Study finds high SAT and ACT Scores Might Not Spell Success at College

Serious

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
80,213
Reputation
14,329
Daps
191,025
Reppin
1st Round Playoff Exits
Teens across the U.S. are standing by their mailboxes, waiting anxiously for the envelopes that will seal their academic fate. It’s college admissions season and for many students a lot hinges on how well they performed in standardized testing.

But how much should exams like the SAT and ACT really matter?

A study published Tuesday that probed the success of “test-optional” admissions policies in 33 public and private universities calls into question the need for such testing.

Former Dean of Admissions for Bates College William Hiss led the study which tracked the grades and graduation rates of students who submitted their test results against those who did not over several years.

Hiss’ data showed that there was a negligible difference in college performance between the two groups. Only .05 percent of a GPA point set “submitters” and “non-submitters” apart, and the difference in their graduation rates was just .6 percent.

There are about 850 test-optional colleges in the U.S., and the trend is growing slowly.

What should college admissions officers look for instead? Hiss says GPA matters the most.

“The evidence of the study clearly shows that high school GPA matters. Four-year, long-term evidence of self-discipline, intellectual curiosity and hard work; that’s what matters the most. After that, I would say evidence that someone has interests that they have brought to a higher level, from a soccer goalie to a debater to a servant in a community to a linguist. We need to see evidence that the student can bring something to a high level of skill,” Hiss said.

According to the data, if high school grades are not high, good testing does not promise college success. Students with good grades and modest testing did better in college than students with higher testing and lower high school grades.

“The human mind is simply so complex and so multifaceted and fluid, that trying to find a single measurement tool that will be reliable across the enormous populations of American students is simply a trip up a blind alley. I would never say the SATs and ACTs have no predictive value for anybody; they have predictive value for some people. We just don’t find them reliable cross populations,” says Hiss.

But the dreaded test was born of good intentions.

The SAT started in the 1930s as a scholarship test for Ivy League schools. Based off of an Army IQ test, it was meant to help those who came from more humble backgrounds to be noticed by prestigious schools. Many other universities followed suit.

But standardized testing may now be hurting rather than helping disenfranchised students.

The study found that non-submitting students were more likely to be minorities, women, students with Learning Differences, Pell Grant recipients and first-generation college-goers.

According to Hiss’ data, the test-optional policy could even help to level the playing field.

“We need thousands of students going through higher ed. Optional testing is one of the ways that that could happen. Optional testing is a potential route to getting many more students through higher education who normally would not be admitted or would not apply in first place,” Hiss said.

The study comes at a time of renewed debate about college admissions, after President Barack Obama pledged in January to get more low income students into higher education.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/nail-biting-standardized-testing-may-miss-mark-college-students/

Supplemental Video:


@Walt
 

L&HH

Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
53,298
Reputation
5,830
Daps
161,774
Reppin
PG x MD
anecdotes don't really matter. I think he was speaking on a large scale

pretty much his case was simply the difference in maturity. Im sure if he applied himself he would have gotten above 3.0 in high school.

Overall Im pretty sure the majority of ppl that do well in high school go on to do well in college.
 

Motife43

Superstar
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
10,181
Reputation
5,200
Daps
29,990
Reppin
ATL
For the most part standardized tests are bullshyt. All students learn differntely and a bunch of em don't perform well under the pressure of taking those tests. But colleges put a lot of emphasis into high standardized test scores.

I'm surprised some people remember their ACT/SAT scores after they graduate HS. All I know is my scores got me in, 6-7 yrs later and can't eem rememeber it.
 

Elle Driver

Veteran
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
27,401
Reputation
13,045
Daps
100,617
Reppin
At the beginning of mean streets
For the most part standardized tests are bullshyt. All students learn differntely and a bunch of em don't perform well under the pressure of taking those tests. But colleges put a lot of emphasis into high standardized test scores.

I'm surprised some people remember their ACT/SAT scores after they graduate HS. All I know is my scores got me in, 6-7 yrs later and can't eem rememeber it.

I remember my score because I was scolded for mine. :heh:
 

Pazzy

Superstar
Bushed
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
28,106
Reputation
-6,860
Daps
44,803
Reppin
NULL
For the most part standardized tests are bullshyt. All students learn differntely and a bunch of em don't perform well under the pressure of taking those tests. But colleges put a lot of emphasis into high standardized test scores.

I'm surprised some people remember their ACT/SAT scores after they graduate HS. All I know is my scores got me in, 6-7 yrs later and can't eem rememeber it.

exactly, it's bullshyt. they only use it as a means of making sure certain people can't get into certain places. anybody can pass a sat or an act with the right training. not everybody can pass college. that along shows how colleges are more of a business than an actual education institution.
 

Killer Instinct

To live in hearts we leave behind is to never die.
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
34,322
Reputation
12,351
Daps
158,501
Reppin
LWO
You can't really rely on standardized tests. I know I went to high school with a few kids I can recall off the top of my head that bombed the science, math, or English sections on the ACT but killed those courses throughout freshman year despite being deemed unprepared for collegiate level course work. Standardized tests are unfortunately a way of life if you or your kids are planning to go into most white collar professions, so being a good standardized test taker can have it's benefits. Doesn't tell the whole story by any means, but it can be beneficial in certain instances.


I personally put more stock into strength of curriculum and difficulty of subject matter. A kid who scores average on the SAT/ACT but routinely challenged themselves and successfully juggled courses such as Psychics/Chemistry, Honors Spanish, English, and AP Bio will probably be a stronger student and handle college better than the one who scored higher on the same test but had a considerably weaker schedule throughout high school.
 

Motife43

Superstar
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
10,181
Reputation
5,200
Daps
29,990
Reppin
ATL
I remember my score because I was scolded for mine. :heh:
Damn lol. Did you get into the school you wanted to go to?

I do remember the two or three times I took the SAT/ACT. One, I was anxious to leave and go to my church league basketball game. The other one, I remember it was top D-1 caliber nikkas from schools around the county and dudes was in there farting

No wonder they didn't do shyt in college lmaoooo

exactly, it's bullshyt. they only use it as a means of making sure certain people can't get into certain places. anybody can pass a sat or an act with the right training. not everybody can pass college. that along shows how colleges are more of a business than an actual education institution.

Not just high school either. Elementary and middle school too. My mom is a elementary school special ed teacher, she deals with kids with behavior disorders and whatnot. They have young kids who aren't even reading grade level taking these tests. They're judging teachers, schools, and systems based on this when it's not an accurate barometer of aptitude and what's being taught in the classes. You can't just give a teacher a bible (curriculum) to teach from and expect it to be taught from when all students learn differently.

These tests are purely a bullshyt way to let lazy admissions officers justify weeding out applicants.

It's comparable to the software HR uses to hire job applicant
 
Top