Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My sister is just a phenom test taker. She got NM from a high school in this area that is never talked about on here, went to Baylor and did their version of Plan 2 which is called University Scholars. Then she went to law school there as well, and did well on LSAT so she tutored others. White kid and a girl at that, from a school none of yall ever talk about. Just to throw that in the mix. Oh and her husband went to HP and she did better than him on everything.
Good for her, some people are just naturally good at test taking, their IQ and academic strength makes it easy for them. That’s why National Merit Scholars tend to do well on LSAT and other advance tests as well.
Just because someone’s parents can put them in HP and provide resources, doesn’t mean they can ace PSAT, SAT or AP tests. It helps some but has its limits.
I would liken taking the PSAT to running a marathon. How do you prepare to run a marathon? start training for it a long time beforehand. If two people are going to run, and one person spends years working out, building up the form, strength and endurance to run, while the other person sits on the couch eating Twinkies, we can all safely predict what the final outcome will be come race day.
With my oldest daughter I honestly think we began the "race preparations" too late to catch up. She had been a typical American child, decent A-B student but not an academic superstar by any means. She played club soccer for several years. We kind of stumbled into getting her a tutor and that tutor introduced us to the world of academic enrichment for kids. Science and math programs in the summer instead of soccer tournaments. There we learned that most of the other kids (who were mainly Indian/Chinese) had been putting their kids in these types of programs since they were 5/6 years old. So by the time they were teens they were already so far ahead of the curve and so when it came to PSAT time, it's really no surprise that they dominate. It's no contest with American kids who are into band/sports or just having a life which I truly understand. But yeah, we are losing the educational arms race. I know better now for my younger kids on what I have to do for them to have a fighting chance.
I am a guy whose living depends on parents buying tutoring. So know where I"m coming from upfront. I'd love to sell more tutoring. But what you are describing is a failure, not a success. Kids don't need to be prepping for the SAT in sixth grade. They need to be kids, and they need to be good students. Test prep doesn't really make much sense until a kid has covered most of the underlying content in school. I can't imagine what test prep would look like with a kid who isn't even old enough to have been exposed to algebra yet, and I really doubt this improves future test scores.
But even if it did, so what? Your kid is probably going to do just as well in life if he or she has a 1350 instead of a 1450. There's more to being a human than a test score, and while I am a fan of giving your kids a good chance to succeed, what you are describing is onerous.
I am as much of an insider as there is in this business, and I can tell you that I'll probably get my kids a good private tutor for 8-10 sessions in the couple of months before the test. 80%+ of the gains that can be had in a year can be had in two months, and I don't want my kids spending a huge chunk of some really great years doing test prep. I'm also okay if they go to a good state school instead of an Ivy -- I want them to be well-rounded people, not just graduates of elite universities.
Edit to add: I just realized you said 5/6 years old (!) and not 5th/6th grade. Oh my.
I think the SAT and ACT have a less certain future in college admissions. The UC System is already stepping back from its plan to create its own admission test. If it doesn't create one by 2025, the system plans to go test blind. Other major universities and liberal arts colleges already have test-blind admissions. Based on recent application data, it seems that test-blind admissions create larger, more diverse applicant pools. If this turns into more diverse graduating classes, schools can address equity problems without sacrificing rigor. Moreover, larger applicant pools increase a school's selectivity ranking, something administrators value. If this scenario holds true, the ACT and SAT become largely irrelevant.
I think the SAT and ACT have a less certain future in college admissions. The UC System is already stepping back from its plan to create its own admission test. If it doesn't create one by 2025, the system plans to go test blind. Other major universities and liberal arts colleges already have test-blind admissions. Based on recent application data, it seems that test-blind admissions create larger, more diverse applicant pools. If this turns into more diverse graduating classes, schools can address equity problems without sacrificing rigor. Moreover, larger applicant pools increase a school's selectivity ranking, something administrators value. If this scenario holds true, the ACT and SAT become largely irrelevant.
I'd probably take the other side of the bet. Very few colleges have the resources and expertise to truly select and screen for applicants without the measuring stick of the SAT/ACT. Anecdotally, a friend working at SMU has already said they think the new students this year admitted without benefit of test scores seem to be underperforming based on their high school performance. I would emphasize THINK because the school doesn't know whether it's simply a question of Covid-related weakness in rigor. Many schools inflated grades and/or lowered expectations in the last 18 months because there was so much going on. Point is, I think the vast majority of schools will want to go back to having that yard stick, imperfect as it can be. I agree that competitive schools want large applicant pools to make them appear more selective, and removing test requirement will for sure accomplish that. I do suspect it makes their yield more unpredictable, and it will remain to be seen whether they are attracting students who will graduate at the same rates as historical classes. Graduation rate is also hugely important to rankings.
To a point I made way earlier in thread, I was speaking very specifically about PSAT being a money maker. Selling lists of students to colleges so they can create a marketing list is a hugely important revenue source for them.
Based on recent application data, it seems that test-blind admissions create larger, more diverse applicant pools. If this turns into more diverse graduating classes, schools can address equity problems without sacrificing rigor. Moreover, larger applicant pools increase a school's selectivity ranking, something administrators value. If this scenario holds true, the ACT and SAT become largely irrelevant.
There's no doubt that removing testing results in larger applicant pools -- kids who didn't have the chops before now think they have a chance. But that doesn't mean the applicant pool is stronger, and colleges now have a big problem. How do they whittle down an even larger applicant pool with fewer criteria at their disposal?
I think most of the colleges that have gone test blind due to Covid will go back. For schools that are test optional, admissions rates are higher for students who submit competitive test scores.
Implicit in your argument here is the idea that two hypothetical student bodies with equal graduation rates from a given school are academically equal, and therefore we should simply prefer the student body that is more diverse. If Harvard could have one group with an average of 1510/4.0 graduate at an 85% rate, or it could have another group with an average of 1380/3.6 graduate at an 85% rate, it should prefer the second group if the second group is more diverse. I don't agree. The graduation rate among Ivy League colleges is over 95%, so it isn't as though elite colleges are difficult to graduate from and the mere fact of graduation is proof of deserving the spot.
While I agree that diversity is important, creating a less-credentialed student body is a bad idea. Spots at elite universities should go to the most qualified students, with consideration also being given to the obstacles a student faced on their way to becoming high-achieving. We should also remember that highly-selective universities already have enough high-achieving students from diverse backgrounds in their applicant pool. Black students are overrepresented at Harvard. To whatever extent minorities are underrepresented at elite universities, it isn't because kids who would get a 1050 on the SAT are scared to apply.
If elite colleges are committed to have student bodies that reflect the population in general, a quota system that uses as much available information as possible is far better. If you want 13% of your student body to be black, you should want to know which black students in your applicant pool are most deserving of those spots. The SAT and ACT are objective measures that contribute to this, and in an era of grade inflation, I think it's clear that GPA/class rank + SAT provides a clearer picture than simply GPA/class rank. I'm not necessarily saying that I think the quota system is a good system (as we've discussed in this thread, some cultures are very academically-driven and may deserve to be overrepresented), but the SAT and ACT aren't preventing this kind of approach.
Last edited by Wittgenstein's Ghost; 09-27-2021 at 10:46 AM..
I'd probably take the other side of the bet. Very few colleges have the resources and expertise to truly select and screen for applicants without the measuring stick of the SAT/ACT.
To add onto this, if people think the test prep world is advantageous to the wealthy, they haven't seen the admissions consulting world. Take tutoring prices and multiply by three (or ten or twenty.....I'm not kidding). The SAT and ACT at least provide clarity. Everyone knows what things make up 80% of the admissions decision. If those go out the window, suddenly the college admissions picture gets very hazy, and college admissions consulting will boom. That world is even more exclusive and expensive, and it's hard to see how such a system becomes a more level playing field.
No they are not. Black people from the actual United States are severely under-represented at Ivy Leagues, including Harvard. And Harvard doesn't chose 'the best' students based on scores or whatever. They never have.
No they are not. Black people from the actual United States are severely under-represented at Ivy Leagues, including Harvard. And Harvard doesn't chose 'the best' students based on scores or whatever. They never have.
Harvard's self-reported demographics for their most recent class show 15.8% African American. Do you have access to information showing the domestic/international breakdown?
Regarding the last two lines: Is it a coincidence that their average SAT is a 1520? I'm certainly not claiming that their admissions process only considers GPA and SAT, but those are both very weighty portions of their admissions decisions.
I doubt PSAT, SAT, AP testing is going anywhere. If you eliminate that, colleges only have GPA to rely on, which is very teacher and school based and has more potential for corruption.
Harvard's self-reported demographics for their most recent class show 15.8% African American. Do you have access to information showing the domestic/international breakdown?
Regarding the last two lines: Is it a coincidence that their average SAT is a 1520? I'm certainly not claiming that their admissions process only considers GPA and SAT, but those are both very weighty portions of their admissions decisions.
It wouldnt surprise me if a substantial portion of that 15.8% is either people born overseas or are first generation here. Colleges love international students since they tend to pay sticker price, so recruiting African students kills two birds with one stone, boost the bottom line and help with diversity. There is still a large number of African kids who were born and raised here but their parents come from Africa (my wife is one). So far it seems that this particular subset of students tend to perform fairly well academically.
Eventually though, almost all immigrant groups will assimilate and those lofty scores will tend to drop back down to the average as future generations become more American and less of where they came from. The one big exception appears to be East Asians. They generally speaking are the longest established and most assimilated of all the immigrant groups in the US and their academic achievement does not appear to be declining whatsoever.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
