<p>UPenn2013, against whom are you arguing in post 99? It wouldn’t be myself, because I certainly never said such a thing, nor does my last post move in that direction. And btw, the kids I meet (that I mentioned) are all white, and none are poor. I’m speaking to the quality of the mid-level suburban high schools in my state, which are for the most part abysmal and not to anyone’s standards, least of all mine. It may surprise a lot of people on CC how many basic skills are not being taught in middle school and high school. For example, the process of writing and the frequent practice of writing is not (unlike in my childhood) a standard feature of public schools. Should we admit such poorly prepared students to elite colleges? Of course not. But not many people here need worry. These students (again, all white in the areas I’m thinking of) are not any threat to any student on CC or their parents. At the moment, “my” students are qualifying only for community college, and they will not have the skills to write well there, either. Many people here would be amazed to learn how many high school English teachers in public schools are giving only objective tests for literature. You heard me correctly. Not in-class essay tests, which any quality English teacher requires as a priority. My best 10th graders are 2-4 yrs behind where they should be as public school 10th graders. They will not make up for that in time for the SAT I, nor for a competitive college.</p>
<p>I consider my son’s English teacher grossly inadequate, but they do write - both in class essays and various things at home including some fairly elaborate responses to books they are required to read outside of class. It’s appalling to think that there are kids who are just doing multiple choice type tests, but I do believe you.</p>
<p>BTW my son’s bio teacher says that the typical AP Bio prep book only has about enough material to get a 4 on the exam.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The bottom line is if you go to a high school with decent AP classes, there is no disadvantage whatsoever in taking the SATIIs. I would say the same for the SATI. This is especially true for people who are capable of doing well in these AP classes.</p>
<p>I think people are being a little extreme in explaining away high test scores of the affluent and some of the lower scores of the middle class to poor. I actually did take the SATI before test prep (in order to qualify for a summer program.) This was before I had seen a pre-algebra book, and, in fact, before I had had any formal instruction in mathematics in school. (I had learned basic math independently from textbooks because the school refused to teach me.) Anyway, so I was actually figuring out most of the math on the SAT from scratch because I had never seen most of the material. I didn’t do great, but I still outscored one of the kids going to Stanford who posted their scores on cc. And when people complained about this Stanford kid’s scores being relatively low for that school, everyone kept going on about lack of opportunity and test prep. Well, if the kid went to high school and has taken algebra and geometry, then that’s test prep.</p>
<p>Blue Book worked for this family. S1 took parts of three exams (focusing on question format and little glitches in grammar) and earned a one-and-done stellar score. S2 has done the same and has an outstanding score, but he plans to retake to get his SAT CR closer to his PSAT CR score and squeeze a few more points out of math.</p>
<p>S2 and I both swear that pre-IB English did more to improve his CR and W scores more than any other test prep ever would have. Math scores went up as he covered the material in school. (Neither kid did any prep at all for PSATs taken in freshman and soph years. We wanted raw scores.)</p>
<p>DeidreTours,</p>
<p>Your point about the need to identify “core talent” is interesting and I think true, but I think it should go on for selection to gifted programs in elementary school, not for admission to colleges. By the time the student arrives at college, it doesn’t really matter what’s in their “core” if they can’t read and reason effectively.</p>
<p>“Well, if the kid went to high school and has taken algebra and geometry, then that’s test prep.”</p>
<p>I will address you as I addressed UPenn2013: Against whom are you arguing? A student who is not adequately instructed in high school material is not ready for a 4-yr college, let alone for an elite 4-yr college – regardless of income (high/middle/low), race, background, etc. That includes if that student “aced” the SAT I, because that student has not yet provided evidence of the discipline of everyday academics that will be essential for college.</p>
<p>I don’t know which particular Stanford example you’re referring to, but most people admitted to a Stanford or to an HYP equivalent these days, are hardly underperforming on tests. Chances are extremely high that they went to premier high schools, and/or have highly educated parents supplying them (by that fact) additional education in-home and supplemental to h.s.</p>
<p>I disagree very much with the quoted sentence. You apparently are completely unaware of the variation in teaching performance in algebra & geometry classrooms TODAY, not when you were in middle and high school. Example: generally, only the classically-trained or classically-oriented geometry teachers are teaching that subject well, including the process of proofs. I do not consider myself a math genius, but geometry was a cake-walk for me in high school, because it was well-taught (i.e., methodically, which is how geometry should be taught; my teacher was also not a math genius). Today, such geometry teaching (at least in my area) is the exception, not the rule. </p>
<p>As to algebra, do not presume there, either. In the (mostly white, mostly middle-income) suburban high schools of which I speak, the foundation for algebra, which should be established between 5th and 7th grades, is poor or absent. Fraction operations are not being taught well. Well, since many algebraic equations are expressed as fractions, good luck with solving for x and y, let alone reducing that fraction. Prime factorization is not being taught well. Decimals are not being taught well. When I say “well,” I mostly mean clarity of instruction, repetition, reinforcement, practice. Not rocket science. Things adults take for granted, & well-taught students take for granted.</p>
<p>This is not a rationale for poorly trained students being admitted to elite institutions. It’s an argument against the assumption that “anyone” who is self-motivated can do well on the SAT I. </p>
<p>I could write a very different article than the one which is the thread subject. I could write one predicting that admissions gaps in about 10 years will include much more of the middle class than it does now, because the middle class that I encounter is becoming less & less literate. There is much less book-reading going on in middle-class homes, much more attention to leisure and preoccupation with the internet, much less attention to academics than about 8 years ago. Media distractions of all sorts rule households, and are deeply impacting student productivity. The parents are unaware of this until the student begins to show failure between 7th and 10th grades.</p>
<p>I am not aware of students “unable to reason” being admitted to elite colleges, what I am aware of is that admissions at elite colleges do seem to evaluate standardized tests in the context of background, affluence and access. Frankly, it seems to be working out pretty well.</p>
<p>“I am not aware of students “unable to reason” being admitted to elite colleges”</p>
<p>Nor am I.</p>
<p>Here’s how my kid got an 800 on CR, he read at least 100 sci fi novels or fantasies a year. But the real question is how did he develop to be a reader? Maybe it had something to do with the fact that the house has thousands of books. Or that we took him to the library regularly. Or that he had something in his genes that caused him to want to read at age two. Or that he lived with parents who used an advanced vocabulary and thought nothing of discussing string theory at dinner - giving him the context to understand much of what he was reading. Or the fact that we don’t have cable and don’t watch much TV at all. (Younger son BTW scored nearly as well, but was not a precocious reader - he finally clicked with reading in 2nd grade.) I don’t think most of us really appreciate how rich the experiences are that we provide our kids without thinking. Studies have shown that on average middle to upper class parents talk to their kids more, and ask more questions than working class or poor families. </p>
<p>A few years ago I worked on a house addition for a family that owned three books - two picture books for their three year old and one cookbook, but they had a TV in nearly every room. How well do you think their daughter will read? Five flat screen tv’s were stolen recently from a neighbor’s house. Five! One TV always seemed like plenty to us - though there have been a few times when we wished we had two - or at least that we had a TV in the basement.</p>
<p>Mathmom, I couldn’t agree more. (post #109) We also have thousands of books and no cable. We have one old portable tube tv with a little antenna. (I admit that I would love to have a big flat screen to watch movies on, but that’s not going to happen.)</p>
<p>Which is why correlation of money to high SATs has its limits. When my S achieved his Presidential Scholar-qualifying SATs without ever taking a prep course really doing any significant preparation at all, he qualified for reduced price lunch, and had for a number of years.</p>
<p>books aren’t everything…a kid can actually LEARN more on the internet. Will they become better readers? …probably not. I really don’t know how anyone has the time to read 100 novels a year, unless that’s all they do in their free. Not saying there is anything wrong with that though.</p>
<p>Sure, it has limits. It is a body of data showing trends, not predictive in a specific case.</p>
<p>100 novels in a year could mean an hour a night for some. I know people like that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, yes, of course. But it also does not explain the excellent results achieved by certain immigrant groups, now and in the past.</p>
<p>I think we need to put the whole standardized test score, income level, college entrance exams and politics into perspective here.</p>
<p>In my state, the average ACT score at the public flagship is 24, which is the 74 percentile. The minimum ACT score needed is 20, which is the 48 percentile. </p>
<p>It is not for colleges like this, I think, that most of the discussion about SAT and college admissions centers around. I very rarely see an article in which some dean of admissions at some state school is concerned about all those students who applied and had an ACT below 20. But given the percentile ranks, just a little less than 1/2 of students nationwide do not qualify for our state flagship. </p>
<p>Whenever I see an article like this, it is usually the dean of admissions at some elite private school like Harvard or Amherst that worries about test prep and college admissions. Here, the 50% range for student who matriculate is probably something like 31-34, which is between the 98 and 99 percentile. </p>
<p>The concern is not about the kids who score 18 or 19, shutting them out of many state schools, but about the kids who score 29 or 30 (not considered the most fantastic scores but still in the 94+ percentile range), preventing these kids from attending the most elite private schools. </p>
<p>I don’t think that Harvard is admitting any students with an 18 or 19. </p>
<p>Furthermore, the outrage mostly is about the kid with the 29 (who scored in the 94 percentile) who managed to get in to the elite private. Usually, there is some sort of suspicion that this student didn’t get in on merit, but on the basis of some hook, such as legacy, URM, athlete, development etc.</p>
<p>Really, I think folks should not be so concerned that, horrors of horrors, Harvard admitted a low income URM with a 29 (the shame of it, only the 94 percentile!!). But this is precisely what the middle and upper classes are really concerned about and what you see the most anxiety about in posts on CC. </p>
<p>Really if we are concerned about income, opportunity, and college education, we should be less concerned about the fairness of that 29 student getting in Harvard and we should be more concerned about why almost 1/2 of our high school students can’t score around a 20–the minimum score for a state flagship.</p>
<p>
And herein lies the problem of Everyday Math?</p>
<p>Ah, yes, the books. S1 had to do a HW assignment where he had to count the number of children’s books in our house. S tallied up ~575. The teacher did not believe him and confronted me. Didn’t believe we had bookcases in every room, including one of the bathrooms. (This was the year of the highly toxic teacher. S was gone at the end of the year. The teacher retired by the time S2 got to 3rd grade or we would have ensured he did not have her for any class.)</p>
<p>S1 would devour 100 novels a year easily. Scifi, too. mathmom, I still think we are sharing sons!</p>
<p>Sorry, Deja, but what are you asking? Are you asking if this is really happening?</p>
<p>Does reading Harry Potter 100 times count?</p>
<p>mathson reads incredibly fast. Much, much faster than I do. (Though I did read 50 one summer in high school when I had a 20 hour per week job.) And he does reread books. The only reason I know he actually read that many books is that his counselor asked him to list the books he’d read in the last year and we started counting…</p>