Tuesday, March 11, 2014

The new SAT: the Essay

This is the third post in a series on the redesigned SAT.  The first two were on vocabulary and the math section, respectively.

It was interesting to see what the news media chose to focus on when they did their bullet points for the redesigned SAT.  As headlines and/or sound-bites, many chose variations on “The new SAT will drop the essay requirement!”  That they would trumpet this particular change is understandable.  The SAT essay has been widely loathed since it was first introduced in 2005.

Criticisms of the 25-minute essay section abound:  Writing a coherent essay in such a short period of time on a random prompt that was sprung on you at the last second is a very artificial task.  How often does that come up?  Even college blue-book exams – the closest real-world situation - will have essay questions specifically on the course material.  And don’t get people started on how they are scored.  Anecdotes abound about how kids who can afford coaches are at an enormous advantage because coaches teach you how to use really bad writing to get a top score.  Dropping the essay requirement was popular and a good marketing move.

However, "drop the essay requirement" may be misleading.  The SAT still has an essay.  However, now the style of essay has changed and it is "optional."  Changing the style of the essay is a good move. The new style is much more the kind of writing that you might expect to do in the workplace:  Take this data and write a quick position summary.  ETS has already test-driven this essay style on the GRE, so they should be able to implement it on the SAT with few hiccups.

As far as being "optional" goes, the more selective colleges will "require" it, just as they now "require" the "optional" ACT essay.

While it is true that the method of scoring the essay has always had issues - and likely still will - there are two points to consider here:  First, American kids need to be writing more and when you include essays in assessments, the curriculum will include more writing instruction.  Second, colleges have always been able to read a student's actual essay.  They don't have to rely on the score as a measure of an essay's quality.  In fact, the essay score has always had only a slight impact on the students Writing component score in addition to being reported as a separate score.  Many colleges disregard the entire Writing component score altogether while others downplay it.  Yet, they have required the essay anyway. Keep in mind that this will probably be the only sample of writing accessible to the admissions committee that is guaranteed to have been written by the applicant.  Admissions officers all claim they can spot an adult-written essay from a mile off, but can they really?  And what is to prevent a student from paying his classmate to write a better essay?


So the essay is still there and those applying to selective colleges are stuck with it.  However, the task should be a better example of a real-world writing situation, and practicing for it may pay off even after the SAT is over.



Monday, March 10, 2014

The new SAT: Math

This is the second of a series of posts about the redesigned SAT.  Yesterday's post addressed comments made about vocabulary.

About the adjustments to the math section:

When Daniel Coleman announced a year ago that the SAT would be redesigned, he listed 3 reasons:

1.     To better serve the needs of college admissions officers.
2.     To improve equity.
3.     To better align with the Common Core curriculum.

At the time, the prediction among many was three-fold:

1.     The SAT would become more like its rival the ACT.
2.     The SAT would become less of a college entrance exam and more of a high school exit exam.
3.       The new SAT would be “easier” and thus do little to distinguish between top students and above-average students.

For the math section in particular, speculation was that, like the ACT, the SAT would test topics currently included in pre-calculus.  The current SAT doesn’t test topics past Algebra II.

Since the recent announcement giving more details about the SAT that will be rolled out in March 2016, some pundits are still predicting that the new SAT will be very similar to the ACT, but I disagree.

It’s no secret that the redesign was inspired in part by the ACT’s increasing market share.  Among other things, several states have contracted to give the ACT in schools as a measure of high school achievement.  That has to be a tempting market to tap. 

One detail in the announcement seemed designed to lure back students who would have chosen the rival test.  The current SAT "penalizes guessing" by subtracting points for incorrect answers.  The ACT does not.  Students have actually chosen not to take the SAT for that reason alone, and eliminating this practice is a much-needed marketing move.  It is also a move I heartily approve.  Less time spent on this useful-only-for-the-SAT test-taking skill means more time we can spend on content and problem-solving.

HOWEVER:  In a very bold move, the College Board also announced that part of the new test will be "calculator inactive."  This will be VERY unpopular, and since calculators are allowed on the entire ACT math section many students will choose to take the ACT on this basis alone.  The College Board may have shot themselves in the foot on that one.  I, on the other hand, am pleased as punch.

In Wednesday’s announcement, they said that the math section would include fewer topics, not more.  The topics are vaguely divided into “Problem Solving and Data Analysis”, the “Heart of Algebra”, and “Passport to Advanced Math.” One presumes that each topic would then be tested in more depth.  This would be consistent with the Common Core goal of studying fewer topics in more depth and of promoting critical thinking skills.  The list of topics was very vague, but nothing in the list specifically pointed to the inclusion of pre-calculus topics.  As for the difficulty level of the questions, it’s much too early to tell.

I am ambivalent about a reduction in the number of topics.  On the one hand, does a college student really need to be able to apply the Hinge Theorem – a topic on one of the Official Guide practice tests?  On the other hand, a student who didn’t remember the theorem could reason through the problem as long as he understood the basic principles of geometry, and isn’t the ability to do that exactly what the test purports to measure?  Won’t reducing the number of topics just put a limit on the questions that can be asked?  Or would this question continue to be asked because the student can reason through it using……wait.  Geometry isn’t in the list of math topics.  Unless it is included in “passport to advanced math” – and what IS that, anyway? – then GEOMETRY IS NOT ON THE REDESIGNED SAT. 

Well, that would solve their market share problem, right there.  On the other hand, if I’m a college math, physics or engineering department, I definitely want to know if the kid remembers geometry.  So, if they leave it off the SAT, will colleges start requiring the ACT instead?  And if this test is designed to influence high school curriculum, then will geometry no longer be taught in high school?  I guess we won’t really know what the topics are until we actually see some sample questions, so I’ll try to avoid getting my panties in a wad between now and then.  Still.  It’s something to keep an eye on.

I’ll be posting about local high school students’ experience with an implementation of the Common Core math standards in a week or so once I get the SAT stuff said, but at this point it’s relevant to remind the reader that the “architect” of Common Core and the leader of the College Board are the same person.  When the announcement first came out that the SAT would be redesigned, aligning with the Common Core standards was specifically mentioned.  But in the announcement last Wednesday, College Board spokespeople and the media were strangely quiet on that point.  Perhaps because Common Core’s approval rating is currently in the toilet?

But, I digress.  One other announcement was indirectly math-related.  Oddly, the one change that seems to have resonated most with the general public is that the SAT will go back to scoring on a 1600-point scale.  I thought this was a silly thing to focus on, but then someone pointed out that this causes your math score to represent half of your overall composite instead of one-third.  That’s true.  The individual who pointed it out was bemoaning this fact (she was an English teacher) but as a math major I am pleased.  I also think it is appropriate given the current emphasis on STEM.


So, changes to the math section:  Good or Bad?  It’s too early to tell, but I confess I’m worried.

Sunday, March 9, 2014

The new SAT: Vocabulary

If it has taken a few days for SAT tutors and coaches to respond to Wednesday’s announcements about the redesign of the test it’s because we were super-busy preparing kids for Saturday’s test.  In the brief breather I have before I get slammed with kids trying to prepare for the May test, here are some of my thoughts. 

This will take several posts because a LOT of interesting things were reported.  There are two sets of interesting things:  the changes themselves and people’s comments on the changes.

Actually make that THREE sets of interesting things:  the changes, the comments, and the way the media has reported it all.

Let’s start with the content.  About the adjustments to vocabulary:

Hooray!  I agree that time spent with vocabulary flashcards in order to memorize words such as “phlegmatic” is not time well spent.  However, I do caution you not to assume that this means a child will not need to study vocabulary in preparation for the SAT.  It just means that the vocabulary he or she is learning is more likely to be vocabulary that can actually be put to use in college and beyond.

After several years I have stopped being astonished by the depths of my students’ ignorance when it comes to vocabulary.  It is not necessary to include words like “perspicacious” on a test in order find words with which the average teenager is not familiar.  I know Mr. Coleman promised to only test words that a child learned in school, but he should probably have promised to only test vocabulary that the child ought to have learned in school, and perhaps some that should have been picked up while living life.

There is an exercise I used to do with all of my critical reading students.  (It is from the first edition of The Critical Reader by Erica Meltzer, the current version of which I highly recommend.  There will be a link after this post if you want to order it.)  In the exercise, the student must read a short paragraph, determine the author’s main point, and answer a typical SAT question.  When the student fails to correctly answer the question (which is usually the case), we go back and dissect the paragraph.  There are several words that you must understand in order to understand the passage.  One word is particularly key and it comes in the first sentence.  Only about one in ten of the students (most of whom attend an elite private school) can give me a definition for the word.  Only about three in ten admit to having come across it before.

The word is not “phlegmatic” or “perspicacious”.  It is “partisan.”  In the last decade how many major newspaper issues have been published that did NOT include the word “partisan?”  Knowledge of this word is essential if you plan to take part in political conversation, but our high school students don’t know it.


If it were true that the current SAT only measures whether or not you are good at the SAT (a common claim), then it would follow that getting a better score would be all about memorizing useless vocabulary and learning special tricks that apply only to the test.  However, I assure you that when a student does badly on a critical reading section it turns out, upon questioning him afterward, that he really didn’t understand the article, and often vocabulary is at the root of the problem.