable plague on education.
Bah!
4
you're right. if students are reading, discussing, arguing, etc.. etc.., in particular reading, and reading a lot, they won't have to worry about the SAT, it'll be a breeze.
guess what, kids are worried b/c they're not reading, and its not b/c they're doing SAT prep, its b/c they're on their iphones, playing sports, hanging out, doing things lots of kids do.
guess what, kids are worried b/c they're not reading, and its not b/c they're doing SAT prep, its b/c they're on their iphones, playing sports, hanging out, doing things lots of kids do.
3
I grew up in a poor Chicano barrio in South Texas, so it took a minor miracle for me to to get a diploma without dropping out or joining a gang. Yet I ended up getting into Rice University, an elite private school.
How did that happen? Two big reasons:
1) Spanish is my first language, if not for a Filipino nun in kindergarten using bilingual educational techniques before it was a thing I would not have learned English well.
I ended up going to public school for first grade, I was tested as reading at 3rd grade level in 1st grade.
2) South Texas is hot, I spent a lot a time in our local public library reading because of the great air conditioning (this was in the late 60s-early 70s).
I did not waste time watching TV or playing sports because these activities really do not help with your academic development. In 8th grade I tested at the 11 grade level.
The result? This native Spanish speaker tested at 97% on the verbal (English) part of the SAT.
Your kids could also do this if they learned that "Reading is Fundamental". And if they were not such coddled and lazy "special snowflakes".
It is sad how many native English speakers speak more poorly than me. And that they know almost nothing about math and science, logic and reason.
Common core is a good thing. Created by the right it has been crucified by the right. Standardized testing is a good thing. It is not a problem in other countries.
Given this is it surprising that the GOP has so many voting for them?
How did that happen? Two big reasons:
1) Spanish is my first language, if not for a Filipino nun in kindergarten using bilingual educational techniques before it was a thing I would not have learned English well.
I ended up going to public school for first grade, I was tested as reading at 3rd grade level in 1st grade.
2) South Texas is hot, I spent a lot a time in our local public library reading because of the great air conditioning (this was in the late 60s-early 70s).
I did not waste time watching TV or playing sports because these activities really do not help with your academic development. In 8th grade I tested at the 11 grade level.
The result? This native Spanish speaker tested at 97% on the verbal (English) part of the SAT.
Your kids could also do this if they learned that "Reading is Fundamental". And if they were not such coddled and lazy "special snowflakes".
It is sad how many native English speakers speak more poorly than me. And that they know almost nothing about math and science, logic and reason.
Common core is a good thing. Created by the right it has been crucified by the right. Standardized testing is a good thing. It is not a problem in other countries.
Given this is it surprising that the GOP has so many voting for them?
9
". . . speak more poorly than I." A hiccup in your excellent English training,
1
In Elementary school (yes I'm older), I excelled in Math. But beginning in 6th grade, I began to fail. I believe it was due in large part because my father was a College Calculus professor, and it all just psyched me out. I always had trouble with math questions. But now, I understand that Math is a language, and I wish I had kept it up. I took the test fully expecting I would fail, but amazingly I scored 100%! Of course I took four pages to write out and perform my equations, but it was FUN. I approve the improvements.
I graduated high school in Germany 30 years ago, mixed performance, repeated a class because I didn't care enough and too busy being an anxious and rebellious teenager in middle school, then pulled myself together the last 3 years it mattered and got the highest GPA of that year in our school. We don't have SAT's but state-wide finals in several subjects that determine our averages to get into university.
Never looked at the SAT before – did the 5 sample questions in a few minutes all correctly, and have to say I was shocked that SAT math questions were this easy. I haven't had to do this kind of math since school and remember my math final being so much harder than this. No longer surprised why US students do poorly in international comparisons.
Never looked at the SAT before – did the 5 sample questions in a few minutes all correctly, and have to say I was shocked that SAT math questions were this easy. I haven't had to do this kind of math since school and remember my math final being so much harder than this. No longer surprised why US students do poorly in international comparisons.
19
Remember that the SAT has to deliver a "Quasi-Normal Curve" of scores
to the Colleges.
The easiest way to achieve this is to rigidly limit the time on any section
of the Test, provide "trick answers" that "sure seem right at the time" and
words/sentences they know that most students will misunderstand.
So if you can afford Test Prep, learn to keep moving through the test,
avoid the "trick answers" you will do better than most. Are you more
intelligent, moral, thoughtful than other applicants - hard to tell, but
the parents of the elite are happy with the SAT and that, in the end,
is all that matters.
to the Colleges.
The easiest way to achieve this is to rigidly limit the time on any section
of the Test, provide "trick answers" that "sure seem right at the time" and
words/sentences they know that most students will misunderstand.
So if you can afford Test Prep, learn to keep moving through the test,
avoid the "trick answers" you will do better than most. Are you more
intelligent, moral, thoughtful than other applicants - hard to tell, but
the parents of the elite are happy with the SAT and that, in the end,
is all that matters.
4
have an audio alternative. but mastering language is critical to any student. nobody gets anywhere ion this world without language.
2
I'm not sure what the real issue here is. Most students will get into SOME schools. They may not all get into Yale or Pomona or Carleton or Washington U., but they will get in somewhere.
You don't get into Northwestern, U Chicago, or Kenyon just by wanting it or expending effort.
Elite schools are for elite candidates.
I believe in education for everybody, but that doesn't mean elite education for everybody.
Not everybody who wants a job at Goldman Sachs or a tenure track job at Emory U. is going to get one.
America is about equal opportunity for advancement through competition.
You don't get into Northwestern, U Chicago, or Kenyon just by wanting it or expending effort.
Elite schools are for elite candidates.
I believe in education for everybody, but that doesn't mean elite education for everybody.
Not everybody who wants a job at Goldman Sachs or a tenure track job at Emory U. is going to get one.
America is about equal opportunity for advancement through competition.
21
I personally found the five math questions exceedingly simple, as I answered all of them correctly. I read a follow up article about the revised test where a few readers mocked the questions because they had so little to do with the real world. I feel they miss the point. This test will never make everyone happy, but the fact remains that a uniform standard is an important tool to evaluate applicants. Of course those who don't do well will always create a scapegoat and an amorphous excuse.
12
I have found as an instructor in a community college that students rarely read a question and understand what is being asks and what is given in the questions. Most student live on multiple choice which is boon to an instructor who has to grade the student's work and that's pretty much the state of the educational system in the US. Students are not required to think and reason but to memorize answers.
13
When I was in high school Algebra II, in 1991, I told my teacher that I did not understand. She told me, "you don't need to understand; you only need to memorize." I said, "Well then, give me the answers to the final exam & I'll memorize them!" She never did help me understand and I had to repeat that class the following year.
4
Our 11th graders in Connecticut will be the first to take this in-vetted, in-tested test to help our state keep federal education dollars. Insane. This test should be declared invalid until it has endured at least a year of testing and updates. I hope no great child is kept from his/her dreams because this experiment failed.
2
In = Un. My apologies for my bad editing
Everything in this world (outside of academic mathematics) requires comprehending a problem that is explained in words and with context. If you can't take a situation and break it down into solvable problems, you will not succeed in college or a meaningful career (not job, career). Sorry, but that's how it is.
34
Why don't we have only subject SATs to gauge mastery in the subject a student is interested in and an IQ test. That would allow colleges to determine potential via the IQ test and hardwork/ discipline in school via the subject SATs. Different tests are needed for kids with different interests and aptitudes. Nobody needs to be good at everything. For example,the math section in the general SATs are too easy for math kids who max out on the math section but may struggle with the reading comprehension section. They are good enough in reafing/writing for the degree/career they want to pursue but the scores may prevent them from going to the college of their choice.
3
there was a point in history when it was thought that reading widely was the cornerstone to cultivation and sophistication. Back then, people thought a familiarity with Shakespeare, Milton, Henry James, Marcel Proust, James Joyce, Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, Freud, and others was an essential part of education. That notion was popular as recently as 1990.
9
It is very simple actually, reading is the key to all knowledge, at least to begin with, so read more and understand.
13
The Key should be what is needed to be tested for students entering colleges, not who is doing well. I do not know if ETS has statistics to show which format is better to predict student performance in colleges.
One problem with the algebra questions.
Not much algebra!
Not much algebra!
8
I was a lazy student. I always aced standard tests - particularly the SAT, and later the GRE. Their simply-constructed questions and multiple-choice format let me use logic and probability to maximize scores, and the fact that I had somehow grown up without text anxiety (which should be more of a focus in these articles) let me breeze to the highest percentiles.
I never performed academically at the level predicted by these tests, in high school, college or at the graduate level -- I did fairly well, but not outstanding. I'm very verbal, but not an aggressive thinker. If the redesign of the SAT demands more head-muscle in order to cope with the questions, and will therefore spread out the high-scorers more, that's a good development.
However, if it will penalize students who never learned to read adequately even more than before - because the schools don't work - that's not the fault of a testing system, it's the failure of the schools.
I never performed academically at the level predicted by these tests, in high school, college or at the graduate level -- I did fairly well, but not outstanding. I'm very verbal, but not an aggressive thinker. If the redesign of the SAT demands more head-muscle in order to cope with the questions, and will therefore spread out the high-scorers more, that's a good development.
However, if it will penalize students who never learned to read adequately even more than before - because the schools don't work - that's not the fault of a testing system, it's the failure of the schools.
8
The schools can do only so much if the student doesn't care.
Our 6 year old has gravitated to reading, which we started fostering when he was an infant. He loves writing, and when he's trying to figure out the spelling of a new word, he asks us, learns, and then moves on.
He's off the charts according to the school's reading skills tests. The school had nothing to do with his love and talent for reading and writing. Schools can help a struggling , but they are not miracle workers.
Kids from better educated, stabler households do better. Some people say it's due to wealth and privilege, but that complaint is a good example of mistaking correlation with causation. Kid from a poorer household can still do well if their parents are engaged and supportive.
Our 6 year old has gravitated to reading, which we started fostering when he was an infant. He loves writing, and when he's trying to figure out the spelling of a new word, he asks us, learns, and then moves on.
He's off the charts according to the school's reading skills tests. The school had nothing to do with his love and talent for reading and writing. Schools can help a struggling , but they are not miracle workers.
Kids from better educated, stabler households do better. Some people say it's due to wealth and privilege, but that complaint is a good example of mistaking correlation with causation. Kid from a poorer household can still do well if their parents are engaged and supportive.
2
What always has bothered me about standardized tests is that they place such a premium on speed. Suppose someone needs more time to read, think about, and correctly answer questions. In "the real world," couldn't such a person do very well? I think it is fine to give tough tests that evaluate the skills necessary to succeed in school and then later, in life. Reading, thinking, solving,...all are skills a person needs. Being able to read, think, solve problems in 15 minutes rather than in 45 minutes is not so important. So we do not need to get rid of tough questions with a lot of thinking and reading involved in the answers; just give the test takers plenty of time to answer at their own pace.
9
"just give the test takers plenty of time to answer at their own pace."
Quick, solve this critical problem in less than an hour or the company loses a million dollar contract!
Duh... I need more time.
Bye, bye million dollar contact.
If you can't read quickly, analyze data quickly, solve problems quickly there are real world consequences.
Dumbing down the SAT because Americans are lazy is one thing, it they are doing it to keep Americans stupid that is another.
But uncritical people are more compliant workers and better consumers so it is really no surprise that schools in the US are so bad.
And uncritical people fall more easily for demagoguery, which works to the advantage of the Republican Party.
I think the following article explains why the right hates science and scientists so much:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/20100...
For years I have been searching for an intelligent conservative to debate politics, to date I have not found one.
So I have come to the conclusion that it is a fool's errand.
Conservatives, dumbing down the educational system just so that your kids look like they actually learned something is a bad idea.
It is bad for your kids, even worse, it is bad for this country.
Corporations are suffering from short-term thinking, thinking only about the next quarter.
The last thing this country needs is more short-term thinking.
Quick, solve this critical problem in less than an hour or the company loses a million dollar contract!
Duh... I need more time.
Bye, bye million dollar contact.
If you can't read quickly, analyze data quickly, solve problems quickly there are real world consequences.
Dumbing down the SAT because Americans are lazy is one thing, it they are doing it to keep Americans stupid that is another.
But uncritical people are more compliant workers and better consumers so it is really no surprise that schools in the US are so bad.
And uncritical people fall more easily for demagoguery, which works to the advantage of the Republican Party.
I think the following article explains why the right hates science and scientists so much:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/20100...
For years I have been searching for an intelligent conservative to debate politics, to date I have not found one.
So I have come to the conclusion that it is a fool's errand.
Conservatives, dumbing down the educational system just so that your kids look like they actually learned something is a bad idea.
It is bad for your kids, even worse, it is bad for this country.
Corporations are suffering from short-term thinking, thinking only about the next quarter.
The last thing this country needs is more short-term thinking.
2
Circa 2006, I had a honors student, business major, who excelled in my junior and senior level university classes. I encountered him one day at the cafeteria with a crestfallen look about him. He just got his LSAT scores, he scored in the bottom 10%.
We talked a bit. He offered at one point he didn't even bubble his name in correctly; he continued: "I never do well on those types of tests." I asked if he had ever been evaluated for learning disabilities. He hadn't and did not know what the term even meant. A month or so later he showed up at my office. He was LD. He didn't get into his 1st choice law school, but another school took the "LD risk" with him. He graduated with honors, again. He served as an intern for a Florida Supreme Court justice, then later for a US Appeals Court justice.
He eventually entered the bar in NY and FL, then reporting to me ten years later, eventually climbed from a MNC division's compliance office to compliance officer to head of compliance for ASEAN operations. Circa 2015, he left the corporate world and now is a successful entrepreneur, alongside that, much happier.
One can draw their own conclusions.
We talked a bit. He offered at one point he didn't even bubble his name in correctly; he continued: "I never do well on those types of tests." I asked if he had ever been evaluated for learning disabilities. He hadn't and did not know what the term even meant. A month or so later he showed up at my office. He was LD. He didn't get into his 1st choice law school, but another school took the "LD risk" with him. He graduated with honors, again. He served as an intern for a Florida Supreme Court justice, then later for a US Appeals Court justice.
He eventually entered the bar in NY and FL, then reporting to me ten years later, eventually climbed from a MNC division's compliance office to compliance officer to head of compliance for ASEAN operations. Circa 2015, he left the corporate world and now is a successful entrepreneur, alongside that, much happier.
One can draw their own conclusions.
9
While I’d never want to tar all sufferers of dyslexia with the same brush, it’s been widely rumored that George W. Bush suffered from dyslexia, and coasted through school – as in life – largely on his privilege as a legacy.
Did dyslexia contribute to his lack of – and, in fact, contempt for – intellectual depth? I can’t say conclusively, but there’s no question that reading skills play a crucial role in success in higher education, and (for most of us) in life.
There’s no reason why those skills shouldn’t be evaluated as part of the admission process. Those with a learning disability should be able to show how they’ve worked to overcome it, and why they shouldn’t be judged on the basis of their test scores alone, just like everyone else.
Did dyslexia contribute to his lack of – and, in fact, contempt for – intellectual depth? I can’t say conclusively, but there’s no question that reading skills play a crucial role in success in higher education, and (for most of us) in life.
There’s no reason why those skills shouldn’t be evaluated as part of the admission process. Those with a learning disability should be able to show how they’ve worked to overcome it, and why they shouldn’t be judged on the basis of their test scores alone, just like everyone else.
10
The purpose of the wordier, redesigned SAT is to reduce the number of Asians in America's elite schools.
Some corporate CEOs and Wall Street financiers were complaining that some of their scions were being rejected.
Some corporate CEOs and Wall Street financiers were complaining that some of their scions were being rejected.
8
That assumes that immigrants can't read. If they can't, they're already doing poorly on the current SATs. If they can, they're already reading better than the non-immigrants.
2
Really? And you know this how? This comment represents about 70% of those I read on these pages. Paranoid. Unsubstantiated. Nonsense.
If I'm wrong about this, please give us some hard evidence To support your statement that CEOs and Wall St. Financiers are behind this change.
If I'm wrong about this, please give us some hard evidence To support your statement that CEOs and Wall St. Financiers are behind this change.
5
I immigrated from a third world country in Asia and got here in my ealry 20s. I got a 90th percentile score on my MCAT reading comprehension. People can make all the excuses that I might be one of the outliers. But guess what? I started horribly on the trial tests, so I practiced reading 4 hours everyday in the 2 months prior to the test. I even subcribed to this paper, around $5 for 2 months, to read more. Yes, people can make all the excuses for not wanting to prepare for tests. But at the end do not complain about not getting places in life.
34
Good for you! Practice makes perfect.
2
I immigrated from NYC to upstate NY and then to PA. In PA when taking the tests I always excelled in the reading and comprehension sections scoring in the 97th, 98th percentiles. In math I didn't fare so well scoring only in the mid to upper 80s.
I should have been a lawyer or history professor or writer of children's stories. I wound up as program analyst who speciality was technical and financial review of government IT projects. It was job heavily laden with math, statistics, algebra and calculus. I even have a master's certificate in financial management and a master's in public administration. That degree required heavy doses of statistics, research methods and advanced statistics. Amazingly I graduated with honors.
I'm now retired. I wish I had been the attorney. I still do financial math and one of my favorite pastimes is writing.
Go figure.
I also build with Legos, play with toy trains, abuse my clarinet audience and collect small native dolls from all over the world. Many of the latter are hand made.
Now, what is the SAT supposed to indicate? I also am teaching myself the guitar.
It would have been far better to read the entrails of monkey.
I should have been a lawyer or history professor or writer of children's stories. I wound up as program analyst who speciality was technical and financial review of government IT projects. It was job heavily laden with math, statistics, algebra and calculus. I even have a master's certificate in financial management and a master's in public administration. That degree required heavy doses of statistics, research methods and advanced statistics. Amazingly I graduated with honors.
I'm now retired. I wish I had been the attorney. I still do financial math and one of my favorite pastimes is writing.
Go figure.
I also build with Legos, play with toy trains, abuse my clarinet audience and collect small native dolls from all over the world. Many of the latter are hand made.
Now, what is the SAT supposed to indicate? I also am teaching myself the guitar.
It would have been far better to read the entrails of monkey.
2
I have often suggested that the SATs of the 1930s be compared to current SATs. Both old and new could be administered without students being told the origin of the test i.e. was it created many decades ago. It would be an easy study. I would bet dollars to donuts that the math of the past easily matches most of the math of today. The same of reading comprehension and mastery of English.
We could break down the populations that take the tests and administer them to mixed groups and also to specific groups such as Vietnamese, Chinese, Plain Vanilla White folks, and African American. Further break downs such as age, sex, gender and even if necessary religion could also be part of the composition of the population. I wonder how many who fail today would have failed in the past and also, how many who excel today would or would not have excelled in the past.
We could break down the populations that take the tests and administer them to mixed groups and also to specific groups such as Vietnamese, Chinese, Plain Vanilla White folks, and African American. Further break downs such as age, sex, gender and even if necessary religion could also be part of the composition of the population. I wonder how many who fail today would have failed in the past and also, how many who excel today would or would not have excelled in the past.
4
It'd be interesting to see the results, though I'm still thinking through what they'd actually tell you about student performance.
You'd need to find a way to control, though, for the effects of tacit knowledge. Stephen Jay Gould famously administered the WWI-era Army "general intelligence" test to his late-20C Harvard undergrads -- and found that their performance was mediocre because things that were assumed to be "common knowledge" in 1917 -- what the flame in a gas lamp looks like, say -- weren't so by the 1970s. [They weren't in 1917, either, unless you were white, urban, and at least middle-class, but that's another story.]
Cultural references that a 1930s student would find "obvious," and rapidly make inferences from, could well require time-consuming thought from a 2010s student (or be completely opaque to them) . . . but the resulting difference in test scores (2010s student scores lower on 1930s test than on 2010s test) wouldn't tell us anything useful about the student's college-readiness or the state of 2010s education. Hence the need for some way to correct for the effect.
You'd need to find a way to control, though, for the effects of tacit knowledge. Stephen Jay Gould famously administered the WWI-era Army "general intelligence" test to his late-20C Harvard undergrads -- and found that their performance was mediocre because things that were assumed to be "common knowledge" in 1917 -- what the flame in a gas lamp looks like, say -- weren't so by the 1970s. [They weren't in 1917, either, unless you were white, urban, and at least middle-class, but that's another story.]
Cultural references that a 1930s student would find "obvious," and rapidly make inferences from, could well require time-consuming thought from a 2010s student (or be completely opaque to them) . . . but the resulting difference in test scores (2010s student scores lower on 1930s test than on 2010s test) wouldn't tell us anything useful about the student's college-readiness or the state of 2010s education. Hence the need for some way to correct for the effect.
3
Life isn't fair, so this test is real-world.
1
But tests aren't supposed to be real world. The education system is supposed to be equal-opportunity, even (and especially when) the real world isn't. That's the largest issue I see here.
1
How about some more information on the mega-industry that SAT, ACT, College Board themselves have become?
The test-makes change the tests and -- surprise, surprise -- they also themselves offer "new" prep material for their own "new" tests. (And so does the prep mega-industry, that depends on these tests changing.)
They're doing the same thing that any for-profit business does: invent "new" products and then create a "demand" for these products, via advertising, news info, etc. (ETS, etc, may technically be "nonprofit" entities, but they're all making $millions from creating new products.)
My basic point is that this is all about business and holding market share, using "educational reform" as a mere cloak!
The test-makes change the tests and -- surprise, surprise -- they also themselves offer "new" prep material for their own "new" tests. (And so does the prep mega-industry, that depends on these tests changing.)
They're doing the same thing that any for-profit business does: invent "new" products and then create a "demand" for these products, via advertising, news info, etc. (ETS, etc, may technically be "nonprofit" entities, but they're all making $millions from creating new products.)
My basic point is that this is all about business and holding market share, using "educational reform" as a mere cloak!
13
Unless one is a mathematician, real-life problems are all word problems. That said, the sample problems were not very real-life.
Something more realistic would be, "Alice is making mac-and-cheese for a picnic. The recipe calls for 1 pint of milk, 1 pound of noodles, and 1 pound of cheese to serve 4 people. If milk is $3 per gallon, noodles $2 per pound, and cheese $3 per pound, how many people can Alice serve for $20?"
Something more realistic would be, "Alice is making mac-and-cheese for a picnic. The recipe calls for 1 pint of milk, 1 pound of noodles, and 1 pound of cheese to serve 4 people. If milk is $3 per gallon, noodles $2 per pound, and cheese $3 per pound, how many people can Alice serve for $20?"
9
Eh? Why Alice?"
"Ralph is making mac-and-cheese for a picnic!" Not to be PC, but that really stood out. It's only one question, but those are the type of questions I saw in the 1960's.
Today, in a series of multiple questions, a balance would be called for.
I accept, an unfair critique of your one question.
"Ralph is making mac-and-cheese for a picnic!" Not to be PC, but that really stood out. It's only one question, but those are the type of questions I saw in the 1960's.
Today, in a series of multiple questions, a balance would be called for.
I accept, an unfair critique of your one question.
1
Poor question. The real question would be if Alice had to feed 26 people how much would it cost? If she only had $20 she had better not have more than 14.
I thought all the sample questions were real-life problems, although I guess changing the phone repair to some other object needing repair might make more sense to most young people. With your problem, however, you have left out some needed information to make it a true real-life word problem. It makes a big difference if the price for each item is the same if you can buy in lesser quantities and if they are sold packaged in lesser quantities. With this recipe, you would never use a whole gallon of milk, even though milk comes in lesser quantities than a gallon. You may be able to purchase half pounds of cheese, for instance. Also, is sales tax included in the price? A poorly written word problem leaves out necessary information. As written, the best I could do with your problem is serving 12, with at most $2 dollars left over or going toward sales tax. Of course, if one really needs to stretch the meal to serve more and tax is included in the price of the items, you could add another pound of noodles, another cup of milk and have less cheesy goodness in your meal but serve 16, with a few glass of milk left over for the kids.
2
Does having lower expectations for certain groups of test-takers constitute a "potential bias"?
3
Yep, it's called "the soft bigotry of low expectations".
4
A thought on the last reader comment quoted in the article:
"It is hard to understand what you are missing if you don't understand what it is."
I teach college math classes, some of which are focused on using mathematical reasoning in real-life situations. In those classes I have many students who have revelatory experiences when they see what they have been missing by not having a good 'math sense' as they navigate the world.
"It is hard to understand what you are missing if you don't understand what it is."
I teach college math classes, some of which are focused on using mathematical reasoning in real-life situations. In those classes I have many students who have revelatory experiences when they see what they have been missing by not having a good 'math sense' as they navigate the world.
20
If the wording of the examples is at all representative, there is a more serious issue here, that being poorly-worded problems. Consider Problem 2, for example. It starts off by postulating that the technician receives a "batch of phones" every week, and that the formula gives an "estimate" of how many she will have left per day worked, both of which imply some variability in the initial conditions. It then asks what 108 "means" in the formula, the "correct" answer being that "she starts each week with 108 phones to fix". It's obviously the closest thing to the correct answer, but is speciously precise, not to mention very unlikely, given the description of the problem.
In other words, a careful reader is likely to waste time answering this problem because there really isn't an answer that is strictly correct. At the same time, it buries the actual math under this mess of ambiguity, which would tend to interfere with measuring mathematical aptitude, which is ostensibly what this part of the test is for.
There is a similar but less serious vagueness of wording in Problem 4, which I leave as an exercise for the reader.
If this is how the College Board proposes to "fix" the math section of the test, I grade them "needs improvement".
In other words, a careful reader is likely to waste time answering this problem because there really isn't an answer that is strictly correct. At the same time, it buries the actual math under this mess of ambiguity, which would tend to interfere with measuring mathematical aptitude, which is ostensibly what this part of the test is for.
There is a similar but less serious vagueness of wording in Problem 4, which I leave as an exercise for the reader.
If this is how the College Board proposes to "fix" the math section of the test, I grade them "needs improvement".
36
Agreed. I always did well on the standardized math tests, but even I found these new questions tougher to read and figure out what was being asked, and how to start the actual math problem-solving. I eventually got all five correct, but getting from the initial reading to the beginning of the actual math-work, was definitely tougher than before.
2
Only part of the purpose of these tests is to determine how well you perform straight-forward, simplistic, raw-calculation problems.
Like you, I am very much opposed to any questions that try to trick people, or that require some kind of special insight to answer them.
(a good example of the latter, while not math-oriented is the familiar 'teaser' about meeting 2 people, one always lies, the other always tells the truth- WHAT DO YOU ASK THEM? {what would the other person say?})
I have no problem with the question you are challenging, a quick 5-second look at the possible answers, reveals that only one of them makes any sense.
Since "d" is the number of 'days' that the tech has worked that week, ANYONE, with solid math skills should immediately recognize, after looking at answer [B];
. . . that the relationship of the equation is and start week with about 108 phones and repair about 23 per day.
The key word here is that this is an "estimate", not an exact universal.
The correct answer makes perfect sense, and the other 3 choices are simply impossible.
SHERLOCK-HOLMES, eliminate the impossible, what remains is the truth.
Your mistake here is, that you cannot confine your problem-solving to the facts as given. You are trying to assume that it has to conform to your 'knowledge' of how you believe a phone repair operation 'should' proceed.
Like you, I am very much opposed to any questions that try to trick people, or that require some kind of special insight to answer them.
(a good example of the latter, while not math-oriented is the familiar 'teaser' about meeting 2 people, one always lies, the other always tells the truth- WHAT DO YOU ASK THEM? {what would the other person say?})
I have no problem with the question you are challenging, a quick 5-second look at the possible answers, reveals that only one of them makes any sense.
Since "d" is the number of 'days' that the tech has worked that week, ANYONE, with solid math skills should immediately recognize, after looking at answer [B];
. . . that the relationship of the equation is and start week with about 108 phones and repair about 23 per day.
The key word here is that this is an "estimate", not an exact universal.
The correct answer makes perfect sense, and the other 3 choices are simply impossible.
SHERLOCK-HOLMES, eliminate the impossible, what remains is the truth.
Your mistake here is, that you cannot confine your problem-solving to the facts as given. You are trying to assume that it has to conform to your 'knowledge' of how you believe a phone repair operation 'should' proceed.
3
Well, Zip, I beg to differ. I am not making any assumptions about how phone repair "should" work, I'm just reading the problem as written. It could have been trivially fixed by inserting the word "typically" into answer b, but it wasn't.
I was quite good at this way back when, and I had a very simple technique for the math section:
- read the problem;
- figure out the answer;
- pick it out of the list.
I always found that to be the fastest way to get through. Playing process-of-elimination with vaguely-written multiple-choice questions is obviously possible, but it just gets in your way if you know what you are doing. And seeing how well "you know what you are doing" is what this exam is supposed to be measuring.
I'm familiar with the argument that it is desirable to be able to apply one's math intuition to real-world situations, but this testing approach is not going to measure that.
Now the verbal part of the SAT always used to work that way (I was pretty good at that too). You had to get as clear a sense as possible of what the problem was "looking for", then see which of the answers was most consistent with that.
My concern is that layering this semantic decoding on top of the math section will result in a less meaningful measurement of math aptitude, which will make the results less useful.
I was quite good at this way back when, and I had a very simple technique for the math section:
- read the problem;
- figure out the answer;
- pick it out of the list.
I always found that to be the fastest way to get through. Playing process-of-elimination with vaguely-written multiple-choice questions is obviously possible, but it just gets in your way if you know what you are doing. And seeing how well "you know what you are doing" is what this exam is supposed to be measuring.
I'm familiar with the argument that it is desirable to be able to apply one's math intuition to real-world situations, but this testing approach is not going to measure that.
Now the verbal part of the SAT always used to work that way (I was pretty good at that too). You had to get as clear a sense as possible of what the problem was "looking for", then see which of the answers was most consistent with that.
My concern is that layering this semantic decoding on top of the math section will result in a less meaningful measurement of math aptitude, which will make the results less useful.
7
Please understand that the SAT is graded on a curve. If it is 'harder', then it will be harder for everyone, rich and poor. The relative position of these groups will not change with a harder test - each will simply miss more questions but maintain their place on the curve. Thus the higher difficulty level is not important to the average test taker, only to the elite. Here is why. Elite testers will be easier to differentiate now. With the old format, an elite test taker could miss one question and move from 95th to 85th percentile; a ridiculous outcome. The test was 'too easy' for too many at the upper end of the curve. With more 'hard questions' there won't be so much compression at the top of the curve, and we should see a smoother distribution of scores from the 90th to the 99th percentile. Er, good news for the Top 10%. As for sub-90th percentiles, missing more problems will not hurt.
13
Aye, there's the rub. Either you know the answer or you don't. Curve? Nonsense. This is the problem with education and math education in particular today. Please tell me I am not driving on a bridge designed by a civil engineer who passed strength of materials in a class where a curve was used.
5
I don't think you quite understand the concept of the curve, not as a tool for "grade inflation" but as a means to a normal distribution that's more meaningful -- and the whole point -- of any standardized test or measurement.
Sounds like NY times did not get the answers they wanted from the Public about the new SAT. It might also be why the media has gotten it so wrong about Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. They can not figure out why most of America is fed up with certain folks being pushed ahead to their detriment.
18
Beside the point. The point is, why should the SAT and ACT even exist? Moreover, why should there be competitive admissions?
I'm not being coy: question the assumptions. And I'm a professional SAT/ACT/etc tutor; I've published books, etc. This is my bread and butter: well, bread, say; the butter is instructional design of all kinds.
I was of two minds about these tests twenty years ago when I started teaching/tutoring in grad school. I'm of one mind now: eliminate them. I'll find other things to do. (I can't go into why they should be eliminated here, unfortunately, but I have no original reasons: you can find why in many places, starting with fairtest.org.)
I'm not being coy: question the assumptions. And I'm a professional SAT/ACT/etc tutor; I've published books, etc. This is my bread and butter: well, bread, say; the butter is instructional design of all kinds.
I was of two minds about these tests twenty years ago when I started teaching/tutoring in grad school. I'm of one mind now: eliminate them. I'll find other things to do. (I can't go into why they should be eliminated here, unfortunately, but I have no original reasons: you can find why in many places, starting with fairtest.org.)
3
I need an answer. Given a limited seating capacity, just what criteria would you use for college admission?
5
For an "Elite College" I would ask them 10 questions:
2 on Current Events - short essay.
2 on History - short essay
2 on Science - explain answer fully.
4 on Math - each problem harder than the previous, solvable
but you actually have to think and explain why your hold your that your answer is correct.
and
1 response on some controversial topic of the day - that is audio-taped so the College can see how the applicant thinks on their feet.
2
2 on Current Events - short essay.
2 on History - short essay
2 on Science - explain answer fully.
4 on Math - each problem harder than the previous, solvable
but you actually have to think and explain why your hold your that your answer is correct.
and
1 response on some controversial topic of the day - that is audio-taped so the College can see how the applicant thinks on their feet.
2
3
I aced the sample test. But then I also scored in the top 2% on the SAT in 1971 when there were no prep courses or books. You just took it cold. I enjoyed both experiences ... Dave The Wave
5
Both laudable high points, to be sure. Congratulations. Now what on earth is there left to achieve?
5
So what percentage answered all 5 sample questions correctly?
3
It's interesting that the writer who received the most "recommends" suggests that college isn't for people who can't read. If anyone knows anyone with dyslexia, they may be award that those people may read as much as the next person, but maybe not as quickly. So, would you keep them out too and wait until they are able to "catch up?" Some people may have a more difficult time in college at first, but many who have comprehension issues eventually do. So, I don't really agree with the commenter's opinion. Perhaps there are other means of keeping people out who will never be ready, but I'm not going to take that leap yet. In other words, if the test increases the function of eliminating people who are intelligent but perhaps not quite as up to speed with ONE aspect of learning at the college level, I believe the new SAT may be a part of the problem.
4
Students with diagnosed dyslexia and other learning disabilities are given extra time on standardized tests.
20
Yes, those with learning disabilities do get extra time on tests. But what is already a grueling experience for those students is then made 1 1/2 times longer.
Kaleberg is absolutely right that students with disabilities are often given extra time. In fact, the College Board frequently even makes other accommodations available, such as the use of a computer to write the essay and large-print booklets, depending on the student's disability. Lisa's comment seems to entirely ignore that fact.
2
Here's a question for the NYT.
Why would you use a photo of a calculus problem in an article about the SAT, a test which does not contain calculus?
I rubs me as purposeful manipulation of the reader into thinking the new SAT is being made a lot more difficult than it actually is.
Why would you use a photo of a calculus problem in an article about the SAT, a test which does not contain calculus?
I rubs me as purposeful manipulation of the reader into thinking the new SAT is being made a lot more difficult than it actually is.
56
I was about to comment on this: you do not need to perform integration on the SAT.
I'm not sure if it was intended to push some 'agenda', but it's a sloppy oversight at the very least.
I'm not sure if it was intended to push some 'agenda', but it's a sloppy oversight at the very least.
21
The reason is simple - these self-same people who find the SAT unfair and overly hard probably view calculus as mysterious Black Magic that no one can possibly understand let alone master.
I found it beautiful and useful across all of my years so far.
I found it beautiful and useful across all of my years so far.
4
Test 1 contains passages varying in difficulty from grade 5 to grade 12, with Tier II vocabulary making up as little as 1%, and over the five passages, an average syntactic simplicity of around 54%. Test 2, on the other hand, ranges from grade 10 to grade 16 (graduate-school level), with one passage containing almost 11% Tier II vocabulary and another with a syntactic simplicity of just 3%. Students taking Test 4 would need to read around 200 words less than those taking Test 2 (in the same time and with the same number of questions), while those taking Test 3 would face one passage of a mere 400 words and the least Tier II vocabulary of them all. One can only hope that these ‘practice’ tests are apprentice-pieces on the part of the College Board and they will get better … with practice.
Issues with the questions regrettably follow a similar pattern.