Is SAT a four letter word?
Is there to much hub-bub about the error made by the SAT in scoring exams?
I am not sure I agree with the attitude of this article. It’s a little to flaky, a touch unbalanced, and entirely unsurprising to me.
The basic deal is that there were some high school kids who took the SAT and an error was made scoring their exams. 1% of test takers were affected, the vast majority of who received scores that were within 100 points of their true score.
Here are my least favorite excerpts:
For the last five years, Hamilton College in upstate New York has been one of a growing number of colleges not to require the SAT exam. The test causes too much anxiety, Hamilton concluded, and there’s a risk of missing bright students who don’t test well.
Hmmmn. Is the fact that there is a risk of missing bright students who don’t test well the reason that the admission process involves more than asking students what their SAT score is? That last time I applied to college, I was asked more than one question. Don’t get me wrong – Hamilton College is welcome to choose their own admission standards, but I hardly think that because Hamilton College doesn’t like SAT scores, the SAT should be scrapped. Nor will it be scrapped.
The error affected fewer than 1 percent of test-takers, and shouldn’t affect admissions decisions — though Inzer noted it’s too late for students to apply to schools they might have considered with a higher score.
Now hold on just a minute! First I listen to the folks at Hamilton College – I am supposed to be worried about students who don’t get into college because they don’t test well. Then I have to listen to the folks at Hamilton College – I have to feel bad about students who did not get into a better college because they tested slightly better than they thought they did?
I am I hearing this right? SAT scores don’t matter. Unless their good. Then they matter.
That mistake prompted a previous incarnation of Pearson Educational Management, which also scores the SAT, to pay a $7 million settlement. On college admissions bulletin boards this week, there was talk of lawsuits in response to the SAT gaffe, along with angry comments from students and parents.
We do live in a litigious society. I should have been a lawyer. I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that if these lawsuits are succsessful, the price of taking the SAT will increase. I can’t wait to read the article when people start complaining about the high price of the SAT next year.
Fair Test, Schaeffer’s group, wants more transparency and expansion of the rights of students to challenge their scores on standardized tests. The SAT error was uncovered because at least one student asked for a hand score. But that request costs $50 (refunded if an error is found), and there’s a risk of getting a lower score. The College Board says it gets about 500 such requests per year, most of which reveal no error. (emphasis added).
I know I am hearing this correctly. I am in favor of accurate SAT scores. Unless my SAT score goes down. Then I am in favor of inaccurate SAT scores.
Here, for giggles, I have noted the geographic area of everyone quoted in the article. I think you’ll find it is very representative. We’ve got upstate New York, New Hampshire, Maine, and D.C. Check out the map in the article too. I wonder how closely that map correlates with the 2004 Presidential election.
One more thing I find super interesting. Say you were going to sue – your kid got into say Hamilton College instead of Syracuse. Suppose you win. How do you prove damages? I haven’t met the economist that can precisely tell me the difference between the value of a Syracuse education and a Hamilton College education yet, but I am looking forward to it.
–CT
March 14th, 2006 at 11:31 pm
I believe the band of SAT testing is ridiculous. First off I don’t mean to come across as rude and maybe I’m jus ignorant to the “some test better then others†idea but I think no matter which way you slice it, tests are meant to do that… TEST your knowledge. And not only your knowledge but your ability also. Just as a test may seem stressful to some, life itself is stressful. It’s how people learn to cope with things and think through problems in life that will determine how far they will go. Also just like life, luck will only bring you so far. (That is if you believe in luck) If I understood correctly the tests have proven to have a %1 failure rate, in which those people we still damn near close to their actual score. Well for those one percent sorry to say but suck it up. You’re only complaining if it’s a decrease failure. Retake the test. Most people take it numerous of times anyway. One of those times is bound to be accurate. The thought of suing the company I think is quite funny actually. The cost of the trial will probably only waste more of their money than retaking the test would. It is also only going to raise prices for those of us who were prepared enough to take the test a second time. It’s is quite sad to know that people feel they have to take such extreme measures to make their point. And anyways, if a “close to actual†score along with their other qualities and attributes aren’t enough to get them to where they want to be, then what makes them think that and actual score along with their attributes will? I’m sure something more then a less than 100 points is what is stopping them.
Angelle Baudoin!
March 15th, 2006 at 9:14 pm
This article is certainly a controversial issue. In my last two years of high school, much emphasis was placed on the SAT and ACT. Although success on these standardized tests was stressed, most of our students were not. I was fortunate to be involved in an academic environment where learning was cumulative, not merely based on one test or one research paper. College testing and entrance requirements should be much the same. New York’s Hamilton College has somewhat got it right. In all fairness to the outstanding student who does not do well on standardized tests, other considerations such as GPA, extra-curricular participation, and even outstanding personal qualities such as leadership, character, etc. should be taken into consideration. However, because we live in a competitive world, entirely removing the pressures of testing is not the answer. Testing is an integral part of college life. Additionally, since these college entrance exams can be retaken, they should not be completely obliterated from the college entrance process. Also, since mistakes in grading are inadvertently made on tests from Kindergarten through Grad School, Marion is particularly on target when he states that “as long as you have humans involved, you’re going to have some mistakes.†Such is life, and standardized testing, mistakes, and pressures are part of life.
March 16th, 2006 at 8:04 am
It’s to bad Hamilton College is going to the extect that it is going to put less emphasis on SAT’s. It seems to me that they are taking a selection route based on ‘convenience’. It the SAT scores are high than the applicants seem to ‘make the grade’ with admissions at Hamilton. If the SAT’s are not so favorable, than vice versa.
I feel this is just another example of the ‘hyper-sensitivity’ issue that we all face here in America. No one accepts responsibility anymore for their actions, test scores, etc. Granted there is room for human error with grading exams, but that is a fact of life that can never be corrected.
As for the pending suit for damages with a student attending Hamilton College as opposed to Syracuse and which institution offers a higher quality degree, I feel it is up to the individuals interpretation as to what they get out of their college experience. Not all the best doctors, lawyers, business people, etc. are graduates from Ivy league schools, but come from lesser know colleges and universities sprikled across the U.S.