GWU makes SAT/ACT scores optional for admissions.

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by nyvrem, Jul 28, 2015.

Loading...
  1. nyvrem

    nyvrem Active Member

    Standardized Test Scores Will Be Optional for GW Applicants | GW Today | The George Washington University | Washington, DC

    Here's GWU's online programs

    Undergraduate Programs | Online Programs | The George Washington University

    Wonder if other colleges will follow suit.
     
  2. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    I have long felt that standardized tests were less than useless.

    I had a pretty average SAT score. If I remember correctly I had an 1150 (out of 1600). I got accepted into pretty much every program I applied for with the exception of the only Ivy I applied to (Columbia). My graduating GPA was a 3.6.

    My best friend had a 1450. He not only got into every college he applied to but he was offered gobbs of scholarship money because of his score. His graduating GPA was a 2.5. He was (is) very smart but he absolutely hated doing homework. It didn't matter how simple the assignment was he just wouldn't do it. He would ace the test, not do any homework and bring home a C. Then he'd shrug. He just didn't care. Got himself a full ride to St. Joseph's in Philly. He lasted 1 1/2 semesters before they finally kicked him out. Different grading models. "Homework" was often much more than 20% of your course grade and often consisted of projects that were simply not optional. And, unlike high school, he had the option of simply not showing up to class or, much more to his liking, showing up in classes he wasn't registered for. It took him nearly 10 years of manual labor to go back to school, take it seriously, and graduate. He earned his associates first and then eventually a B.A. in Math. But his failed attempt at college the first time still haunts him. He's been rejected for two grad programs because of his 1.5 semesters of lackluster grades, academic probation followed by expulsion. His explanation is that he simply lacked the maturity for college and probably should have served a hitch in the military first to get his head on right.

    In any case, it sounds to me like exactly what a school should expect when it admits (and heavily rewards) students with bad grades and stellar SAT scores. But that reality didn't stop schools from flushing scholarship money down the toilet.

    I'm not saying that all schools were this irresponsible as stewards of scholarship funds. But I think a lot of schools placed more emphasis on SATs than was probably wise. Ultimately, the high GPA high school students tended to be high GPA college students. And the low GPA high school students tended to either plod through college or drop out entirely. SAT score might have measured their potential but potential remains unrealized when you refuse to apply yourself.
     
  3. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    I'm on the other side of that, because testing well has been incredibly helpful in my life. I easily CLEP'ed out of a year's worth of credit because of it, and my MAT score rescued me for doctoral admissions after one cataclysmic semester at GW otherwise might have sealed my doom for further study.
     
  4. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    Well, there's a fundamental difference between SAT/ACT and CLEP. SAT/ACT doesn't result in credits being awarded, no matter how stellar your score is. I'm not saying that all standardized testing is bad for all situations. CLEP is a prime example of what works, in my opinion. If my friend had CLEPed a year worth of credits then maybe he would have been better engaged by the higher level coursework when he started college. At a minimum, he would have had a year's worth of transferable credit at the end of his failed initial college bid.

    What I'm talking about is using the SAT/ACT as a potential indicator of college success. Why would it be a wise assumption to assume that a person with a poor GPA and a high SAT score would perform well in college? So you have someone with potential who simply can't get the grades together. Especially when dishing out scholarships based upon those scores. Nor do I think that there is no place for standardized tests in admissions at all. But many universities historically didn't weigh SAT/ACT against all other factors. For many schools the SAT/ACT was an end, rather than a means.
     
  5. AV8R

    AV8R Active Member

    Agree Completely. Good for GWU. I'd love to see all admissions tests go the way of the dodo.
     
  6. TEKMAN

    TEKMAN Semper Fi!

    I also against ACT/SAT exams for college entrance admission. My high school mandated everyone took Pre-SAT exam, and I was really frustrated. I worked full-time during Junior year, and attended full-time school. I barely had time to complete all my homework assignments; especially, I took AP courses. I did not have time to study for SAT/ACT/PSAT. Because I did not take SAT, I felt that I was not ready for college while I maintained 3.49 GPA. It was amazing, how I did lot of CLEP and DANTES exams saved me 2 years of college and tuition. Even though I was on active duty, I was able to walked away with a Bachelor degree in 24 months; which costed me only $2,000.00 out of my pocket for textbooks and study materials (included a laptop).

    The next step I would love to see George Washington University partner with StraighterLine for college credits.
     
  7. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    My disdain for SAT/ACT was simply because I feel like I spent a lot of wasted time on the test and the preparation for it.

    I took the test junior year after shelling out hundreds of dollars (and the loss of my tuesday and thursday nights) for SAT Prep Class (taught at my school by my teachers). Then I shelled out the test fee. Then I took the test. My first attempt came in at around 1050. Not terrible. Would have been fine for admission to UofS, but I took another prep class and took the test again. Nights of study. Saturdays filled with angst.

    Had I spent all of that time (and money) on CLEP tests I may well have actually knocked through a few credits before I put in my first application. At UofS (which did accept ACE evaluated credits, at least at that time) that would have saved me a lot of money. Even a single semester (12 - 15 credits) would have been a few thousand bucks worth of savings.

    And honestly, I think that my taking the initiative to take the CLEP tests would have been a much more accurate indicator of the likelihood that I would do well. I was going to college to succeed not because my parents told me it was the only thing for me to do.

    I just think that college admissions should either scrap SAT/ACT entirely or relegate those scores to a more harmless weight. Maybe if I'm a borderline admission case I can see using a top score to weigh in favor of admitting me. But, yeah, the College Board for me is the sort of for-profit influence in education that I think warrants more negative attention than Everest.
     
  8. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    SAT?ACT tests were used because they allegedly predicted success in college. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that they are not a good predictor, this is why an increasing number of schools are eliminating them or making them optional. To me they are a waste of time and money.
     
  9. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    I know several very smart people who just don't do well on standardized tests. Whatever it is that makes people thrive on exams, I seem to have it; my SAT & ACT (I went to HS in Virginia, I had to take both) scores were very good, likely in excess of what my HS grades indicated, and I was accepted to every college to which I applied (I was realistic, I didn't waste my time with the Ivies or public Ivies). Likewise, I did well on the ASVAB, various Civil Service exams, and the GRE.

    However, I have friends who are just as "smart" as I am, but they just don't do well on exams, one in particular almost panics when faced with an exam and answer sheet. I think knowledge based exams like CLEP and DANTES are useful because you know the information or you don't, but I'm not at all a fan of general aptitude exams like the SAT.
     
  10. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    The sole purpose of the SAT is to predict the student's success in his/her freshman year. That's it. No more importance should be given to it.

    As a predictor, it is not very good at even that modest task. It correlates 'okay' with freshman grades (about .3). When coupled with other admissions information, it adds a bit (about .1) to the overall correlation.

    But at what cost? The test is divisive, creating a discriminatory outcome. This would be fine if the thing was more valid, but it isn't. Also, it correlates much better to family income/wealth. (So do high school and college grades.) This furthers the divide.

    About 9 of 10 institutions of higher education are not competitive; they admit all who meet the qualifications for admission.

    Finally, the tests create what economists call an 'externality,' where one party gains a benefit paid for by another. (Canada, when struck with acid rain caused by air pollution in the U.S., is a classic example of this.) The people who gain (admissions officials of universities) do not pay for the information. Test-takers and their families must carry that cost, but they receive no benefit. (No, admission is not a benefit; it can be awarded without the test.)

    Shift the cost of the test to those who receive and consume the information--the universities--and it would disappear tomorrow.
     
  11. AV8R

    AV8R Active Member

  12. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

  13. AV8R

    AV8R Active Member

  14. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

  15. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

Share This Page