Test scores do not accurately assess the knowledge of a student. You can have an off day, and that will haunt you forever. For example, you didnt get enough sleep the night before the sat or act, and then boom. Your dream college wont accept you. All of this funnels down to pressured tests that stress students and decrease their potential.
Performance on a timed test demonstrates how an individual performs under pressure, but a portfolio demonstrates what a person is capable of when given time to perfect a project. A good portfolio can show growth and spotlight characteristics not obvious to a scantron.
ACTs should be used because there is so many student who want to go to school and dont have the knowledge to get to where there going and with the ACTs a person can prepare themselves to do what is best for there lifes and there future. I agree with emphasis on ACTs.
The traditional college assessment guidelines, including the ACT and SAT programs, should be routinely revised and updated to include more basic applications of real-life situations that reflect the current business and academic climate, as well as society. In most traditional colleges and universities, I feel that not enough educational principles are being taught that can be applied to everyday life which begins with the entrance assessment programs as most of their results only reflect a small percentage of an individual's overall personal and academic capabilities.
It is evident that through 4 ACT tests taken, subject scores varied from 4 to 6. Why can't you take the highest scores of multiple tests and make that your average. In school, I have 3.8 GPA and help others that get scores of 28 - 30. Understand the material. On the ACT I'm a 24, but my best of all scores could have made me a 27. Also, luck should never be allowed on a test of this magnitude. Scores would change dramatically if it were fill in the blank instead of picking a, b, c, or d.
I am an "adult" student. I haven't been in school for 9 years and haven't studied math in 10. I scored 90 on my English and missed the essay by a point. The math (college algebra) I didn't do as well in. I need to have college algebra, eng 101 and 102, bio 101, psych 101, a&p 101 and 102 for my major. I know myself, and I know if I tae the courses I need I will do fine because I am being taught. To throw someone into a test on something they haven't used in 9-10 years is just ignorance. Even the advisors of the school stated that they wouldn't have done as well as I did. My first argument is "it's my money, loan, or aid and I should be able to choose the courses I desire and feel I can accomplish." My second argument is "if the student hasn't attended school in the past 3 years, there should be some type of study classes prior to testing." I am truly frustrated because now a major that would have taken me 2 1/2 years will now take me at the least. 3-4 years!
There are many students who are good students that do not perform well on standardized tests, such as the ACT or SAT. My niece is one. She got almost all A's in school, but did horrible on the SAT. There are also people who perform well on the standardized tests that do not do well in college. I think colleges need to come up with other ways to assess students that are more accurate for all.
Tests like the ACT and the SAT are long and tedious, and provide no good assessment of student's academic ability. They ask mundane questions that don't pertain to anything related to college. It is unfair that students have to sit through these useless tasks, and on top of it all pay money for it.
When I took my SAT & ACT I had to retake it twice just to get a score good enough to get a full 100% scholarship, which is a 1260 SAT/28 ACT. To the SAT scorers, a 1260 is average...Well, these generalized test that test on vocabulary that you have to take a specific class (SAT PREP CLASS) just to pass. These test are a class in themselves! Students should have the opportunity to show what they are good at, not have the intelligence measured by a over-generalized test.
Not all students perform well on standardized exams. Furthermore, standardized tests aren't always the best way to asses students. Often, standardized tests focus on how well your test-taking skills are, as opposed to knowledge of the material.
A student's performance on the ACT and SAT is not a complete picture of the student. While both require a degree of critical thought, both cater to students who are inclined to "follow the rules and get a good grade," while proving a stumbling block for those who want to rewrite the rules. I think that teacher recommendations and essays which demand a high degree of critical thought will create a more complete picture of the student. It will also be a good indicator of whether a student is ready to meet the higher demands of higher education. Many I see in my introductory classes simply aren't ready to be there.
Majors relating to the performance of a given art (i.e. painting, photography, film, acting, sculpture, and so on) do not rely as heavily on ACT or SAT scores. Students can score badly on such tests and still be able to produce incredible pieces of art. Colleges accepting students into such majors should look more closely at their ability to perform such arts.
Kids living in impoverished communities have many other obligations that take away dedication from school work. Even the brightest, due to culture, family values etc, have limited resources and opportunity. Because those who truly aren't able to dedicate enough time to study end up with low SAT/ACT scores that put them in bad light. They aren't able to show their true potential therefore losing admittance to their dream colleges.
The ACT and SAT are standardize tests. Granted, these are tests of the basic knowledge an individual will need if he or she is going to be attending a college. Sometimes, however, students do poorly on these tests due to some circumstances that may have occurred at that particular time. How about a college entrance exam as an alternative?
I have personally known several people who have had stellar careers in college academically, while under-performing on the SAT. I outscored my own brother by almost 100 points on the SAT, and yet he earned an honors level degree, while I graduated with no honors. If the SAT had been the only evaluation tool, he would not have had the opportunity that he did.
You can't please everyone with one solution. Colleges use standardized tests like the ACT or SAT because it is a simple formula to compare all applicants. One problem is many people suffer from test anxiety and score lower when put into a highly monitored timed situation.
There are classes that claim to improve test scores for the price of a few classes. The test is suppose to show an accumulated wealth of knowledge over a school career. There has to be something lacking in the tests that a class can magically 'improve' that score.
Yes, colleges should look at a student as a package. There are poor students who do extremely well on standardized tests, and there are good students who do extremely poorly on standardized tests. Standardized tests are not the sum of a student. Other things, such as admissions essays, GPA, recommendation letters, and an interview, should be taken into consideration.
Examinations such as the ACT and SAT do not provide adequate information on the student. SAT and ACT scores are simply a reflection of how much a student knew their sophomore or junior year of high school. Students accumulate knowledge in preparation for college and there should be additional testing that could overrule their ACT/SAT scores.
The ACT and SAT are traditional and nationwide standards for high school students looking towards college to focus on. If colleges and universities started focusing on more assessments than those, it would be more difficult for aspiring secondary education students to know what to prepare for, in order to apply to the schools of their choice. High school is complicated enough.
Colleges need a standard way of assessing the academic abilities of students entering their institutions. The ACT and SAT offer that. That does not mean that they can not consider high school performance or portfolios. However, the standardized tests allow the institutions to assess which students will need remedial work in order before being allowed to take college level courses. There is no reason why a person entering college cannot do well on these exams. Students can go to preparatory classes for these exams, get practice books from bookstores, or practice on-line. Students need to be pro-active on their own behalf. If they are not, then maybe they are not yet ready for college. The ACT and SAT held determine a students' academic skills. If the student is entering a trade school, the assessment needs might be different.
No university can admit every student that applies, so clearly admittance exams are here to stay. They give the school the legal grounds to not admit people who do not have the culmination of knowledge they will need for success in an institution of higher learning. At the very least admittance exams should always play a part- but other talents should be considered if a student falls short on the exam metric.
Colleges rely on ACT and SAT scores for a simple reason, they are proven indicators of later success at college. Whereas grades can vary widely, depending on the school system, the ACT and SAT act as universal test that can reveal the intelligence of prospective students. Furthermore, most colleges already take into account a wide variety of other aspects, such as extracurricular activities, geography, wealth of parents, and, through affirmative action, even race and sex. Thus, there is no reason to further de-emphasize the ACT or SAT.
Everyone is saying we should use some "other" form of assessment but no one is suggesting what for that should be. If, as one person claims, ACT/SAT creates a "fuzzy" snapshop, then what would essays create? ACT/SAT accomplishes quite the opposite. It creates a black and white snapshop where essays create something fuzzy. Put yourself in the shoes of a college admissions counselor. How could you possible read, grade, and rank 8,000 essays? Could you imagine how subjective that would become? Presumably, that job of reading the essays would be divided between a number of people. That creates the opportunity for bias. Each grader is going to read each essay through a different lense. As a result, a student who should have been accepted might be denied admission just because the wrong person graded his essay. The reality is that we as people need to be graded. We, as working adults, are evaluated and graded in our jobs everyday. Having a clear understanding of what is expected of us is crucial if were going to meet those expectations. It's not different for ACT/SAT. Students need to know exactly what's expected of them (ACT/SAT) to get into the college they want. That allows them to set goals and do what's necessary to accomplish those goals. If it wasn't for that clarity, students would have more angst over exactly what's expected of them to be admitted to the college of their dreams.