Education >
Standardized Tests
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould the SAT be abolished for college admissions decisions?
Results so far:
| Yes | 52% | 376 votes | Total: 721 votes | |
| No | 48% | 345 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesThe SAT should be abolished as a method of determining admission into college. It is a poor indicator of how well somebody performs in college. I base my argument on personal experience.
In 1975, my parents divorced, and I took the SAT at that time. At the time, my concentration was poor, my sleep erratic, and I didn't care about the results of the test. I recall taking the test, and remember hearing that the best answer on the test was to answer "B", so this answer was given for the vast majority of questions.
I didn't have the patience for the test, and when I didn't know the answer, I answered with the choice of "B". Distracted due to family problems, I scored poorly. In fact, I did so horribly on the test, that it was predicted by the test results, that if I attended college, I would achieve a D-, in school performance.
I wasn't a very good high school student, far more interested in socializing with peers, than any application of real study, and I must admit attended college, only to get away from my home environment, and away from parents battling through a messy divorce.
Off i went to a college that would accept anybody, as a student. During my first semester, I had a B average. Not great, but certainly not the D- average that had been predicted on the SAT test.
After one semester of college, I transferred to another college, and was accepted based on my performance at the first college. I received straight A's, through the remainder of my school years.
Throughout college, I was told that I was highly creative, and had an ability to write well. Since I had performed so poorly on the SAT, i suffered from a self esteem problem, as I didn't believe i was really capable of performing well in school, and convinced myself, that I did well, only because I was "lucky".
Later, I attended graduate school, and while I performed better on the graduate record exam than on the SAT test, I was still convinced that my performance in school was only because of a "fluke". After all, the SAT had predicted I would do poorly.
By the time I had finished the first semester of college, my parents had run out of money, battling this messy divorce, and so I was left to my own resources. I diligently found grants, work study programs, and scholarships, and applied for all. Not only did I complete college, using my own resources, I was able to pay for college, borrowing less than $1000.00, for the six years of schooling.
I might add that I graduated with an undergraduate degree from a very well respected University, and one that would not have accepted me with my SAT scores from high school. I graduated with honors. The same was true about the school in which I had received my masters degree. Both were excellent schools, and schools in which I paid tuition and room and board, using my own resources.
Since graduating college, I have earned rights to one patent, two trademarks, and have owned, and operated multiple businesses. The SAT was a poor predictor of my performance in school or in life, as I excelled far better, than the SAT had predicted. The one notion that I did gain from this test, was that I wasn't able, or capable of high performance. Is this really the lesson we wish to teach our students? How many students sit down, and take this exam, under similarly stressful situations?
The SAT does not test school performance, it measures how well somebody performs on a standardized test. Isn't it time we challenge students to develop creativity? Wouldn't a better predictor of school performance be how motivated a student is to perform in school, rather than how well they do on a standardized test? Doesn't it make more sense to evaluate how resourceful a student will be?
The SAT should be abolished as a deciding factor, for college admission. It is a poor indicator of school performance, because test performance does not measure school performance. There are many factors that shape how well somebody does in school. Don't make the SAT one of them.
Learn more about this author, Tammy Stoner.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
This week, the University of Memphis is under investigation by the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association). It is suspected that one of its basketball players, Derrick Rose, handed in an illegal SAT test prior to being admitted. Apparently, Rose received another student's test score. His former coach, John Calipari is allegedly partly responsible. But, he is now coaching at Kentucky. So if Calipari is responsible for the Rose fiasco, we know two things. Memphis is a national basketball power. Calipari is around $40 million dollars richer and in the clear!
The SAT or the Scholastic Ampitude Test are mandatory exams for all high schoolers. The test is supposed to measure a student's ability in reading, writing and math. Their scores are then calculated. The scores' ranges are necessary to pair students if with a college suitable to meet their needs and challenges. Consider the test as colleges' way of "matchmaking" freshman enrollees.
SAT exams aren't the only college measurement tests taken by high schoolers. The ACT is a required exam for all high schoolers; especially of those in Iowa. A student can take the SAT by it costs over $70 for the procedure.
Scores range from lowest to highest. A 720 can spell community college. However, most students volunteer to retake the exam. The test asks questions over the general subjects. You can study over the general area of an SAT, but no one knows the questions being asked ahead of time. A 1600 S.A.T. is a perfect score. Around 1% of all test takers accomplish this feat. Close to 5% reach the 1260 or higher plateau. It's an extreme rarity to score so high. In some locales, the recipents' names are published in their local paper. That's why Rose's test score sparked so much controversy.
Another Memphis starter, Clifford Dozier is being looked at for the same infraction. His 1260 score has raised suspicions about collegiate athletics. Apparently, he tried passing that score to the University of Georgia. They refused to admit him. His admission to Memphis has also intensified the NCAA probe.
Discussions are being raised if only black, student-athletes are being picked on. The NCAA isn't being racist in their investigations. They are looking at all student-athletes (regardless of color) for breaking NCAA rules. They are looking at the high schools who either pay students to take SAT for their athletes or knowingly doctor their athletes' scores. Cheating is cheating. You're talking about offering a student a full ride to a Division I school for four years. That could mean upwards to $100,000 depending on the institution.
SAT tests are vital because who wants a student flunking out in their secondary education. If their abilities (or lack thereof) are measured correctly, problems can be fixed with incorporating, study habits or extra tutoring.
It's a dirty business of recruiting blue-chip prospects. You have shady AAU scouts looking for "the next, Lebron James". They scour the blacktops and playgrounds for their proteges. They fill their heads with dreams. They put money in their pockets or in their families. When you're dealing with young people struggling in impoverished communities, they're susceptible to unscrupulous people.
It's about time for the John Caliparis who say "They'll push the envelope as far as they can push it" to pay for their transgressions. Why should an institution pay for the sins of their long-departed coach? Why should a player's reputation be dirtied for the shady dealings of crooked, athletic scouts and high school coaches? Who's there to question the high school about Rose's test score? Who's there to question the coach who referred specifically to the University of Memphis?
Critics are quick to blame the "poor kid" for making wrong choices. But, it's not the athlete with his hand out all the time. Sometimes, it's the forces that wish to siphon the athlete's talent for monetary gain. However, no one wants to blame the establishment. That'll be too daunting of a task.
Source: wikipedia
Scholastic Ampitude Test
ACT
Learn more about this author, Marcus Brooks.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
