3 ms·

> Well, research has shown that grades predict college success and ACT/SAT doesn't really. So I would say that one is strictly better than the other. I'm not sa

> Well, research has shown that grades predict college success and ACT/SAT doesn't really. So I would say that one is strictly better than the other. I'm not saying that standardized testing shouldn't exist. I do think students should be able to take standardized subject specific tests like AP and SAT II and submit those scores with their application. Grades and standardized tests can co-exist. Let's just not waste time and money on a standardized test that doesn't provide a meaningful metric. I don't really take issue with the rest of what you say, but you simply can't claim that grades are strictly better that SATs. They are _different_ measurements. There are people with bad grades that will do well at SATs. Now if by "strictly better", you mean that grades individually are a better predictor than SATs, then that I could believe (though obviously it's a claim that requires actual study), but that isn't really a good definition of strictly better. It could very well be the case that grades provide 50% of the predictive signal of success while SATs provide 35%, but taken together they provide 60%. In that case, neither is really strictly better than the other. However, both together really are strictly than either separately. That said, if by "research has shown that grades predict college success and ACT/SAT doesn't really" you mean SATs provide 0 predictive power, then they should of course be removed. I've never heard anyone make that claim, but it could be true I guess. I'd have to defer to your knowledge of such research. But assuming that SATs aren't providing 0 predictive power, I'm not convinced these tests should be replaced with nothing at all. If they replaced them by required SAT subject tests, then that's one thing, but they aren't doing that. They are simply removing a signal. Before they did have a single test to compare across and now they have none. Anyway I don't really feel like going back and forth forever with this. My original question in this thread about whether the SATs provide information has been answered well enough. Thanks for the responses.

MyHypatia 5y ago
Ok so maybe instead of "strictly better" I should have just said better. There is research on this. For example, this study from the University of Chicago: "UChicago Consortium researchers found that the predictive power of GPAs is consistent across high schools—something that did not hold true for test scores. At many high schools, they discovered no connection between students’ ACT scores and eventual college graduation. The authors were also surprised to find that, at some high schools, students with the highest ACT scores were less likely to succeed in college." Students can already submit other standardized test scores like AP to improve their application. I think those tests a) contain material that is worth the time study, and b) measure something clear (i.e. a student tried to learn chemistry and was able to do so, as measured by this exam. And can use the skills learned for this exam in the future.) https://news.uchicago.edu/story/test-scores-dont-stack-gpas-predicting-college-success https://news.uchicago.edu/story/test-scores-dont-stack-gpas-...
- gnicholas 5y ago
  That's interesting, but elite schools are not primarily interested in the binary measure that is graduation/drop-out. They are optimizing for a much higher bar than merely not dropping out.
  - MyHypatia 5y ago
    Yes, graduation/drop out is just one metric. There are other studies that look at SAT scores and grades, and they only correlate for the first year. I would argue that elite schools mostly want students who will become wealthy leaders. The people who achieve this are either already wealthy and connected, or think creatively and can design/implement a unique solution. I don't think the SAT/ACT can give much of a signal on the latter. The main purpose the SAT has served is making it easier for admissions staff to make and justify decisions. I think subject-based exams are a better use of students' time, and give a clearer signal to both the student and the school whether they will be successful in their chosen major. (i.e. A declared history major performing well on the AP US History and AP World History exams. A declared physics major performing well on an AP physics, AP statistics, and/or AP calculus exam.)
    - gnicholas 5y ago
      Subject matter exams can be helpful, but many students are either undeclared, or end up changing majors while in college (I changed 3 times, if memory serves). Also, a student's ability to succeed in subject-specific exams is more dependent upon the HS's offerings. For example, I went to a school that had a very strong science program (e.g., regularly top-3 in national competitions). But if I was trying to prove my ability to be a strong student of social sciences, there were very few courses I could have taken to demonstrate that. Lastly, most students take a plurality+ of their subject-specific exams in 12th grade, which is too late for them to affect admissions. If more reliance were placed on subject-specific exams, it would advantage kids at competitive high schools, where there are so many APs offered that students take many of them in 10th-11th grade.
      - 5y ago

MyHypatia 5y ago

Ok so maybe instead of "strictly better" I should have just said better. There is research on this. For example, this study from the University of Chicago: "UChicago Consortium researchers found that the predictive power of GPAs is consistent across high schools—something that did not hold true for test scores. At many high schools, they discovered no connection between students’ ACT scores and eventual college graduation. The authors were also surprised to find that, at some high schools, students with the highest ACT scores were less likely to succeed in college." Students can already submit other standardized test scores like AP to improve their application. I think those tests a) contain material that is worth the time study, and b) measure something clear (i.e. a student tried to learn chemistry and was able to do so, as measured by this exam. And can use the skills learned for this exam in the future.) https://news.uchicago.edu/story/test-scores-dont-stack-gpas-predicting-college-success https://news.uchicago.edu/story/test-scores-dont-stack-gpas-...

gnicholas 5y ago
That's interesting, but elite schools are not primarily interested in the binary measure that is graduation/drop-out. They are optimizing for a much higher bar than merely not dropping out.
- MyHypatia 5y ago
  Yes, graduation/drop out is just one metric. There are other studies that look at SAT scores and grades, and they only correlate for the first year. I would argue that elite schools mostly want students who will become wealthy leaders. The people who achieve this are either already wealthy and connected, or think creatively and can design/implement a unique solution. I don't think the SAT/ACT can give much of a signal on the latter. The main purpose the SAT has served is making it easier for admissions staff to make and justify decisions. I think subject-based exams are a better use of students' time, and give a clearer signal to both the student and the school whether they will be successful in their chosen major. (i.e. A declared history major performing well on the AP US History and AP World History exams. A declared physics major performing well on an AP physics, AP statistics, and/or AP calculus exam.)
  - gnicholas 5y ago
    Subject matter exams can be helpful, but many students are either undeclared, or end up changing majors while in college (I changed 3 times, if memory serves). Also, a student's ability to succeed in subject-specific exams is more dependent upon the HS's offerings. For example, I went to a school that had a very strong science program (e.g., regularly top-3 in national competitions). But if I was trying to prove my ability to be a strong student of social sciences, there were very few courses I could have taken to demonstrate that. Lastly, most students take a plurality+ of their subject-specific exams in 12th grade, which is too late for them to affect admissions. If more reliance were placed on subject-specific exams, it would advantage kids at competitive high schools, where there are so many APs offered that students take many of them in 10th-11th grade.
    - 5y ago