| I taught the SAT many years ago. There is no question in my mind that the SAT has a very slight predictor of success at MOST, and in many cases, it actually has a negative correlation.
I have seen far too many kids who I knew were top notch, yet not do well on the test. The main reason is the timed nature of the test. There are a LOT of thoughtful kids who simply like to think things through. Einstein was one of these types of kids and would have been adversely affected.
Likewise, I see kids who score well and I know won't do well in school for a variety of reasons. Frankly, most people who have taught the SAT, that I have known, would have agreed with my sentiments. It is the colleges that are fooling themselves. Luckily, the colleges are waking up and realizing that the SAT isn't that good a predictor of college success.
As for the ACT and subject matter tests,I do believe that they are better predictors from what I have seen. However, they have the same problem regarding the timed nature of the test.
However, with all that said, I still doubt the veracity of UC's study. Let's face it: UC has a vested interest in affirmative action and in bringing in more minorities. Anything that will accomplish that seems to be acceptable to them. |