Current Events > Do you believe that colleges in the u.s. should get rid of act/sat testing

(+) Yeah! (+)

do you

I dunno. How else will they decide academic scholarships, besides general grades? I can see the reasoning behind it, but I wonder if this would end up disadvantaging kids that are bright despite their circumstances. I suppose its something thats probably been answered, so maybe I should look it up.

Edit: I understand that requiring them in the first place could be an extra expense that could be tough, and in that case I understand, thats not how I read the topic title/poll at first.

More and more colleges have already removed them as a requirement. It's only a matter of years before they drop them entirely.

Colleges are focusing more on grades, volunteer hours, leadership experience, and personal essays to determine scholarships and such.

As a former strong student with poor standardized test taking skills (and too poor to hire testing coaches like my rich peers did), I support this.

Terrible idea

Grade inflation is real in some places and kids who go to rigorous high schools will be fucked

Why remove basically the only objective measure in college apps?

Also every "i'm bad at standardized tests but i get good grades person" ive met is just good at sucking up to teachers and is not as smart as they think

There's no secret to filling in the right bubble besides just knowing the answer

I got a 35 act and still only got into my state college lol

No. The class rigor is too different at too different schools. You need some standardized way to know what their actual capabilities are.

g980 posted...

Also every "i'm bad at standardized tests but i get good grades person" ive met is just good at sucking up to teachers and is not as smart as they think

There's no secret to filling in the right bubble besides just knowing the answer

Oh, so you believe the act does test intelligence? Iirc most people do not believe that

CedarPointcp posted...

Oh, so you believe the act does test intelligence? Iirc most people do not believe that

"Intelligence" is vague and not well defined, if you want to get pedantic then sure its not the word i should have used

I took the SATs but assuming ACT is similar it does measure whether you know some basic math, reading, and critical thinking
Which is relevant to college
Whether you want to consider it a measure of 'intelligence' isnt really important

No unless they have a better means of filtering out people for the truly gifted and smart. Just getting good grades isn't really enough sadly.

Zanzenburger posted...

More and more colleges have already removed them as a requirement. It's only a matter of years before they drop them entirely.

Colleges are focusing more on grades, volunteer hours, leadership experience, and personal essays to determine scholarships and such.

As a former strong student with poor standardized test taking skills (and too poor to hire testing coaches like my rich peers did), I support this.

Yeah I also didn't score that well on standardized tests, never did like act tutoring and stuff, do those really help a lot more than like an act guide book you check out from the library?

Pretty sure the SAT helped me get into school because I slacked.off as a freshman and sophomore and my GPA wasn't that great.

CedarPointcp posted...

Yeah I also didn't score that well on standardized tests, never did like act tutoring and stuff, do those really help a lot more than like an act guide book you check out from the library?

There are actual tricks to taking standardized tests. Content mastery is only a part of it. Another part is having the ability to answer questions in a fast fashion to get through the time limits. There are entire industries full of test-taking coaches that can raise your ACT/SAT scores simply by teaching you how to take the test, without having to teach you any actual content.

I work at a university and real with these coaches all the time. My problem with standardized tests is that they focus more on HOW you take the test than what you actually know. Research has also shown that standardized tests are biased against minorities and people from low socio-economic backgrounds.

g980 posted...

Terrible idea

Grade inflation is real in some places and kids who go to rigorous high schools will be fucked

Why remove basically the only objective measure in college apps?

My cousin goes on Facebook bragging about her daughter's high school grades. Her GPA is something ridiculous like 4.5, something that wasn't even possible when I was in high school.

g980 posted...

Also every "i'm bad at standardized tests but i get good grades person" ive met is just good at sucking up to teachers and is not as smart as they think

There's no secret to filling in the right bubble besides just knowing the answer

My issue with standardized tests was the vocabulary/analogy sections. I aced the Math and Writing sections, and most of the reading sections, but because English is my second language I did not understand the questions having you define the synonyms or antonyms of certain words. The section is supposed to test your critical thinking of the relationships between meanings of words, but if you've never heard of the word before, then that part doesn't work. Even taking tons of time studying flashcards, I did not have enough exposure to those words growing up to learn them all for the test.

Your assertion that poor test-takers only suck up to teachers is very limited and doesn't grasp the challenges that students from poorer backgrounds face. I work at a university and my job is increasing college access. We offer free ACT/SAT training for our communities and are able to provide these students help with test-taking strategies. Had I had access to these trainings as a teen, it would have helped immensely. But those trainings were expensive and only the well-off kids could afford them.

g980 posted...

Terrible idea

Grade inflation is real in some places and kids who go to rigorous high schools will be fucked

Why remove basically the only objective measure in college apps?

This would be an issue if grades were the only factor. Any college worth their weight only looks at grades as part of the picture. In addition to grades, colleges look at:

• Personal essays
• Volunteer hours
• Leadership experience
• Work experience or internships
• Career goals
• Socio-economic background
• Class Ranking
• School performance

The thing of it is, colleges take into account grade inflation in their application processes. They look at what school you attend. Schools with a higher average GPA for students are held to higher standard per student since they are more likely to have a high GPA. So they may rank a student with a 3.0 GPA higher in a tougher school than a 4.0 GPA student at an easier school.

Likewise, a 4.0 student will not get into the top schools if they don't have leadership experience or well-defined or well-aligned career goals. College applications use rubrics that include all or most of the above criteria and GPA is only a fraction of it.

I have sat on college application review committees and scholarship application review committees and ACT/SAT scores rarely make or break a student's chances when taken in combination with the other criteria. If anything, they may downgrade an otherwise well-rounded student who just doesn't test well with those kids of tests. They could be removed with little impact.

Doe posted...

I got a 35 act and still only got into my state college lol

I don't believe you or we're missing some context here

opopopza posted...

My cousin goes on Facebook bragging about her daughter's high school grades. Her GPA is something ridiculous like 4.5, something that wasn't even possible when I was in high school.

This happens when students take Dual Enrollment or AP courses for college credit in high school. College courses are often weighted on a 5.0 or even 6.0 scale.

opopopza posted...

My cousin goes on Facebook bragging about her daughter's high school grades. Her GPA is something ridiculous like 4.5, something that wasn't even possible when I was in high school.

My school did weird weighting where AP was x1.25, honors was x1.15

So I chose to do only honors English because it was easier, and based on the weighting I would definitely receive a higher score with less effort

It was so dumb

I don't see how there can be any objective measure of academic attainment without there being standardized tests. Grades are too arbitrary & teachers are often incentivized to give higher ones for a variety of reasons (making themselves looking good, avoiding getting yelled at parents, sympathy, ect.). Plus I never bought into the, I'm smart, but a bad test taker type. If you really know the material you should be able to do well in testing (I mean, it is just multiple choice after all). It's like saying you are a good player because you are good in practice mode, but you have a losing record when playing online.

DeepFriedSquid posted...

I don't believe you or we're missing some context here

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/3/8/AAcZIZAAElBu.jpg
The other schools i applied to are the really competitive Midwestern schools. I really expected i could at least get into either notre dame or U Michigan. I actually got into two schools, but Purdue didn't offer me financial aid.

DeepFriedSquid posted...

I don't believe you or we're missing some context here

why don't you believe him though? yeah, a 35 iirc would place you well within the top 1 perc. of all test takers. But in his defense, many ivy league schools etc... is mostly about money and not about grades test scores etc.... anyway

DragonClaw01 posted...

I don't see how there can be any objective measure of academic attainment without there being standardized tests. Grades are too arbitrary & teachers are often incentivized to give higher ones for a variety of reasons (making themselves looking good, avoiding getting yelled at parents, sympathy, ect.). Plus I never bought into the, I'm smart, but a bad test taker type. If you really know the material you should be able to do well in testing (I mean, it is just multiple choice after all). It's like saying you are a good player because you are good in practice mode, but you have a losing record when playing online.

you really believe this? some people could just not be good at taking the sat/act

Zanzenburger posted...

More and more colleges have already removed them as a requirement.

Not a requirement but you can still take it and it will count?

I'm all for adding more pathways to get people into college that might not be good at standardized testing, but I wouldn't want to remove standardized testing from being an option.

Also, holistic methods can be easily gamed by people, more so than standardized testing

DragonClaw01 posted...

Plus I never bought into the, I'm smart, but a bad test taker type. If you really know the material you should be able to do well in testing

Agreed. I've never met a "bad test taker" who was actually knowledgeable about the material. They'll have an incredibly shaky foundation so their confidence about their abilities is just as shaky.

Squall28 posted...

Agreed. I've never met a "bad test taker" who was actually knowledgeable about the material. They'll have an incredibly shaky foundation so their confidence about their abilities is just as shaky.

idk, do most of you guys agree with this?

Squall28 posted...

Agreed. I've never met a "bad test taker" who was actually knowledgeable about the material. They'll have an incredibly shaky foundation so their confidence about their abilities is just as shaky.

Plus if you suck at taking tests now, then good luck in college. College is like 85% tests & maybe like 15% some lame group project or something. If anything, college is more centered around standardized testing than highschool is. So, hiding kids from standardized tests is only setting them up for failure

DragonClaw01 posted...

Plus if you suck at taking tests now, then good luck in college. College is like 85% tests & maybe like 15% some lame group project or something. If anything, college is more centered around standardized testing than highschool is. So, hiding kids from standardized tests is only setting them up for failure

I graduated college with a 4.0 in my bachelor's, two masters, and a PhD. I now teach statistics and research courses with heavy math and heavy writing and reading components. I struggled with the SAT no matter how much I studied. If SAT was the primary determinant of my college options, I would have been screwed.

Research shows that grades are better predictors of college success than standardized tests, despite popular belief.

Here is a news article for it. I have some research papers in my home computer I can pull up later, but this news story gives the basics of it:

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-12-22/grades-vs-sat-scores-which-is-a-better-predictor-of-college-success

Grade inflation is very overblown through the media. When you look at actual studies, you will see that grades are still the golden standard for predicting college success.

emblem-man posted...

Not a requirement but you can still take it and it will count?

I'm all for adding more pathways to get people into college that might not be good at standardized testing, but I wouldn't want to remove standardized testing from being an option.

Also, holistic methods can be easily gamed by people, more so than standardized testing

How is it any different than employers hiring people? Most jobs don't have a standardized test you can take. It's based on subjective reviews of resumes and interviews. Rubrics are used to keep the process as standardized as possible.

College admissions are no different than hiring for a job position. Many colleges even have interviews for the same purpose.

Zanzenburger posted...

I graduated college with a 4.0 in my bachelor's, two masters, and a PhD. I now teach statistics and research courses with heavy math and heavy writing and reading components. I struggled with the SAT no matter how much I studied. If SAT was the primary determinant of my college options, I would have been screwed.

Research shows that grades are better predictors of college success than standardized tests, despite popular belief.

Here is a news article for it. I have some research papers in my home computer I can pull up later, but this news story gives the basics of it:

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-12-22/grades-vs-sat-scores-which-is-a-better-predictor-of-college-success

Grade inflation is very overblown through the media. When you look at actual studies, you will see that grades are still the golden standard for predicting college success.

iirc i read yrs ago that the sat was a greater predictor of college success than good grades. that was one study or article i read. The studies or results are supposedly all over the place

It shouldn't be a requirement, but a good extra data point for assessing the student's academic performance.

CedarPointcp posted...

iirc i read yrs ago that the sat was a greater predictor of college success than good grades. that was one study or article i read. The studies or results are supposedly all over the place

This is a personal area of interest for me, so I've researched this a long time. While individual studies may show results all over the place based on methodology and sampling, the trend of research (which means the plurality of results) has a general consensus that grades are a stronger predictor than the tests. There's no easy way to prove that without posting the dozens of articles I've read on the subject (something I'm not about to do on my day off from research lol), but I figured I'd share that nugget, so take it as you will.

Sansoldier posted...

It shouldn't be a requirement, but a good extra data point for assessing the student's academic performance.

I agree with this.

The tests helped me greatly because I was a terrible student in high school, but I was smart and knew how to take tests. People shouldn't have to take them though and all of this stuff is mostly a reflection of socioeconomic status. I think they should be available as a distinguishing point, not a choke point.

Doe posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/3/8/AAcZIZAAElBu.jpg
The other schools i applied to are the really competitive Midwestern schools. I really expected i could at least get into either notre dame or U Michigan. I actually got into two schools, but Purdue didn't offer me financial aid.

Yeah okay so I'd accept that you maybe didn't get into the most competitive schools but of course a 35 could get you into a reputable private school

The reason is that there are numerous studies showing that standardized tests are decidedly NOT objective and strongly favor certain demographics

Zanzenburger posted...

How is it any different than employers hiring people? Most jobs don't have a standardized test you can take. It's based on subjective reviews of resumes and interviews. Rubrics are used to keep the process as standardized as possible.

College admissions are no different than hiring for a job position. Many colleges even have interviews for the same purpose.

I don't know, should acceptance into college be similar to getting hired for a job?

My main point is, similar to how more methods are being used to show acceptance eligibility, it seems like "good at standardized testing" is a method that should stay, to help those people out also. Like I said, I'm all for having more pathways, not necessarily for removing them. Which is why I asked if it would still count towards their overall application if they did well on it

Standardized testing as a gateway to college is silly, as a) you'll never take a standardized test in college and b) you'll never take a standardized test after college. It's proving you're good at something you'll never do again

I'm glad they are doing away with it. Doesn't measure anything of substance. Knowing how to take a test =/= intelligence. The sooner we get away from this way of thinking the better.

emblem-man posted...

I don't know, should acceptance into college be similar to getting hired for a job?

My main point is, similar to how more methods are being used to show acceptance eligibility, it seems like "good at standardized testing" is a method that should stay, to help those people out also. Like I said, I'm all for having more pathways, not necessarily for removing them. Which is why I asked if it would still count towards their overall application if they did well on it

Yes, they will still accept them if taken.

https://youtu.be/osR6be2UUHk

Euripides posted...

Standardized testing as a gateway to college is silly, as a) you'll never take a standardized test in college and b) you'll never take a standardized test after college. It's proving you're good at something you'll never do again

I completely disagree. Most of college is taking tests, often from some book publisher test bank, so, yeah, you will be taking a lot of tests in college, so better get good at them. Also, the material you study for in the SAT is pretty basic. It is reading comprehension, algebra, basic science, writing, ect. Foundational items, so I hope you aren't forgetting too many of these items because they will be coming up again in your studies and parts of life.

Taking away the SAT has always been a political more than practical one. It is a way to hide bad students under overinflated grades, so the students/school don't look bad. I can't blame teachers & administrators for doing so because the educational system is less about educating and more about being a bullshit barrier to the job market now a days, so the teachers don't want to hurt the student's future by giving them bad grades, but we are lying to ourselves that this has anything to do with proper educational assessment.

DragonClaw01 posted...

I completely disagree. Most of college is taking tests, often from some book publisher test bank, so, yeah, you will be taking a lot of tests in college, so better get good at them. Also, the material you study for in the SAT is pretty basic. It is reading comprehension, algebra, basic science, writing, ect. Foundational items, so I hope you aren't forgetting too many of these items because they will be coming up again in your studies and parts of life.

I am a college professor and I don't know a single prof at my university that uses "test bank" exams. We all write our own tests.

Taking away the SAT has always been a political more than practical one. It is a way to hide bad students under overinflated grades, so the students/school don't look bad. I can't blame teachers & administrators for doing so because the educational system is less about educating and more about being a bullshit barrier to the job market now a days, so the teachers don't want to hurt the student's future by giving them bad grades, but we are lying to ourselves that this has anything to do with proper educational assessment.

The students who can economically afford to spend hundreds of dollars for test tutoring do the best on the test. It's classist gatekeeping

Euripides posted...

The students who can economically afford to spend hundreds of dollars for test tutoring do the best on the test. It's classist gatekeeping

You can say that about everything in this world. Although, if people are spending money on learning and bettering themselves, I can't see how that is a bad thing. A lot of the mega rich cheat the system entirely by just buying thier kids way into the school. At least in your scenario the kid is actually learning something

Every college should have their own test if they care so much. Maybe if you get enough like minded colleges together they can group up and all use the same test that can make admissions a little easier

DragonClaw01 posted...

You can say that about everything in this world. Although, if people are spending money on learning and bettering themselves, I can't see how that is a bad thing. A lot of the mega rich cheat the system entirely by just buying thier kids way into the school. At least in your scenario the kid is actually learning something

yeah this does happen a lot, at like ivy league schools. Though there are some people who think that like harvard graduates are usually geniuses or something...etc...

i think ACTs/SATs are should be done once during your high school days if youre a Junior or Senior.

Ive always felt that the colleges and schools do ACTs and SATs to find out who's smart as heck like Einstein or really dumb and stupid

WizardofHoth posted...

i think ACTs/SATs are should be done once during your high school days if youre a Junior or Senior.

Ive always felt that the colleges and schools do ACTs and SATs to find out who's smart as heck like Einstein or really dumb and stupid

what? what do you mean only taken once? the act and sat measures how smart you are?

No.

Improve education in the states. Not these participation trophy style teaching that dances around feelings.