I would like to see an end to ALL entrance exams. There are additional factors that determine students' success in school that these exams can't possibly measure -- like how determined someone is, how hard someone works and studies, etc.
There are additional factors that enhance a student's chances of succeeding in undergraduate and graduate degree programs, such as tenacity, high levels of motivation, focus, etc. However, these characteristics may not be sufficient if a student does not possess sufficient intellectual capacity to engage in higher level academic studies. This is a serious problem in our society whereby high school students whose academic standing is subpar are often encouraged to attend college when they would do much better learning a skilled trade.
I think that most of the schools that are making these tests optional are relying on 1) grades, 2) references, 3) extra-curriculars, and 4) bribes from Lori Loughlin
I believe tests are a fact of life. I agree they don't measure everything, but they do measure some things. Many times in life one can get a do-over, but many times one cannot. And what one person can test well in, another cannot. We all have our strengths. For example, I'm sure we would prefer out doctors get the correct diagnosis the first time. Sometimes they get a do-over, sometimes the patient is dead. I work in a forensic laboratory. When I go to testify, I get one shot and I had better get it right. I don't get to say the next day, "Wait, I forgot to mention something." Maybe a plumber installing a faucet can come back and fix the drip, a do-over, but the plumbers who re-piped my house got it right the first time so I didn't have to deal with additional leaks. I believe that sometimes one has to get it right the first time, and tests are a valid measure of the ability to do so.
Perhaps you should reevaluate that belief, at least in this case: http://news.cornell.edu/stories/1997/08/study-graduate-record-exam-shows-it-does-little-predict-graduate-school-success
The actual predictors of college success might surprise you http://michiganfuture.org/09/2017/actually-predicts-college-success/
While tests might not be a good indicator of graduate school success, what Steve said can still be true. There are times when you need to get something right the first time or you're done. Tests do assess that.
Sat on a committee here at the uni that was set up to explore the improvement of student retention, progression and graduation rates. One of the things that a member of the committee, who was also associate dean, told us was that her investigation of the research into this indicated that standardized exams were terrible indicators of success. She said the best available evidence was that high school grades determined it. My wife graduated valedictorian, but choked on the ACT and only got about 80th percentile. Guess which was the better indication of her success? She blew away undergrad in math/physics with high honors and went on to PhD studies in mathematics and is now on a college's math faculty. On the other hand, I blew away the LSAT (had a legit shot at a perfect score had I only managed my time better, just got distracted and started daydreaming about 3/4 of the way through while still exactly on schedule and having gotten every single question right to that point--still killed it well enough to get a scholarship to law school even with the daydreaming) and finished squarely in the middle of my class in law school and then had an undistinguished career as a lawyer in which I eventually had to find another way to make a living--my present gig. My best friend in high school, Ron, got the highest ACT score of everyone in the entire graduating class but was a mediocre student. He flunked out of college in his first year and went to work at an auto parts store. Of course, those examples are as anecdotal as heck, but they sure do confirm the findings of the studies. Standardized tests mainly test how good you are at taking standardized tests. There is almost nothing else in life that is tested by them.
I think at this point we're talking about two different things. Tests absolutely assess if you get something right the first time. There is no room for debate there. Show me any evidence that says tests don't assess if you get something right the first time. Neither myself or @perrymk said anything about tests and success in graduate school or in the professional world. We just said tests assess whether you get something right the first time. There are things in life and in the professional world that you only have one chance to get right.
I guess the "GRE" in the title of this conversation fooled me into thinking that's what we were discussing.
I could rephrase my question. Show me one piece of evidence that says the GRE doesn't test whether you get something right the first time. No one said it accurately assesses success in grad school or beyond. We said it assesses how well you get something right the first time. Which is something you need to do in life and in the professional world.
So does trivia night at the pub, which is roughly as relevant here. It sounds like you want me to say that the GRE tests whether you can get the answers right on a GRE test. Okay, if it makes you happy, I'll concede that point. The only reason to talk about the GRE at all is that its whole purpose is to evaluate whether an applicant for graduate school is likely to successful there. And the point is that it's not fit for that purpose.
This, I think goes to the heart of the issue. The real question is not "Does the GRE measure something?" Of course it measures your ability to answer the questions on the test. The real question is "Does this have any predictive value?" It seems the answer is "not very well." We could give all university applicants a welding test and that would measure their ability to" get it right the first time" but the issue is "So what?" Does that test predict success in college?
The problem with this study is that there are many students who for various reasons do not apply themselves to their studies during high school resulting in poor grades. However, many individuals develop better study habits, focus and motivation as they maturate and subsequently do well at the college academic level.
That was true for me. High School: 2.1 GPA AS in CAD: 4.0 GPA BSME: 3.7 GPA MBA: 3.4 GPA DBA : 3.5 GPA (so far) I still have no idea why I had to know all the Presidents, State Capitals and memorize some Shakespeare. My Michigan Government textbook was printed in 1952. . . . I graduated in 1986.
I know usually most people do better as they specialize more in what interests them. This wasn't the case for me. High School: 3.3 GPA BA: 3.3 GPA MEd: 3.8 GPA MS: 3.0 GPA Average of the two masters degrees: 3.4 GPA So basically I have a 3.3-3.4 average across the board. I think this is because I'm a very curious person who loves learning. I'm interested in so many things that no matter what class I was in, I enjoyed it.
