14 ms·
These were called "Achievement Tests" in the early 90s, and man, they were much harder than the SAT. If the current "Subject Tests" approximate their level of
by jimmyvalmer 7y ago
These were called "Achievement Tests" in the early 90s, and man, they were
much harder than the SAT. If the current "Subject Tests" approximate their
level of difficulty, then it's a clear mistake for MIT to disregard these
datapoints. When I was applying to college, yes, people paid for SAT prep but
very few paid for Achievement Test prep, and so Achievement Tests were a superior
indicator.
- pulisse 7y ago> These were called "Achievement Tests" in the early 90s, and man, they were much harder than the SAT. If the current "Subject Tests" approximate their level of difficulty, then it's a clear mistake for MIT to disregard these datapoints Difficulty as perceived by test takers is irrelevant. What MIT cares about is how well test performance predicts undergrad performance. As TFA notes, MIT is retaining the standard SAT because their data indicates that performance on that test is predictive.
- jimmyvalmer 7y agoWe don't disagree. I remain dubious that excluding a subject test term wouldn't deteriorate MIT's scoring model.