David Coleman, President of the College Board, announced changes to the SAT test, criticizing the SAT and rival ACT for being out of
touch with student high school work. The new exam is set to roll out in 2016
and will be moved back to a 1600 scale.
It will features an “evidence-based reading and writing” section and a
mathematics section. The new test will have an optional essay that will focus
on analytic skills as well as writing. Coleman also stated that the
vocabulary section will be toned down to feature less esoteric vocabulary.
Coleman also noted that the test would now feature more demanding
problem-solving, as well as the potential to have students include written
justifications for some answers.
 |
| Rui Vieira/Press Association |
In my opinion, this shift will make the SAT less formulaic
but this will also increase the difficulty of the test. Coleman came directly
to the College Board after previously working on the new Common Core education
standards rollout—Common Core also focuses on more evidence- and
knowledge-based approaches to problem solving, and many of these new changes
seem to reflect that similar approach. Noting that the SAT has been losing
ground to the ACT for quite some time and that there is significant dissatisfaction
with standardized testing in general and particularly relating to college
admissions, I doubt that this test will attract more test-takers; it may
dissuade many students. However, I personally do believe that this new test may
be a better reflection of actual academic performance, as it reflects an
approach more oriented towards analysis and problem solving rather than the
regurgitation of surface-level knowledge.
And on a final note, Coleman also announced that the College
Board will be partnering with Khan Academy to develop free online test
preparation materials. Income-eligible students will also receive wavers to
apply to four colleges free.
What do you think? Is it a step in the right direction as
far as making standardized testing better assessments of students’ abilities to
perform in school/college? Is that even the direction the SAT should be heading,
or should it continue to be a more formulaic assessment? What’s the purpose of
standardized testing anyhow? And what do you think about the new test prep?
Good, bad, more of the same?
5 comments:
While I didn’t look forward to taking the SAT Reasoning or SAT subject tests, I believe that standardized test scores are a necessary part of college admissions. They provide a means of comparison that is otherwise difficult to find among both public and private schools of various degrees of quality across the country. (I am weary of test-optional colleges, but that is beside the point). This all being said, I appreciate that the SAT and the ACT do not play as large a role in college admissions as standardized tests do in most countries.
I’m surprised that College Board plans to change the SAT as quickly as it has announced. However, I agree with Brandon that it is a step in the right direction to align it with Common Core standards and methodology, which will be permeating schools at an increasing rate over the next several years. If a college wants to use the SAT to evaluate a student’s ability to learn and readiness for college-level courses, the test should reflect that. I hope the new vocabulary sections will reflect such a change.
Both CNN and the New York Times pointed out that College Board is trying to make the SAT a more level playing field, especially for students who come from financially disadvantaged families. The free practice materials from the Khan Academy are a great idea, and I hope those will be fully utilized by students. However, I’m concerned about how these materials and the new SAT changes will affect the costs of the test. It’s currently around $50 when you register early—toss in all the edits and the fee waivers for four colleges some students will receive, and I foresee a hike in costs.
The last facet of this policy change that interests me is the now-optional essay. The essay section of the SAT is section I trust the least because I don’t think it reflects one’s writing ability as well as a timed essay in English or a social science class would. A part of me thinks that it should remain obligatory; if colleges want to assess a student’s readiness, writing is one of the most crucial skills for success in college and beyond. An on-demand essay on a random topic is a way to see how a student writes in a raw state. But at the same time, college applicants already submit written work and do plenty of assignments for school. Will this essay really have an effect on their admission decision, and if not, is it worth it? Will a student be more favorable to an admissions officer if they opted to write the optional essay, even if it wasn’t a good one?
I’m very curious to hear the thoughts of others.
I always regretted not taking the ACT over the SAT. When I finally looked at the ACT, I realized that it was a test I would have preferred to prepare for and take. I felt that although it has its flaws, as does any standardized test, it was more representative of what a high school junior's knowledge should be. So, yes, I am glad these changes are being made. I expect the first few years people will complain since it's a new process to get used to, but I'm confident this is a step in the right direction. I'm glad the changes are being made as soon as 2016, it's long overdue. But I feel bad for the students who are in the midst of the process and know they are just barely missing a new type of SAT Reasoning.
I don't disagree that standardized tests are helpful in college admissions, as it is an easier way to compare students from across the nation, but I found the old/current SAT Reasoning test not to test my knowledge but my skills as an SAT test taker. As someone who is not naturally stellar taking standardized tests, I felt I had to study how to take the test rather than material on the test. That seems ludicrous to me. I hope that with both the changes geared toward making the test more skilled-based and having the Khan Academy supply study materials, this problem of being good/bad at standardized tests will shrink.
I agree with Annika's comment about hiking prices to pay for college app fee waivers. I'd like to know more about College Board's finances, but I'll trust that they'll figure it out eventually.
While I agree with Annika's point that it's important for colleges to be able to assess a student's critical thinking and on-the-spot thinking/writing capabilities, I don't think the SAT's current timed-essay really does that. It's not a difficult essay to write, and it shouldn't necessarily be, but it doesn't test your thinking skills as much as your listing skills...at least from my experience. I'm confused about the switch back to the 1600 scale, not sure it really matters. It seems colleges already preferred to look at CR and M and excluded W to some extent in their considerations. I'm curious to see if colleges will state if they require the writing score with the optional essay. I know schools say that for the ACT (where the essay is optional...and I've heard also has better prompts than the current SAT.)
Standardized testing will never be perfect or completely equal and fair. But it is important to realize that grades are more important and there are many other factors that play into college admissions other than standardized testing, even if they play a sizable part. I think and hope this will help improve the process and fix some of the biggest issues of the SAT (yay no more random vocabulary). I'm sure the new SAT will still be able to predict success in one's first semester (or is it year?) of college. I'm interested to see how this plays out in 2016. I've seen a lot of FB posts tonight. I look forward to hearing the dialogue about this topic in the community in the coming weeks.
Like Annika and Kira, I agree that the new SAT planned sounds more reliable and valid than the current test.
Though I might not particularly agree with the methods of common core standards (essays in band and PE? No thanks!) I do appreciate their focus on critical thinking and creating analytically intelligent students, rather than students capable of memorizing large batches of information.
Annika, you mentioned your uncertainty over the now-optional essay, and I would argue that it is a good thing to allow test-takers the option to choose. I, for example, am a decent writer but fail miserably at forcing out an essay in 25 minutes. The writing section score for me was by far the lowest, despite doing well on grammar and sentence completion. I think it is good to allow good (& fast) writers to take the essay portion and show colleges their skills, while allowing other students (like me) to opt-out of the section, especially if it does not pertain to their area of study in college.
Kira, I also wished that I had decided to try the ACT because it seems to be a more accurate judge of crystallized intelligence. However, with the new SAT set to be released, I believe it will again be as good as the ACT at judging crystallized as well as fluid intelligence (in part because they will take out some of the more outlandish vocabulary and make the essay optional).
Also, I completely agree with your statement about how ludicrous it is that we have to study how to take the SAT rather than the material the SAT is supposed to test our knowledge on.
The new SAT shows promise, and I'm only disappointed that I was not able to take it in place of the current SAT.
I personally think that these standardized tests are a bad way to measure one's intelligence or readiness for college. Like several people above mentioned, I understand the concept behind standardized tests as a universal way to compare students, however, I don't think that these tests are necessarily doing that. For example, the ACT and the SAT (including the new one) are very different tests and from personal experience, I performed very differently on these two tests. Just based on the variation of tests, it automatically goes against the "universal" idea of college readiness tests. Another issue with both tests is its emphasis on time. I think that students in the testing room focus so much on time, that it affects their accuracy of their answers. Also, test scores are definitely dependent on whether students take classes and have tutors. While I think that the SAT offering free online test prep is an amazing idea and a big step towards making the test more fair, there is still a difference between online test preparation and a private tutor. Unfortunately I do not think there is a perfect solution (besides getting rid of the test completely) to making the SAT or ACT more fair, however this test is definitely moving in the right direction because, based on what I have read, it is less of how well a student can master a test and reflects more of what a student actually learns in school, like critical thinking.
I like the idea of having a single, nationwide test that everyone has to take, and I think it is a helpful component (not single determining factor) in an application. Paige is right: the SAT or the ACT are not intelligence tests, and I think there is an unfair correlation between test scores and the degree of preparation students have access to before the exam. However, there are zero other aspects of a college application that cannot be influenced by advantages such as financial status and outside help or connections, at least any that I can think of. I think the SAT and the ACT take the bulk of the blame for what is overall an imperfect college education system that we have here in the U.S. I see the tests as an imperfect cog in an imperfect machine, as opposed to, I don't know, the devil in an otherwise angelic college application process.
In regard to the new SAT format, I feel that despite the changes to the exam the difference in scores between "intelligent," good test takers and those who do not perform as well on standardized exams will remain the same. In effect, if the SAT is made easier or harder for everyone, the same number of people should be performing well or unwell, thus not changing the ratio between high scores or low scores. However, Brandon's post was the first I had heard about the stronger emphasis on written justification and a less formulaic exam, so hopefully I am wrong and smart people who are bad test takers will be able to do well on this new and improved SAT.
Post a Comment