Did Anyone Catch This??? College entry requirements for the coming cycle

[YJMD]

I think the whole notion of removing the standardized test scores is fraught with challenges. I, like basically every person I knew who went to GT, knew kids freshman year who showed up as a top 5% student in their high school only to fail out 1st semester. You need a standard measuring stick to evaluate a kid's academic ability. It isn't fair to anyone (the student who gets in but is unprepared/fails/is hosed for looking at transfer options or falls WAY BEHIND but stays at GT, the student who doesn't get in and could have better used that spot, the teachers/support staff at the Institute who are working with kids that aren't prepared for the workload, the parents who foot the bill, the list goes on and on).

I understand the argument that there is a subset of our kids who score disproportionately lower on the SAT / ACT, but that means we should rework those tests to be more indicative of the skills and fundamentals needed to be successful in college. We are treating symptoms of the problem, not the problem itself which is fix the broken K-12 situation that leads to kids being behind on reading comprehension/math/science etc.

Other than (as previously mentioned) kids coming in for a one and done kind of experience - which isn't what GT is all about - I don't see this being a good thing. Kids nationwide are going to find themselves in trouble academically and schools are going to have one less, flawed as it may be, data point to assess who can be tutored up and who won't be successful here. At least with the athletes someone from the school is talking with / evaluating the kids - for the general population (if we move to expanding the admissions requirement long term) it'll be a recipe for many mismatches.

I remember my roommate being shocked that he scored 100 points higher on the SAT than I did (and was also salutatorian in HS). I finished with a higher class rank at Tech than I did in HS. On paper, other than me being in state and him not, I doubt there would be anything on the application that would be scored in my favor. I'm not saying that my anecdote trumps yours. I think it's unlikely that your theory is completely untrue. I am saying, though, that no amount of data can eliminate a significant amount of variablility in the performance of students who are ultimately accepted. We should look at actual data before drawing what limited conclusions we are able to draw.

But this is an internet message board. It's not something I would expect any of us to have reasonable access to, so that's a lot of words to end up concluding that your thoughts are reasonable although I worry are overstated.

As has been pointed out, this rule is not relevant for Tech directly, but it is relevant because it may provide others a competitive advantage. I don't think we'd be pursuing anybody who would skip testing anyway. I can imagine 2 scenarios harmful to us: 1. recruit has reduced access to testing so takes the test late or has limited access to retesting so they are unable to meet the Hill's requirements to enroll or their spot is taken by someone else waiting for them to clear the bar, and 2. schools who don't provide much real education to (some) athletes in the first place now can grab some guys who would otherwise end up going the Juco/prep school route.

But I don't think the impact is going to be very big. Personally, despite the downsides and likely cases of abuse, there are a bunch of lower-tier prospects whose college hopes would be dashed without this. I think that benefit makes it worth it.

 

[MidtownJacket]

I remember my roommate being shocked that he scored 100 points higher on the SAT than I did (and was also salutatorian in HS). I finished with a higher class rank at Tech than I did in HS. On paper, other than me being in state and him not, I doubt there would be anything on the application that would be scored in my favor. I'm not saying that my anecdote trumps yours. I think it's unlikely that your theory is completely untrue. I am saying, though, that no amount of data can eliminate a significant amount of variablility in the performance of students who are ultimately accepted. We should look at actual data before drawing what limited conclusions we are able to draw.

But this is an internet message board. It's not something I would expect any of us to have reasonable access to, so that's a lot of words to end up concluding that your thoughts are reasonable although I worry are overstated.

As has been pointed out, this rule is not relevant for Tech directly, but it is relevant because it may provide others a competitive advantage. I don't think we'd be pursuing anybody who would skip testing anyway. I can imagine 2 scenarios harmful to us: 1. recruit has reduced access to testing so takes the test late or has limited access to retesting so they are unable to meet the Hill's requirements to enroll or their spot is taken by someone else waiting for them to clear the bar, and 2. schools who don't provide much real education to (some) athletes in the first place now can grab some guys who would otherwise end up going the Juco/prep school route.

But I don't think the impact is going to be very big. Personally, despite the downsides and likely cases of abuse, there are a bunch of lower-tier prospects whose college hopes would be dashed without this. I think that benefit makes it worth it.

Appreciate the conversation on this, it is something I have been following for the last few months thematically with the announcement from California schools back in May about removing SAT/ACT components of applications. I definitely agree with you that the tests are flawed, but am concerned that GPA of a high school doesn't offer near enough information. AP Tests are a better indicator often of student's preparation but realistically they all fall short of measuring aptitude and grit. I don't envy the job of college admissions officials.

 

[forensicbuzz]

I think the Admissions people know what schools inflate grades and which don't. I also think that there are enough data other than standardized test scores to adequately predict whether someone will be successful at Tech. Let's be frank; a very small subset of our student-athletes would be accepted to Tech if they had to compete head-to-head with other applicants. That doesn't mean they're not capable of being successful at Tech, just that their academic record is generally not as robust as the average Tech acceptee. When I was at Tech, our football team's graduation rate was over twice the general student population graduation rate. That has changed now, but that's not because of the football players' graduation rate going down, the general population's rate almost tripled.

I believe the numbers back that up. In 2008, Georgia Tech had the highest SAT average of any BCS football team at 1028. That year, that score was 315 points below the general student population average. I believe GT also had one of the highest graduation rates for our football players too. If the kids want to work, they can make it. Standardized tests are one metric that helps Admissions determine whether someone can be successful here, but it is not absolutely necessary nor is it necessarily the best way to evaluate potential students.

 

[Buzzbomb]

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Kind of a tangent, but I think Georgia Tech should expand our Applied Physiology program to have a bachelors degree. Sports medicine is a booming industry, and so many student athletes want to enter into it after they graduate. Focusing on the intersection of sports medicine and technology sounds right up Tech’s alley.

It would also be a good thing for the student body as a whole, it will help diversify our student body even further just like the business school did. Different kinds of people aside from awkward engineers would be nice! (I am an engineering major here so I’m talking about my own people haha!)

Great idea, but remember, such things are not really in Tech's hands; the GA BOR has to approve, and they have a history of shooting down similar obviously good ideas for Tech in the past.

 

[RonJohn]

I saw that the University System of Georgia has now waived standardized testing for upcoming admissions for spring, summer and fall of 2021. From the AJC:

“USG made the decision after monitoring testing availability during the spring and summer when multiple test date cancellations have prevented thousands of students from having access to a testing opportunity,” Tristan Denley, the system’s chief academic officer, said

Georgia colleges waive SAT/ACT requirements for upcoming admissions

University System of Georgia, Spelman acknowledge difficulty of taking standardized tests in pandemic

www.ajc.com

 

[forensicbuzz]

You know they were starting to feel the heat after announcing that they were going to still require the standardized testing.

 

[MidtownJacket]

I do think this will be interesting to track matriculation -> graduation of this class to see if it deviates more significantly than a typical incoming class.

 

[forensicbuzz]

I do think this will be interesting to track matriculation -> graduation of this class to see if it deviates more significantly than a typical incoming class.

I don't think it will make a lick of difference. Standardized testing just one of so many metrics they use to evaluate potential students.

 

[MidtownJacket]

I don't think it will make a lick of difference. Standardized testing just one of so many metrics they use to evaluate potential students.

.. which could be proven or disproved by tracking the data.

 

[forensicbuzz]

.. which could be proven or disproved by tracking the data.

agreed, Except I reason it will be proven one way or the other.

 

[GTBandman]

Hardest thing to measure is personal motivation. I love all three of my kids. All three were accepted into Tech with SAT scores within 50 points of each other. One graduated with highest honors, one graduated, and one flunked out. All went to same private high school and had the same opportunity. Some folks take advantage and some don’t.

We’ve all seen incredibly gifted athletes throw away their careers. We’ve also seen highly motivated players make a difference beyond what their 40 time indicated. Great recruiting gets to the whole person.

 

[augustabuzz]

Hardest thing to measure is personal motivation. I love all three of my kids. All three were accepted into Tech with SAT scores within 50 points of each other. One graduated with highest honors, one graduated, and one flunked out. All went to same private high school and had the same opportunity. Some folks take advantage and some don’t.

We’ve all seen incredibly gifted athletes throw away their careers. We’ve also seen highly motivated players make a difference beyond what their 40 time indicated. Great recruiting gets to the whole person.

Each of us matures at our own pace.

 

[85Escape]

Each of us matures at our own pace.

And some of us use epochs as units of time to measure it!

 

[GoldZ]

If this becomes permanent, which it was spreading before Covid, it will simply be one more example of dumbing down education that began in the 60s in the name of political correctness. We just can't force the normal distribution curve to be a straight vertical line....no matter how badly a certain brand of politicians wish to do so (sorry OC).
Yes, the standardized tests are not perfect, but neither is our judicial system or capitalism, which are two of the best systems in the history of mankind. So, you don't just trash em. The point made above about, we are treating symptoms, is so very correct.
Not flunking kids due to PC, dropping SATs, creating a flood of substandard online programs for degrees, and new math, are not going to help our sinking international rankings on education--- neither will simply throwing money at it.

 

[orientalnc]

If this becomes permanent, which it was spreading before Covid, it will simply be one more example of dumbing down education that began in the 60s in the name of political correctness. We just can't force the normal distribution curve to be a straight vertical line....no matter how badly a certain brand of politicians wish to do so (sorry OC).
Yes, the standardized tests are not perfect, but neither is our judicial system or capitalism, which are two of the best systems in the history of mankind. So, you don't just trash em. The point made above about, we are treating symptoms, is so very correct.
Not flunking kids due to PC, dropping SATs, creating a flood of substandard online programs for degrees, and new math, are not going to help our sinking international rankings on education--- neither will simply throwing money at it.

This is on the edge of a political argument. If you are an educator and/or have the data to support your points, please post.

 

[MidtownJacket]

This is on the edge of a political argument. If you are an educator and/or have the data to support your points, please post.

Since I was responsible for the original offshoot of this bit, I went looking for an article I had read a few months back that informed my thinking on this topic. It was a Forbes article from February of this year specifically talking to the university system of California’s logic and reasoning behind waiving the requirement prior to the Covid-19 concerns.

If this is out of line to continue engaging here (apologies in advance) Forbes link:

Should Colleges Abandon SAT Score Requirements?

The University of California system may drop its requirement that applicants submit standardized test scores., Other prominent schools such as the University of Chicago and the University of Rochester have gone test-optional in recent years.

www.forbes.com

Remember they chose to waive it anyway but this was the counter argument presented; pertinent passage [bolding is my own for emphasis]
“
The University of California’s faculty review committee echoes this argument, arguing that the tests help system schools identify talented students from low-income or minority backgrounds. The committee’s report also contradicts existing research, claiming that SAT scores are a better predictor of student success than high school GPA.

For any given high school GPA, a student admitted with a low SAT score is between two and five times more likely to drop out after one year, and up to three times less likely to complete their degree compared to a student with a high score,” the report argues.

Dropping a standardized test requirement necessarily means that admissions committees must rely more heavily on high school grades. But if grades become the metric by which applicants are judged, high schools will have an incentive to hand out A’s like Halloween candy. Grade inflation of this sort could destroy high school GPA’s usefulness as an indicator of student aptitude.
“

I didn’t continue the topic here because I didn’t want to stray too far off the point, and because when discussing it with other posters I realized this year will be a good sample to track and see if graduation rates dip. The data will show the results one way or another.

I do stand by my previous comment that I think this is generally a mistake for the overall student body (athletes included). The grade inflation scenario is a real issue, especially for athletes, and while I fully acknowledge the flaws of the standardized tests disproportionately skewing lower when looking at “disadvantaged youths” collectively, I think it fair to say if you struggle with the tests than you would struggle similarly with the academic rigor of GT. That is an objective statement devoid of political bias.

 

[GoldZ]

This is on the edge of a political argument. If you are an educator and/or have the data to support your points, please post.

orientalnc, the thread itself is political in nature, as are many threads, which is difficult today to avoid. Agree though on the edge, but the SAT/ACT will always be somewhat political and never just football related. Heck, even our playing or not playing is somewhat political. One doesn't have to be an educator to comment on this topic. Maybe just move it and still allow discussion?
Thanks, Z

 

[GoldZ]

Since I was responsible for the original offshoot of this bit, I went looking for an article I had read a few months back that informed my thinking on this topic. It was a Forbes article from February of this year specifically talking to the university system of California’s logic and reasoning behind waiving the requirement prior to the Covid-19 concerns.

If this is out of line to continue engaging here (apologies in advance) Forbes link:

Should Colleges Abandon SAT Score Requirements?

The University of California system may drop its requirement that applicants submit standardized test scores., Other prominent schools such as the University of Chicago and the University of Rochester have gone test-optional in recent years.

www.forbes.com

Remember they chose to waive it anyway but this was the counter argument presented; pertinent passage [bolding is my own for emphasis]
“
The University of California’s faculty review committee echoes this argument, arguing that the tests help system schools identify talented students from low-income or minority backgrounds. The committee’s report also contradicts existing research, claiming that SAT scores are a better predictor of student success than high school GPA.

For any given high school GPA, a student admitted with a low SAT score is between two and five times more likely to drop out after one year, and up to three times less likely to complete their degree compared to a student with a high score,” the report argues.

Dropping a standardized test requirement necessarily means that admissions committees must rely more heavily on high school grades. But if grades become the metric by which applicants are judged, high schools will have an incentive to hand out A’s like Halloween candy. Grade inflation of this sort could destroy high school GPA’s usefulness as an indicator of student aptitude.
“

I didn’t continue the topic here because I didn’t want to stray too far off the point, and because when discussing it with other posters I realized this year will be a good sample to track and see if graduation rates dip. The data will show the results one way or another.

I do stand by my previous comment that I think this is generally a mistake for the overall student body (athletes included). The grade inflation scenario is a real issue, especially for athletes, and while I fully acknowledge the flaws of the standardized tests disproportionately skewing lower when looking at “disadvantaged youths” collectively, I think it fair to say if you struggle with the tests than you would struggle similarly with the academic rigor of GT. That is an objective statement devoid of political bias.

MJ, me thinks the grade inflation issue goes back decadesss. Yet another reason for combining gpas and testing scores, for a more complete and fair measure.

 

[orientalnc]

MJ, me thinks the grade inflation issue goes back decadesss. Yet another reason for combining gpas and testing scores, for a more complete and fair measure.

As the newest moderator I am reluctant to move or remove posts. I think we all want a civil discourse that allows for disagreements.