The Index Eutxia Swzein Dokei
Volume LXXII, No. 3
January 2011
Haverford, Pennsylvania
Why the SAT is Flawed tadas antanavicius ‘12 As Fifth Formers begin to chip away at the standardized testing requirements of colleges, namely the SAT I, SAT Subject Tests, and ACT, Sixth Formers relish their completion, and Fourth Formers start to look ahead to what will undoubtedly be a grueling Fifth Form year. However, some may stop and think: “What do these tests really tell me?” Is it your level of intelligence, as the general public seems to believe? Is College Board, the company that administers the SAT, correct in calling it an indicator of success in college? Or is the test simply overvalued by society as a whole? The SAT I has been one of the most criticized tests of the past several years, although most others probably suffer similar shortcomings. One statistic to note is the direct correlation between family income and test scores; each section’s score, and thus overall score, increases at a near constant rate for every $20,000 range of income up to $200,000 (according to College Board). Of course, this could be interpreted several ways. Higher incomes could mean higher quality educations, greater amounts of test preparation with help from tutors, higher expectations, more pressure, and so on. Regardless of which explanation is correct, most point to one common theme and end result: a greater amount of time and effort put into preparing for the test.
If time and effort are some of the main keys to success on the SAT, how can it be called a standardized indicator of success for college, much less an indicator of intelligence? Within the test prep industry, one can find a wide range of promises and guarantees of score increases, sometimes hundreds of points, if you take their courses. Most often, the requirements for fulfilling the terms of the guarantees entail attending the sessions and doing the work. The companies must be confident in their ability to place such guarantees in their names, and they probably have the statistics to
back it up. But do these test prep courses or private tutoring sessions actually make you smarter? Of course not. A student who starts off at 2000 and is able to score 2200 after two months’ worth of tutoring sessions is likely not at all more intelligent or more capable of handling a college workload than he was two months before. He has simply grown familiar with the test after taking a dozen practice tests, he has systematically memorized a few hundred vocabulary words that he will forget in half a year’s time, and he has brushed up on some grammar and
math rules that he had learned before and forgotten, a process that will repeat itself once again. The simple fact that a score can be altered through learning certain techniques and becoming familiar with the test exposes its imperfection and gives reason to doubt its overall effectiveness. Ultimately, a student who does not have either the time, determination, or, to a lesser extent, money to prepare for the SAT is at a significant disadvantage to a student who takes several hours a week to study in the months leading up to the test. After all, the results are interpreted as measures of one’s academic ability, not amount of free time spent studying, effort put into that studying, or the number of test prep courses one has taken. In that case, why use it as a significant factor in college admissions? The answer to that is some type of standardization is needed. As unreliable as it is, it creates a relatively level field abilities to a certain extent - not just anybody can put in enough work to achieve a perfect 2400. A student near the bottom of a class academically is not going to be able to achieve a score equal to a student at the top, regardless of how much time and effort he puts into it. Even so, when the difference is not so clear, there is no way continued on page 3
Uniformity, Unfairness, or utopia? Josh Collins ‘13 92.6. A/A-. “Everyone did fine.” In depth breakdowns of grades. Curves, homework, differing material. Should it be more uniform? Teachers grade and teach in many different ways. Some meticulously count points, find averages, and scale on trends. Others grade more subjectively. All have differing partial credit policies. Grades for homework, even amounts of homework, fluctuate wildly from department to department, teacher to teacher. Within the same subjects, teachers cover different material, and tests fall on drastically different days. Should grading have a universal standard, would teachers of the same subjects cover the same material, have tests on the same days, and have a uniform homework policy? English teacher Ms. Rebecca Smedley has mixed feelings on the topic. “My short answer is yes, but I like the freedom of a private school, and the respect they have for me as an educated individual to teach more freely than in a rigid public school.” She further stated that she believes that within departments that the grading system should be very close, if not identical in a perfect world, but that it might be
hard to do given the personalities and teaching styles of the teachers. Echoing Ms. Smedley’s later statements, Fifth Formers Tadas Antanavicius and Jake Gaskill explained, “I think that it would be good [for teachers to grade the same way] in a perfect world, but its almost like asking for utopian fairness, and is not realistic.” While implying that they would like to see uniform grading at least within departments, Ms. Smedley, Antanavicius, and Gaskill all agree to some extent that it is not completely possible to accomplish completely uniform grading. In contrast to previous opinions, Third Former Ryan Hughes was a bit more adamant about the need for a universal system of grading. “I think teachers should grade the same, if only between Math teachers and English teachers. A B- in with one teacher can’t be an A with another.” Agreeing with Ryan in adual interview, Fourth Former Evan Kuritzkes vehemently stated “teachers have to grade the same. It’s really unfair otherwise, as some teachers are much harder graders than other currently, and this can affect your performance in classes.” The two underclassmen interviewed were more
skewed towards uniform grading than the teachers and upperclassmen, a trend that might correlate with age and experience. Upperclassmen have more experience with how teachers grade, and their responses that it might not be possible show more in-depth knowledge than the underclassmen interviewed. The consensus seems to be that uniform grading would be an exceptional system. Differing views exist on its viability as a workable system, but there were no outwardly disapproving points of view. A uniform grading system has pros, such as having a general, widely known and universal standard that students know they must work up to, as well as providing a more level and fair playing field among students who have different “harder” or “easier” teachers. Despite these positives, the system has negatives as well; Ms. Smedley felt that having to teach the same way as other teachers might impair her ability to teach in her own unique way. Grading on a universal scale may too difficult to achieve in the real world. But we can always hope and improve.
Inside this issue... community service update, pg. 2 people to people trip, pg. 3 sexism at haverford, pg. 4 should midterms be before winter break?, pg. 5 sports, pgs. 6-8 abuse of free time in the library, pg. 9 Mr. Fox’s art, pg. 10 Review of Dr. Dre’s beats, pg. 10