<p>In an editorial in today’s paper, former Congressman Bob Barr complains that North Carolina recently enacted a law requiring all HS juniors to take the ACT. Let the ACT/SAT battles continue…</p>
<p>So Barr’s suggestion is to…? Not require all kids take the ACT because it’s imperfect? Not require all kids take the ACT because the SAT is better? I am not sure what they’re trying to say here. </p>
<p>Anyone who’s heading to a 4 year college/university will take either the ACT or SAT. Not requiring everyone take won’t make any impact on how colleges evaluate applicants. Infact, he’s complaining about something that already existed before the law was passed.</p>
That got me wondering: if you start with the science and reading sections, how much additional predictive power do the math and English sections add?</p>
<p>IIRC, vladen, I think the state of GA has a deal with collegeboard to provide some online tutoring for the SAT for the public school students (it may now be available to all students but initially it was only for public school kids). So Barr would likely be happy to write something in support of the SAT</p>
<p>this was actually discussed in another thread when this article came out; I still maintain that unless you want to compare apples to apples (and therefore ACT to SAT), this argument holds very little weight IMO…</p>
<p>If they BOTH hold little predictive value, I “get” it… one can’t bash just the ACT…</p>
<p>If only the ACT is at fault, carry on this discussion…</p>
<p>I hate standardized tests; would be very happy if they would both “burn in ****”…</p>
<p>Interestingly, with respect to the SAT Reasoning and Subject tests, the math sections have little to no predictive power on university GPA for UC students.</p>
<p>The problem with NOT requiring a standardized test is that one is then at the mercy of several thousand school districts, all with their own little grading policies, schemes, and assorted grade inflation. </p>
<p>Having said this, I always had a soft and suspect spot in my heart for the ACT, to the extent that it is graded ‘narrow’ (kind of like the IELTS) and as such it loses a lot of information compared to the more widely spread SAT. </p>
<p>Perhaps we can do the Law School admission trick - since law schools seem to care only for GPA and LSAT, regardless of school or major (or so I hear), one would do well to enroll their kid in a not-so-great high school and supplement with cram school or tutoring; this guarantees a perfect GPA, add some meaningless EC’s and elite.edu, here we come. Do we really want this?</p>
<p>Where I live we have our choice of urban, near-suburban, wealthy suburban, ex-urban, rural, and small town chic high schools with tremendous variation in grading and student body ability. Plus the usual assortment of prep and parochial schools. The students know what are the easy schools - the parents may know, the school admins have all drank the Kool-Aid, and good luck with admissions…</p>