Re: Fw: SAT

[Robert Schaeffer <bobschaeffer@earthlink.net>]

Prof. Cunningham's memory is not accurate -- The statement in Jerry Bracey's letter is correct.. 

The College Board and Educational Testing Service have long admitted that high school record is a better predictor of first year undergraduate grades than is the SAT. FairTest's musty reference copy of the College Board's SAT "Technical Handbook" (copyright 1984) states, "Clearly, high school record is the best predictor of freshman grade point average. . . " (p. 142). 

The addition of a third exam to the prediction equation (the so-called "Writing" test, for which 70% of the score comes from multiple-choice copy editing questions) in the "new" SAT did not alter the fundamental relationship. High school academic performance -- despite grade inflation and variations in course difficult among applicants -- still predicts better than the SAT (or ACT), according to the most recent College Board analysis.

Recognition of this important fact is a major reason why so many colleges and universities have dropped admissions testing requirements for all or many applicants (42 additions to FairTest's test-optional list, including several of the most selective schools in the country) since the "new" SAT was introduced. 

-----Original Message-----
>From: George K Cunningham <gkc@louisville.edu>
>Sent: Jul 15, 2008 4:25 PM
>To: arn-l@interversity.org
>Subject: Re: [arn-l] Fw: SAT
>
>Historically, the SAT was a slightly better predictor of first year in college GPA than High School GPA.  In the latest research they appear to be equal predictors, but the two combined is a much better predictor than either by themselves.
> 
>George K. Cunningham
>Professor, Ret.
>
>>>> "GERALD BRACEY" <gbracey1@verizon.net> 7/15/2008 1:56 PM >>>
>This letter appears in today's Washington Post.  Monty, Bob and some other ARNers will recognize this as the same argument that engendered a long-running, acrimonious dispute between George Hanford, then President of the College Board, and SAT critic, Jim Crouse (The Case Against the SAT, 1988, with Dale Trusheim).  It will be amusing to see what, if anything, the Board has to say this time around.
>
>Jerry
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: GERALD BRACEY 
>To: letters@washpost.com 
>Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 9:04 AM
>Subject: SAT
>
>
>Laurence Bunin of the College Board inadvertently gives the game away in his letter defending the SAT.  He wrote "Recent data compiled by the College Board show that the SAT...is almost precisely as predictive of college success as are four full years of high school."  In other words, the SAT is redundant with grades and useless.  As long as you've got the high school record, you don't need the SAT.
>
>Carl Campbell Brigham, the principal developer of the SAT, saw it a "merely as a supplementary record" and the question has always been, "When the SAT is added to the high school record, does it increase the accuracy of predictions about college success."  It does not.
>
>Gerald W. Bracey
>1797 Duffield Lane
>Alexandria, VA 22307
>703-317-1716
>
>The writer is a former Director of Research, Evaluation, and Testing for the Virginia Department of Education and author of Put to the Test: An Educator's and Consumer's Guide to Standardized Testing.  


Bob Schaeffer
Public Education Director
FairTest: National Center for Fair & Open Testing
ph-  (239) 395-6773   fax- (239) 395-6779
cell- (239) 699-0468
web- http://www.fairtest.org