When revisions to the SAT were first announced, there were several changes proposed for the reading section. One of the changes was the elimination of the fill-in-the-blank vocabulary section that started off each reading section. I thought that was an interesting choice at the time because, as unpopular as the vocab questions were, testing vocabulary is an easy way to assess reading comprehension. Vocabulary knowledge is a reliable predictor of reading comprehension and vocab questions are a lot easier to write. In addition, testing vocabulary, as opposed to passage-based testing, allows more questions to be asked in the time allotted, which should allow for finer differentiation among test-takers.
The reasoning offered at the time was that being familiar with "obscure" vocabulary did not predict success in college. In the very same announcement, Daniel Coleman said that the reading passages would include "the founding documents." At this point, the test-prep tutoring community responded, "Ummm.....have you actually READ the founding documents??" Talk about obscure vocabulary. I sat down and compiled a list of obscure or antiquated words from the Constitution ALONE that numbered in the hundreds. Then the practice PSAT was posted without any founding documents in it, and I figured the College Board members had come to their senses.
Shortly after that, ETS posted four practice SAT tests. I took the first one, and then I got busy. REALLY busy. It's been a crazy summer in test-prep land. All the tutors I know have been swamped.
The first practice SAT had a pretty easy reading section. Lovely. There was plenty of time, and the most difficult section had a passage that had clearly been written for grownups but wasn't ridiculously challenging. I didn't take tests 3 and 4 until this week, and HOLY CRAP!! Hello, founding documents!
So there is a lot we could say here about the wisdom of including founding documents in some tests, but not others, including that fact that this would be a perfectly valid reason for avoiding the revised SAT. However, if you are going to take it, you need to show up prepared to interpret writing that is 300 years old, obscure vocabulary and all.
Showing posts with label ETS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ETS. Show all posts
Monday, August 31, 2015
Monday, May 5, 2014
Cheating on the college entrance exams
My kid went off to a prestigious college. He came home for Christmas break convinced that he was one of the few people on the planet who didn’t cheat on his college entrance exams. Apparently, everyone there had a story about his cousin’s boyfriend’s sister who cheated on the exam by doing fill-in-the-cheating-method-here. Some of the stories sounded rather unlikely to me, but the news at the time was all about that kid in ….New York was it? …who made a gazillion dollars impersonating other students and taking their exams for them.
In May of 2013 I took the SAT II Math Level 2 exam and I assure you, none of the cheating techniques would have worked. That’s not to say they never work, but the cheating techniques I hear about all depend upon having a dishonest or incompetent proctor. How prevalent is that? I don’t know. I do know that if your testing strategy depends entirely on having a bad proctor, you are likely to run into trouble.
I was recently asked to review a book entitled SAT SNEAK ATTACK: How Computer Geniuses Hack, Beat and Cheat America's Most Feared Exam by Peter Wayner. At 33 pages, it would make a better magazine or newspaper article than it does a book. The gist of it is this: 1. Poor pay causes the proctors to do a bad job. (There are no statistics on the percent of proctors doing a bad job, but since they are all paid poorly I suppose we are supposed to assume that they all are therefore doing a bad job.) 2. Because the proctors are not paying attention you can hide helpful information in your calculator, such as a dictionary. (Having your calculator out at all during the verbal sections is forbidden, so this requires a very inattentive proctor.) 3. You can also hide a program that helps solve math problems, although, based on the description, it sounded to me like this particular help would only be useful for students who would otherwise score very low in the math section. 4. Large numbers of students are cheating using this method. (Again, no actual statistics. This is based on anecdotes from college students.) 5. The author personally alerted the ETS to this egregious problem and they metaphorically rolled their eyes. 6. This means that the math help program is apparently “legal” and any test-taker would be stupid not to avail himself of this advantage.
The SAT was designed in such a way that you do not need a calculator AT ALL. You are allowed to use a calculator because too many high school students think they can’t do math without one, and because they aren’t really testing you on arithmetic anyway. The top test-takers know that using your calculator as little as possible will actually help you go faster in the math section. Spending time and money downloading some program that will solve triangles for you is pretty silly. The triangles on the SAT can nearly always be solved in your head. In the time it would take to practice using the program, you could just practice the math in the first place. But I guess then you wouldn’t have a fun anecdote about how you cheated the SAT.
In May of 2013 I took the SAT II Math Level 2 exam and I assure you, none of the cheating techniques would have worked. That’s not to say they never work, but the cheating techniques I hear about all depend upon having a dishonest or incompetent proctor. How prevalent is that? I don’t know. I do know that if your testing strategy depends entirely on having a bad proctor, you are likely to run into trouble.
I was recently asked to review a book entitled SAT SNEAK ATTACK: How Computer Geniuses Hack, Beat and Cheat America's Most Feared Exam by Peter Wayner. At 33 pages, it would make a better magazine or newspaper article than it does a book. The gist of it is this: 1. Poor pay causes the proctors to do a bad job. (There are no statistics on the percent of proctors doing a bad job, but since they are all paid poorly I suppose we are supposed to assume that they all are therefore doing a bad job.) 2. Because the proctors are not paying attention you can hide helpful information in your calculator, such as a dictionary. (Having your calculator out at all during the verbal sections is forbidden, so this requires a very inattentive proctor.) 3. You can also hide a program that helps solve math problems, although, based on the description, it sounded to me like this particular help would only be useful for students who would otherwise score very low in the math section. 4. Large numbers of students are cheating using this method. (Again, no actual statistics. This is based on anecdotes from college students.) 5. The author personally alerted the ETS to this egregious problem and they metaphorically rolled their eyes. 6. This means that the math help program is apparently “legal” and any test-taker would be stupid not to avail himself of this advantage.
The SAT was designed in such a way that you do not need a calculator AT ALL. You are allowed to use a calculator because too many high school students think they can’t do math without one, and because they aren’t really testing you on arithmetic anyway. The top test-takers know that using your calculator as little as possible will actually help you go faster in the math section. Spending time and money downloading some program that will solve triangles for you is pretty silly. The triangles on the SAT can nearly always be solved in your head. In the time it would take to practice using the program, you could just practice the math in the first place. But I guess then you wouldn’t have a fun anecdote about how you cheated the SAT.
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?
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.
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
David Coleman calls for updating the SAT
David Coleman, president of ETS since October of 2012 has sent out a letter calling on colleagues to participate in a revision of the SAT in order to
This will apparently be a process that involves a lot of different stakeholders. If you were to make changes to the SAT, what would they be?
- better meet the needs of college admissions offices
- better reflect excellence in instruction of the common core curriculum so that schools can use results to improve curriculum and instruction
- reinforce the practice of school work to ensure a smooth transition to post-secondary education while ensuring fairness and equity
This will apparently be a process that involves a lot of different stakeholders. If you were to make changes to the SAT, what would they be?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)