professornana (professornana) wrote,
professornana
professornana

  • Location:
  • Mood:

The Elephant in the Room

It seems to me that of late there have been many elephants in many rooms. We have not asked all the right questions or we have ignored the backstory or we have simply thrown up our hands and thought, oh well.

So, what is missing from this article about making changes in the SAT: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/09/20/college-board-president-gives-some-hints-about-changes-sat#.UkcWZAEAb6Q.twitter. Well, we might point to one elephant: David Coleman is one of the architects of CCSS and now wants to "reform" the SAT. In Coleman's own words (and they are always the best because Coleman seems to sometimes blurt out things he later regrets): :And he said that, however much the current SAT can be improved, "I think the SAT is the best current test there is." What is the elephant here? Well, there are a couple. I think the largest pachyderm is the fact that scores on the SAT are not good predictors of success in college. Here are some links:

http://www.wbur.org/npr/226530184/college-board-concerned-about-low-sat-scores
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/WhosCounting/story?id=98373&page=1
http://www.fairtest.org/satvalidity.html

In fact, a better predictor of success in college is family income.

Coleman wants to make the SAT less coachable. Huh? He wants it tied more closely to high school curriculum. What curriculum? Will there be an SAT that reflects the CCSS? Will vocabulary be more content area driven?

You say you want a revolution? Well, you know, we all want to see the plans. The elephant in the room here resides in this question: how can we ensure more kids gain entrance into college and SUCCEED? A different or "reformed" SAT is not the answer.
Tags: sat
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments