Study Reaffirms Mt. Holyoke SAT Policy

Parents Forum
21

<p>I have searched the College Board site and now can’t find them. Maybe I am tired. I have emailed the College Board to find out where these statistics are located on their site.</p>

<p>As for my 55-45 estimate, obviously this is an estimate based on students that have taken tutoring for the SAT. I based these estimates on how well the student did in the first year, and in some cases subsequent years vs. how well they did on the SATs. </p>

<p>Yes, generally 1400+ kids did better grade wise then 1000-1200. However, it wasn’t necessarily much better. A 1400+ kid might have gotten a 3.5+ vs a 3.3 for the 1100 or 1200 kid. Like wise, I have seen a number of kids with 1100+ perform better than those with 1400. Are these exact studies, no! I can only say that from my experience, I have only seen a slight correlation.</p>

<p>You also note that maybe someone had a bad day. Yes, there is some truth in that. However, I have seen a large number of kids whose scores were less than 1200 have very decent first year GPAs. Obviously, this varies from college to college and major to major. However, the kids with lower SATs didn’t do as badly in many cases as one would suppose compared to their much higher SAT counterparts. I regret that I never kept a statistical record for proof.</p>

22

<p>

</a></p>

<p>Thank you for the informative link.</p>

23

<p>taxguy,
not statistical or “proof,” I know, but, FWIW, I did much better in college than classmates (at same college) who outscored me, esp. in math scores. That was esp. true of the guys, whom I significantly outperformed as an undergrad – obviously those who shared their history, that is. (I also way outperformed both males & females in grad school who did better on the GRE, although that’s not on-topic.) I’ve seen so many examples of this on both levels of education, that I look askance at any standardized scores as reliably predictive. </p>

<p>And, although the Mt. Holyoke policy is news to me, I applaud it. And I agree with their approach: IF a particular skill (such as writing) is so bleepin’ imp. to a college, stop being lazy & create your own damn “test” (in this case, via the MH application itself). But it could be a separate test, as well, or in substitute, if you’re so hot for tests. That could also be an option for those students who don’t have access to many AP courses in h.s., to demonstrate their proficiency & compete with more advantaged students. But for those students with abundant opportunities to prove their preparation for college via their h.s. programs, I just think the SATs are of minimal value & are mostly either duplicative, or become an end in themselves.</p>

<p>JMO.</p>

24

<p>Dstark: thanks for the website. I didn’t perhaps read it thoroughly enough, but I didn’t see where it says that students with lower SES do better on the SAT 2. What I did see is that, in this study, the SAT 2 had a better predictive value for freshman grades. So a lower SES student with higher SAT 1 than 2 would now be deemed a greater risk and perhaps not be accepted. So it’s really important to see if their SAT 2’s are equivalent to their 1’s or not. They don’t seem to chart that (though they do show that within racial categories, there isn’t a variance, but that begs the question of whether there is a variance by SES or not.)</p>

<p>I may have missed tht chart (like I said, I skimmed), but if it’s not there, the question to me remains open.</p>

25

<p>Epiphany, before applauding MHC’ policy, you may be interested to see how Mrs. Brown views the “high school curriculum contributions” : </p>

<p>

</p>

26

<p>FWIW, the UC study is far from being the only study worth mentioning. For one, the UC study was based on a pool of 50,000 applications. Despite its obvious bias and ulterior motives, the College Board has sponsored many studies. Here’s a small description of a study that coincided with the start of Atkinson’s crusade. </p>

<p>"SAT I scores of African-American and Hispanic students have lagged significantly behind the state average. According to the state Department of Education, the 2001-02 average verbal score for African Americans was 426, while the average verbal score for Hispanics was 431. The average math score for African Americans was 427, with Hispanics scoring 447. Whites had a 530 average verbal score and a 544 average math score. Asian Americans had a 488 average verbal score and a 554 average math score.</p>

<p>Because of these disparities, a huge controversy continues regarding the worth and usefulness of the SAT I. The College Board has funded studies that have sought to discover whether the SAT I is a reliable predictor of success in college. The most comprehensive such study was conducted by the University of Minnesota. Released in 2001, the study used the meta-analysis technique to evaluate more than 1,700 other studies covering more than one million students.</p>

<p>The study found that the SAT is not only a good predictor of freshmen grade point averages, but also predicted GPA during later years in college, as well as study habits, persistence, and degree attainment. </p>

<p>Further, the study found that the SAT predicted the success of students in college regardless of gender or race and was not simply a measure of test-taking ability. Despite such findings, critics of the SAT I have been working to undermine the exam.</p>

<p>In 2001, UC president Richard Atkinson called for the eventual elimination of SAT I scores from consideration in the UC admissions process. Atkinson portrayed the SAT I as -an ill-defined measure of aptitude or intelligence." Atkinson claimed that the test was perceived as unfair and that its results ?can have a devastating effect on the self-esteem and aspirations of young students." He implied that the SAT I blocked African-American and Hispanic students from entering the UC system.</p>

<p>In reality, the SAT is not the greatest barrier to the UC for most African-American and Hispanic students. Rather, it is the failure to take the required college-preparatory curriculum." </p>

<p>And, on the subject of income versus performance:</p>

<p>"In the public’s mind, the SAT is often viewed as an indicator of general student performance. But it is at best a crude measure of such performance. Unlike the California Standards Test or the Stanford-9, which test almost all students, or the NAEP, which tests scientifically representative samples of students, there is no control over who takes the SAT. The percentage of California high-school seniors taking the test has increased from 30 percent in 1972 to 52 percent in 2002. Since SAT test-taking populations vary from year to year, using SAT results to say something definitive about general student achievement is problematic. Indeed, the College Board warns that, “Since the population of [SAT] test takers is self-selected, using aggregate SAT I scores to compare or evaluate teachers, schools, districts, states or other educational units is not valid.” </p>

<p>This is not to say that revisionists are correct in their claim that drops in SAT scores have been caused by the increase in the number of test takers from minority and low-income groups. As PRI’s 2002 report They Have Overcome: High-Poverty, High-Performing Schools in California explains, children from minority and low-income backgrounds can excel on standardized tests as long as they are getting effective classroom instruction. Thus, the real culprit for the decline in SAT scores is not the demographic change in the test-taking population, but the lower-quality public schooling received by those taking the test."</p>

27

<p>Xiggi:</p>

<p>“Thus, the real culprit for the decline in SAT scores is not the demographic change in the test-taking population, but the lower-quality public schooling received by those taking the test.”</p>

<p>I agree with you that it plays a very important role. </p>

<p>Mini: what would you say about it? </p>

<p>"What will happen to a kid where the highest score in the class is around 3.5 versus outside word where the grades may be around 4.0” So are you telling me that now prep school needs to give a grade inflation. If you say ignore SAT 1 but use SAT II, I may agree with you. However if you think one need to ignoring SAT II as well as SAT 1, then how would you compare students if a school gives grades were much lower than other public school.</p>

28

<p>Xiggi, I don’t always agree with you,but I am in agreement on your SAT comments.</p>

29

<p>Of course xiggi is describing the situation in California where our public schools are ranked 44th in the nation for funding, and most homeowners put real property tax protection above the interest of children. The state where the Governor reduced car taxes ( so people could afford to add that dvd in the back seat) while he borrowed $2 billion from the education budget. This year he is going back on his word while he continues to underfund education below the required by prop 98 .</p>

<p>Every child in our country deserves a great education not just the ones who live in wealthy districts or whose families can afford private schools. When a college like Mt. Holyoke can find a way around the built in biases that traditionally keep the working poor down.</p>

<p>I attended a mock trial award ceremony and the winning team from a wealthy school, stood on the stage with an attorney advisor behind every member of the team. The third place team was from an inner city school that had one attorney advisor and no faculty advisor (the kids had organized their own team.) There was no question in most of our minds which team was most impressive, even though their ecs might not reflect all that they had overcome and accomplished. It is the same when people try to compare the SAT scores of a student who had special preparation and took the test several times to get a good score, vs. the kid who is the first in the family to take the test and has little preparation going in. </p>

<p>Bravo Mt. Holyoak…lets even the playing field.</p>

30

<p>Of course xiggi is describing the situation in California where our public schools are ranked 44th in the nation for funding, and most homeowners put real property tax protection above the interest of children. The state where the Governor reduced car taxes ( so people could afford to add that dvd in the back seat) while he borrowed $2 billion from the education budget. This year he is going back on his word while he continues to underfund education below the required by prop 98 .</p>

<p>Every child in our country deserves a great education not just the ones who live in wealthy districts or whose families can afford private schools. When a college like Mt. Holyoke can find a way around the built in biases that traditionally keep the working poor down.</p>

<p>I attended a mock trial award ceremony and the winning team from a wealthy school, stood on the stage with an attorney advisor behind every member of the team. The third place team was from an inner city school that had one attorney advisor and no faculty advisor (the kids had organized their own team.) There was no question in most of our minds which team was most impressive, even though their ecs might not reflect all that they had overcome and accomplished. It is the same when people try to compare the SAT scores of a student who had special preparation and took the test several times to get a good score, vs. the kid who is the first in the family to take the test and has little preparation going in. </p>

<p>Bravo Mt. Holyoak…lets even the playing field.</p>

31

<p>Interesting that a test that was supposed to promote equality and merit is now seen as a vehicle for perpetuating elitism.</p>

32

<p>Mr. B:</p>

<p>actually, the UC’s comprehensive review makes the adjustment in the admissions process, and give big tips to first generation to go to college, low-income kids, low income schools, etc.</p>

33

<p>Mr. B, I also applaud Mt. Holyoke for its attempts to level the playing field. I also happen to like many of the positions of the school, especially that among the Seven Sisters, it is not a Wellesley clone. </p>

<p>This is the second time I discuss the school; the first time was in the context of the erroneous assertion that Mt Holyoke was the leader in financial aid among all private schools. My conclusion at that that time was similar to my conclusion about MHC’s position on the SAT: it is ALL about marketing. It is a very simple proposition: MHC NEEDS to use financial aid to continue to attract applications, and it needs to maintain its visibility AND selectivity in its targeted pool of applicants. </p>

<p>It would be extremely naive to think that MHC is not keenly aware of the impact of selectivity in applications. You can read the Op-ed titled “SIDETRACKED BY SATS” that was written by Joanne V. Creighton and ran in the Washington Post on Wednesday, January 3, 2001. </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.mtholyoke.edu/offices/comm/oped/jvcusn.shtml[/url]”>http://www.mtholyoke.edu/offices/comm/oped/jvcusn.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>You’ll see for yourself how much of the discussion was dedicated to the SAT’s negative impact on the lowest SES applicants, and how much there was about the impact of the USNEws rankings. </p>

<p>However, there is much more to learn in Joanne V. Creighton’s Plan for 2010, which I consulted when discussing the financial aid at MHC. It is available at: <a href=“http://www.mtholyoke.edu/cic/about/plan/The_Plan_for_2010.pdf[/url]”>http://www.mtholyoke.edu/cic/about/plan/The_Plan_for_2010.pdf&lt;/a&gt; </p>

<p>One could expect that the changes in the SAT policy would garner some attention … Nah, the SAT is not even mentioned, and there is no mention of any research prior to the changes. However, here’s something that is worth noting:<br>

  • Mount Holyoke College Recruitment Marketing Study: Recommendations for
    Marketing Strategies and Tactics [Art & Science Group, January 1999].
  • Mount Holyoke College Enrollment Plan 1999?2003 [J. Brown, April 1999].
  • Mount Holyoke College Marketing Situation Assessment [P. VandenBerg,
    April 2000].
  • Report of the Task Force on International Initiatives [April 2001].
  • Mount Holyoke College: A Marketing Opportunity and Image Analysis [Maguire Associates Inc., July 2002].</p>

<p>While I am sure that most colleges use research to establish and verify their policies, I was surprised by the dedication of MHC in this regard.</p>

34

<p>

</p>

<p>Could you kindly provide a reference for the statement you have made about school funding in California? A Web link that compares school funding among the fifty states by a consistent methodology would be great, if you can kindly provide one.</p>

35

<p>Mr. B may have a different local report that is more precise or recent, but this is one that compares the various states in 10 criteria:</p>

<p>Table 1: How much, on average, did teachers in each state earn per year?<br>
Table 2: How many students were enrolled in each state?
Table 3: How many teachers were working in each state? .
Table 4: What was the student?teacher ratio in each state?
Table 5: How much money, on average, did each state spend per student?
Table 6: How much money did each state spend for operating schools, including salaries, books, heating buildings, and so on?
Table 7: How much money did each state spend in total for schools, including operating expenses, capital outlay, and interest on school debt?
Table 8: How much revenue did school districts receive from state overnments?
Table 9: How much revenue did school districts receive from local governments?
Table X: What were school districts? total revenues? </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.nea.org/edstats/images/04rankings-update.pdf[/url]”>http://www.nea.org/edstats/images/04rankings-update.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

36

<p>The NEA figures cited by Xiggi put California about in the middle of the pack in spending per student, which is about what I expected.</p>

37

<p>This thread has been very educational for me. I had thought that the colleges focused mainly on the GPA, the courses taken and what they knew about the student’s school to see if the student were capable of doing the course work and motivated to do it. I thought they used the SATI in ranges to see if they were dealing with an overachiever or underachiever. In that manner the SAT did not have a strong correlation with how one might perform in college. A student with an SAT of 1600 might not perform better than one of 1400, but would almost certainly outperform someone with an 1100 in the more rigorous schools.</p>