As
an undergraduate admission officer, I often encounter questions from fearful
students and anxious parents regarding the opportunity for admission to my
institution, which requires standardized testing as an element necessary for a
complete evaluation. While I speak at
length about SAT and ACT average test scores, I preface this message by stating
that there is not a minimum requirement.
Some institutions differ in this area by identifying a minimum score
that applicants must have to gain admission.
An even smaller number of colleges are moving to a test-optional model,
which gives students the choice to submit a standardized test score if they
wish, but it is not a required.
As
admission to college grows increasingly more competitive, any slight advantage
or disadvantage could mean very different experiences in an undergraduate
program. The likelihood of job security
upon graduation from any school is not always predictable based solely on the
place of undergraduate studies. However,
the immediate concern high school students and families are facing is how to
get into the college of “my/our” choice, which brings much anxiety and fear
around standardized test scores.
The
increase in competition in college admission is evident by the growing industry
of test preparation. Companies, such as
Kaplan, Revolution Prep, even CollegeBoard are leading the culture of raising
test scores through paid practice. As
scores improve for students enrolled in these courses, the competition
increases, and it becomes more difficult to identify academic merit. In 2001, Richard C. Atkinson, President of
University California, said to the American Council on Education that, “Anyone
involved in education should be concerned about how overemphasis on the SAT is
distorting educational priorities and practices, how the test is perceived by
many as unfair, and how it can have a devastating impact on the self-esteem and
aspirations of young students. There is widespread agreement that overemphasis
on the SAT harms American education,” (Atkinson, 2001). Atkinson sheds light on the
fact that families are spending resources on expensive test preparation courses,
which is creating a larger gap from those applicants who have those who have
not. This new bias leaves those with a
lower socioeconomic status at a disadvantage.
The lack of test preparation and stagnant scores, widens the between “high
achieving/low achieving.” This is a
valid reason and concern for colleges to enact a test-optional admission
process.
With
the absence of a test score, it is even more valuable that admission officers
take the somewhat trendy “holistic” approach to evaluating applicants. This approach takes every component of the
application and proper fit for major and institution into consideration. Leaders of the test optional approach tend to
be smaller, liberal arts colleges. Their
faculty integration in the admission process plays a vital role in understanding
the strength of a student’s intellectualism rather than the ability to score
well on a standardized test.
FairTest,
The National Center for Fair and Open Testing, reveals that 23 of the top 101
liberal arts colleges, as ranked by the US News & World Report, have
adopted a test optional method in regards to SAT and/or ACT test scores for
admission. As an admission officer, I
often face more than just fear when interacting with students and
families. Oftentimes, I am faced with
anger and disgust because a published score on our recruitment literature may
far exceed that of a received score by the student. This causes a reaction that can closely resemble
the five stages of grief, leading to a lash-out against myself and
colleagues. I do not enjoy this
interaction with students and families, so I can empathize with their feelings,
especially since I have never been able to reach an “average score”
listing.
While
a standardized test score can show a student’s ability to work through a timed
assignment well, I believe a focus on this solely discredits the student
learning in and outside the classroom.
Both types of students can do well in college, so there should be a
greater adoption of the holistic approach in evaluating students based on all aspects
of their merit. While we all work to
improve and make ourselves better, those with the available means will more
than likely always have the extra edge in gaining more exposure to areas that
individuals with minimal resources.
References
Atkinson, Richard C., "Achievement Versus Aptitude in College Admissions." American Council on Education. 2001.
Great insight Joe! Fair Test publishes a comprehensive list of all test optional institutions. http://www.fairtest.org/university/optional
ReplyDeleteI've explored these policies quite a bit myself and it is interesting to see how the issue isn't so black and white (test required vs. no test required). Colleges have an amazing variety of admissions requirements, even when considered "test optional."
While I agree with you that focusing solely on a test score isn't good practice either for the institutions we serve or for the students themselves, there does seem to be a fairly substantial body of evidence that indicates that test scores do have some value in predicting first-year student success when used in conjunction with a student's high school record (Syverson, 2007). Moreover, as Sofie notes above, the "test optional" schools don't always allow students to completely forgo submitting test scores, but instead often replace that requirement with something else: a portfolio, a graded assignment, etc. My fear in the test-optional world is that we risk making an already arcane and bewildering process even more confusing for families, especially the "have nots." My guess is that a student from a high-SES background is much more likely to pick up on these nuances of the process than a student from a low-income background, and thus be more likely to actually benefit from a test-optional application process. It's a tricky issue.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it can be very difficult to identify academic merit through standardized test scores. The nature of the questions asked on the SAT often gives advantages to students from high SES backgrounds, while placing students from low SES backgrounds at a disadvantage. However, as Joel mentioned, such tests often indicate students’ success in their first year of a given academic program. Similarly, among medical students, the MCAT is viewed as a predictor of students’ success on Step 1 of the LCME Board exam, in addition to students’ success on tests while enrolled in medical school. Many admissions offices now pride themselves in using a holistic admissions process. As an admissions officer, I believe that it is essential to evaluate all aspects of a students’ admissions file, so as to understand an applicant’s background and other qualitative factors. While I see the benefits of a test-optional admissions process, I fear that it would disadvantage students who choose not to submit test scores. Since other students may submit test scores, would it automatically be assumed that students without test scores are less proficient in regards to standardized testing? I agree that there is too great of a focus on standardized testing and that efforts should be made to understand students’ qualitative, non-cognitive abilities. In order to place less emphasis on the SAT/ACT, there must be a shift in attitudes towards and the perceived value of standardized testing in higher education.
ReplyDeleteThe issue of how heavily standardized test scores are weighted in the college admissions process is extremely important. Joe raises critical and compelling points that all higher education professionals, particularly admissions counselors, should consider. I am a strong advocate for a holistic admissions process, and believe there is much more to a student than a test score. I also believe a (single!) test score does not accurately indicate how successful a student will or will not be in college. For example, as students mature and begin to pursue studies they are genuinely interested in, they often become more committed to their academic work. Contrarily, students often face unforeseeable challenges and pressures once they enter college, which potentially stand as significant obstacles to their academic progress. While it is important students are admitted to schools where they can succeed academically, we must consider the student as a whole and account for all of the variables that make up each applicant. High school grades, recommendations, and interviews all provide critical insight into the student, and may offer clues about how successful they can be. Also, we must remember that each student brings something unique to every campus. It is important to create a well-rounded and diverse freshman class, with an array of interests, talents, and backgrounds. Ultimately, I believe it is critical to evaluate the WHOLE student, and not allow standardized test scores to dictate admissions decisions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Joe about the greater adoption of the holistic approach when evaluating students. This blog actually brings to mind Rossier's decision to make the GRE optional for the EdD program. Now students can either submit their scores or a writing sample. I think it is unfair to place such a heavy emphasis on standardized tests when some students are able to pay large amounts of money in order to take classes to help them improve their score, while other students do not have the resources to do this. By being more holistic and/or offering alternatives to the SAT/ACT, I believe students have a fairer chance of being admitted into universities based on their merit.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a very interesting topic, and I absolutely agree that universities should focus more on the holistic student than the student's test scores. When admitting students, we should be looking at their potential to grow and succeed in college, not on their abilities to accurately fill in an answer scantron. I do wonder how de-emphasizing standardized test scores in the college admission process would affect the way that high school students are taught. Because so much emphasis is currently placed on test scores, I wonder if the teaching styles at high schools would shift if universities as a group stopped considering test scores for admission. I feel like teachers would have a lot more freedom in the classroom if such a thing were to occur.
ReplyDeleteEven though I understand that standardized test scores are a good indicator of whether or not a student will be successful, I do not think that it should be more important than the rest of their academic resume. I don't feel that one test score should be allowed to make a break a student's chances of going to a higher education institution.
Joey, thank you for this post. I found it very interesting and useful. I completely understand why students and their families are so concerned with achieving high standardized test scores. Colleges and universities are becoming more and more competitive because they are receiving a greater number of applicants from which to choose. A “easy” way to sort through these candidates is to simply look at their GPA and test scores. However, I don’t believe that this will help higher education institutions obtain the “best” students. Again, I agree with you that it is important to take a holistic approach. Students need to be evaluated based on the courses they have taken, extracurricular activities, goals, and the hardship they have had to overcome. By placing so much focus and emphasis on tests and scores we establish a dangerous standard of studying for a test rather than trying to actually learn and critically analyze the information we are taught in school. Speaking from personal experience, I did not score well on the SAT, however I did just fine in college. Furthermore, I scored rather poorly on the GRE, yet I am thriving in my masters program. I get positive feedback on my assignments, participate in discussions, and am able to keep up with all the readings. Therefore, I don’t believe that a test score can predict your success in a Bachelors or Masters program.
ReplyDeleteSometimes I admire the practice in Asian countries like Korea and China that one test to determine if and where a student gets into college. It is incredibly simple for the family: no late nights navigating a plethora of application requirements such as ACT vs SAT. It is also very powerful to see an entire country basically shut down for an entire day so as not to disturb students taking the test (Korea will actually reroute flights and stop train service on test days).
ReplyDeleteThis is, of course, going to miss out on everything else that an applicant brings to the table through their personal statement, involvement in clubs, and their interactions with others in pursuit of valuable letters of recommendation. We have a confusing but valuable holistic approach here because it works: I am not my test score.
At my current work place at a dental school, students take Board exams in their 2nd & 4th years of study to prove they have learned while in school. Schools that offer postdoctoral programs have used the scores from these tests as a determining factor in admitting students to programs. This year, those exams went pass/fail. This created mild concern for faculty, but caused a mountain of anxiety among students. How will you choose amongst applicants? The tests were never designed as an admission tool anyway, and they are being moved back toward a more appropriate use.
As an admissions officer, I think putting together a college application is the same as putting together an incoming class: it's a lot like putting together a jigsaw puzzle. Only in this case, the final picture isn't determined until the final piece is put in place. Highlighting different components will create different pictures. That is the artistry of the holistic college application process.
Colleagues above have outlined the biases in standardized tests and I agree with the UC president's statement on the damaging effect of overemphasizing on such assessments. While one can argue any side, I tend to think that excelling on standardized tests or having an outstanding portfolio is less a reflection of a student's innate potential or intelligence, but a reflection of the support and preparation offered to the student via social and cultural capital (this is where the differences in educational access generally manifest themselves). The more one knows how to navigate the system (e.g. taking timed tests, using technology effectively, etc.) the better their college application will look. Standardized tests are only a correlation of first year success because they indicate the quality, or lack thereof, of a student's pre-college preparation. While much work needs to be done in terms of college-preparation I don't think student's should be punished or rewarded for this, for doing so perpetuates the notion of meritocracy and fails to address higher ed's responsibility in helping to fix the problems inherited by a failing k-12 system. Instead, colleges should focus their resources on supporting all students and creating inclusive environments.
ReplyDeleteIf I have kids someday, I for one plan to emphasize holistic learning and critical thinking; teaching them to be inquisitive of the world in a manner that does not stifle innovation and overemphasize standardized tests. Some educational structures reward the wrong things, and it's important to let people know that.
I agree with Joe's assessment of there being two types of students. Those who are analytically acute, and those who persevere and methodically work until they find a solution or prove a hypothesis null. I do find limited value with board tests. I would argue that correlation between SAT scores and gpa are a greater predictor of first year success, than SAT scores alone. The issue I find perplexing are colleges and universities willingness to use student profiles to compete for rankings. I am not sure which is more absurd-the BCS ranking system or News Weeks annual "Best Colleges and Universities" report.
ReplyDeleteI think it's great that more and more, admissions offices are realizing how discriminatory SAT scores can be. It’s important for schools to look at students as a whole. However, I do have to wonder. How can schools compare students across the board, without the use of standardized tests? There needs to be a way to determine how students from different schools compare.
ReplyDelete