5 ms·

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 ar

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.
- MyHypatia 5y ago
  I think all of your points are very valid. But I still have a few thoughts: >> Also, a student's ability to succeed in subject-specific exams is more dependent upon the HS's offerings. While some schools don't offer all of these subjects as courses. I don't know of a single school that offers "SAT/ACT" as a course. So while my school may not have all the AP classes, I could select from the classes that are offered and at least take those exams. Students can also take AP exams without taking the course (which is what they already do for the SAT). >> Lastly, most students take a plurality+ of their subject-specific exams in 12th grade You are right that many students don't take AP classes at all, or not until 12th grade. In that case, I think SAT II subject tests are preferable to SAT I, because at least students spend time studying a subject that is useful and transferable. Basically, I think a system of: Pick 1-3 SAT II or AP exams in subjects of the student's choosing to add value to their application would be better than using SAT 1 scores. That way: -Students show their college readiness by learning transferable knowledge. -It is standardized so it compares apples to apples. -Students can learn the material in school, and focus on the subjects that they prefer or are offered in their school. -If the subject is not offered in their school they can still self study (like they do with SAT 1) and take the exam anyway. -I think the exams should just be used to assess "college readiness" not what major they can enter. That way students aren't pigeonholed into a specific major. -I think these exams should be way to add value to a college application rather than a requirement to address the issues of accessibility. If someone went to a high school that offered 0 AP classes, and they don't take these exams I don't think they should be rejected from college. If they take 1 AP exam that they self-studied for, that shows a lot of initiative and could add value to their application.

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.

MyHypatia 5y ago
I think all of your points are very valid. But I still have a few thoughts: >> Also, a student's ability to succeed in subject-specific exams is more dependent upon the HS's offerings. While some schools don't offer all of these subjects as courses. I don't know of a single school that offers "SAT/ACT" as a course. So while my school may not have all the AP classes, I could select from the classes that are offered and at least take those exams. Students can also take AP exams without taking the course (which is what they already do for the SAT). >> Lastly, most students take a plurality+ of their subject-specific exams in 12th grade You are right that many students don't take AP classes at all, or not until 12th grade. In that case, I think SAT II subject tests are preferable to SAT I, because at least students spend time studying a subject that is useful and transferable. Basically, I think a system of: Pick 1-3 SAT II or AP exams in subjects of the student's choosing to add value to their application would be better than using SAT 1 scores. That way: -Students show their college readiness by learning transferable knowledge. -It is standardized so it compares apples to apples. -Students can learn the material in school, and focus on the subjects that they prefer or are offered in their school. -If the subject is not offered in their school they can still self study (like they do with SAT 1) and take the exam anyway. -I think the exams should just be used to assess "college readiness" not what major they can enter. That way students aren't pigeonholed into a specific major. -I think these exams should be way to add value to a college application rather than a requirement to address the issues of accessibility. If someone went to a high school that offered 0 AP classes, and they don't take these exams I don't think they should be rejected from college. If they take 1 AP exam that they self-studied for, that shows a lot of initiative and could add value to their application.