The new SAT is yet another example of what is wrong in education. The idea, the hubris, the irresponsibility of higher education that you can quantify knowledge into a numerical construct using a 3 HOUR and 40 MINUTE exam is foolishness at its height. But of course, the only reason we have this new SAT is because higher education professionals have become lazy at pedagogical development and are leery to the concept of student outcomes and other accountability measures.
The purpose of the SAT should be to get a generalized notion of the skill sets that potential students have in order to tailor the curriculum around those needs so that the high priced pedagogues can be most effective. That was, originally, the purpose of the SAT. Instead, the SAT has now become a primary sorting device to produce ?haves and have nots.? More importantly, the administration has gotten caught up in the scores as an end, in and of themselves. Simply put, they want the highest scores in because they believe these students will go on to achieve in their post higher education lives -- in other words, GOLD in and GOLD OUT (the opposite of garbage in and garbage out). If the kids they teach are excellent BEFORE they get to them, then please tell me what the hell is higher education accomplishing? I like to call this the County Club Effect of higher education in which the hardest part of your education is GETTING IN. How sad is that?
As you all know, I value standardized testing. I believe there should be minimum standards that all kids should have. I actually think GWB is on to something with his No Child Left Behind Act but the people that have uncorked this new SAT are just trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. There is NO TEST that can be given on ONE Saturday that can quantify a person?s knowledge (even with the fuzzy range scores ETS has added), their capacity to learn and apply concepts, their motivation to learn and their civic temperament. My goodness, the idea of one test on anyone is outrageous; the idea that you can accurately quantify a TEENAGER in one test is preposterous. I?ve helped urban kids go from an 850 to an 1150 (I can usually get them an extra 120 pts just by changing their negative psychology toward the exam and a few technique adjustments) within 6 months if they have the time (My services are expensive!). But still, I tell kids that if you want to improve your score by 200 points, you are ONLY NEED 99 hours of dedication and $99 of software and books (besides my labor). But here?s the point: If I can change your score by 200 to 300+ points in 6 months and take you from a so-so candidate to a ?SURE THING?, then what the hell is the test measuring in the first place? I?m not adding a significant amount of knowledge to these kids; I?m mostly refining their approach and identifying their weakest knowledge gap. But again, the SAT measures, mostly, how well you are socialized to the exam. Now that?s not bad, in and of itself, but it surely shouldn?t be the main mechanism by which we produce this nation?s elite class.
I still don?t know how you are going to do such things as measure an essay. The whole thing would appear to be extremely subjective. If you are only going to measure for grammar, then that could be accomplished through the multiple choice construct.
Kids, parents, high school and higher education professionals must stand up to this new SAT. We have to learn that measuring is important but that it is INHERENTLY inaccurate. More exams, more sections, more questions in different areas STILL won?t get you all the answers. The purpose of the SAT is to produce a sketch of a person in order to inculcate them with the right type of pedagogy and services. If done correctly, schools should be able to produce success stories in abundance. Instead, every school has settled for the Gold in & Gold out standard in the never-ending Newsweek ranking chase.
I feel sorry for these kids. 3 HOURS and 40 minutes when you are 17 or 18 to produce a number that will grant you membership into the nation?s elite. What has happened to our democracy?
The purpose of the SAT should be to get a generalized notion of the skill sets that potential students have in order to tailor the curriculum around those needs so that the high priced pedagogues can be most effective. That was, originally, the purpose of the SAT. Instead, the SAT has now become a primary sorting device to produce ?haves and have nots.? More importantly, the administration has gotten caught up in the scores as an end, in and of themselves. Simply put, they want the highest scores in because they believe these students will go on to achieve in their post higher education lives -- in other words, GOLD in and GOLD OUT (the opposite of garbage in and garbage out). If the kids they teach are excellent BEFORE they get to them, then please tell me what the hell is higher education accomplishing? I like to call this the County Club Effect of higher education in which the hardest part of your education is GETTING IN. How sad is that?
As you all know, I value standardized testing. I believe there should be minimum standards that all kids should have. I actually think GWB is on to something with his No Child Left Behind Act but the people that have uncorked this new SAT are just trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. There is NO TEST that can be given on ONE Saturday that can quantify a person?s knowledge (even with the fuzzy range scores ETS has added), their capacity to learn and apply concepts, their motivation to learn and their civic temperament. My goodness, the idea of one test on anyone is outrageous; the idea that you can accurately quantify a TEENAGER in one test is preposterous. I?ve helped urban kids go from an 850 to an 1150 (I can usually get them an extra 120 pts just by changing their negative psychology toward the exam and a few technique adjustments) within 6 months if they have the time (My services are expensive!). But still, I tell kids that if you want to improve your score by 200 points, you are ONLY NEED 99 hours of dedication and $99 of software and books (besides my labor). But here?s the point: If I can change your score by 200 to 300+ points in 6 months and take you from a so-so candidate to a ?SURE THING?, then what the hell is the test measuring in the first place? I?m not adding a significant amount of knowledge to these kids; I?m mostly refining their approach and identifying their weakest knowledge gap. But again, the SAT measures, mostly, how well you are socialized to the exam. Now that?s not bad, in and of itself, but it surely shouldn?t be the main mechanism by which we produce this nation?s elite class.
I still don?t know how you are going to do such things as measure an essay. The whole thing would appear to be extremely subjective. If you are only going to measure for grammar, then that could be accomplished through the multiple choice construct.
Kids, parents, high school and higher education professionals must stand up to this new SAT. We have to learn that measuring is important but that it is INHERENTLY inaccurate. More exams, more sections, more questions in different areas STILL won?t get you all the answers. The purpose of the SAT is to produce a sketch of a person in order to inculcate them with the right type of pedagogy and services. If done correctly, schools should be able to produce success stories in abundance. Instead, every school has settled for the Gold in & Gold out standard in the never-ending Newsweek ranking chase.
I feel sorry for these kids. 3 HOURS and 40 minutes when you are 17 or 18 to produce a number that will grant you membership into the nation?s elite. What has happened to our democracy?