SAT old test or new one?

[Az Pirates]

Especially for those of you who are, or who have children who are HS juniors this year...
(or for any educators out there with a strong opinion)

Are you/they taking the old SAT or the new SAT or both?

There seems to be conflicting information from diff. sources about what would be best.


Not sure I find any of the standardized tests all that predictive of college success. Isn't that, to a large degree, what they are trying to gauge?

I understand the buzz is that the new SAT will be even easier to 'coach' a good score on - so the kids/parents who are willing to shell out the $$$ to firms like Kaplan or Princeton Review have a pretty good chance of coming up with the big scores.

Not sure how I feel about the essay. I definitely think writing skills should be evaluated, but it will have to be a pretty subjective scoring system (I'm having flashbacks to the olympic gymnastics scoring fiasco)

The essay will be read and rated 1-6 by just two readers (possibly 3 IF there is a score discrepancy) this should take less than 4 minutes - and a lot of colleges are reqiring the new test specifically to have the score from the new writing segment. Hmmm

 

[monarchsfan16]

I do know some juniors who are taking both. However, most colleges, from what I have heard will be looking strictly at the new SAT, because that's what's available to them. Most juniors do not take SAT's until the spring, and the first administration of the new one is in January.

As for the essay; many colleges previously required applicants to take the Writing SAT II which had an essay component. 20 minutes to write an essay on that one So it will save people from taking an additional test. That scoring system is identical to the one already in place for the SAT II.

I really think the SAT's needed some serious changes and they got them. The analogies are gone; and it's supposed to be more realistic. I'm sorry, but there is nothing good about the old style SAT. I just took it for the second time on the 9th and it was no better than the first time. The vocabulary that is used in analogies on the old test is vocab that is barely even still in the dictionary. Yes, it's possible to do quite well. But I think that once they get the quirks worked out of the new one it will be better.

Oh, and for the objectiveness of essay scoring-the collegeboard has some serious rubrics for essay scoring. They've corrected at least 10 of my essays at this point, between AP exams and the SAT II and the scores I've received on my tests have all been fair.

 

[caitycaity]

I understand the buzz is that the new SAT will be even easier to 'coach' a good score on - so the kids/parents who are willing to shell out the $$$ to firms like Kaplan or Princeton Review have a pretty good chance of coming up with the big scores.

i honestly don't know a thing about the different versions of the SAT, but the kaplan/princeton books (i have experience with kaplan, specifically) that you can buy at barnes and noble teach you the exact same thing as the class. the only difference is that you really have to be self-motivated to use the book. i'm a big proponent of the books though, they helped me do really well on my GRE's.

 

[danacara]

I wonder about any buzz that suggests that the new test, with the essay, will be even more coachable. I don't think you can teach fundamentally good writing skills in eight weeks. I do think that any kid who walks in knowing that the scorers would like to see the typical intro paragraph, main idea as the last sentence, three body paragraph, smooth closing paragraph format will have a definite advantage. Beyond that, it's about writing skill, organization of thoughts, decent spelling, legible handwriting, etc.

Another thing to remember is that most college prep high schoolers have long taken the SAT II Writing exam, which has had an essay section for many years.

Another thing that puzzles me - a test like the SAT can be designed one of two ways. It can be designed toward what you've been taught or coached, or it can be written to test IQ. Originally, it was more like an IQ test. Today, it's evolved much more strongly into a gauge of what you've been taught, as a predictive indicator of your freshman year undergraduate grades. So, why is there an objection to creating a test that grants higher scores to those who have been taught or coached well? I mean, what is a college class final exam? It's an indicator of how well you've absorbed what you've been taught or coached over the last 8-16 weeks. So why do we object, exactly, when the SAT tries to test exactly that? Because the poorer schools or students don't have a chance to gain that same advantage? They may have a weaker background, but that prep book is available at Barnes and Noble for $24.95. And, I hate to say it, but a weaker high school education does leave one with a lesser chance of success in college.

I think the writing section is a great idea.

 

[Olaf]

What was wrong with the old, old SAT? You know, the one before this latest one. Before they tinkered with the scoring method.

 

[sharbear]

I have a junior and his school is advising that juniors wait and take the new SAT. Since his school has been pretty good with their advice that what my DS is going to do. He's not going to even try the old SAT. Also the ACT is adding an optional writing section which is hear is not going to be very optional.

I think that the reason that the college board has changed the SAT is because more colleges were asking for the SAT II writing. I thought that the changes were more to show ability, I thought that it was going to be harder to coach for the test. Also I thought that the SAT is trying to be more like the ACT to show mastery instead of learning how to "beat" the test.

 

[Az Pirates]

Originally posted by sharbear
I have a junior and his school is advising that juniors wait and take the new SAT. Since his school has been pretty good with their advice that what my DS is going to do. He's not going to even try the old SAT. Also the ACT is adding an optional writing section which is hear is not going to be very optional.

I think that the reason that the college board has changed the SAT is because more colleges were asking for the SAT II writing. I thought that the changes were more to show ability, I thought that it was going to be harder to coach for the test. Also I thought that the SAT is trying to be more like the ACT to show mastery instead of learning how to "beat" the test.

Interesting -
That's why I asked.

My DD's school counseling office is recommending that this years juniors take the old test (which is still offered up through January of 2005) and then take the new version in the fall of senior year too (the first time it will be offered is March 2005)

I had read that a major impetus for the change was that the pres. of the University of CA system (the largest public system in the country) had threatened to stop requiring a SAT score at all - quite a few colleges give them much less weight in the admission process than they used to.

Money and numbers talk.

As for the ability to coach to the test - Princeton Review has stated that they are considering doubling their guarantee of a score increase of 100 points to 200 points after taking their course for the new SAT. Guess they're pretty confident in their ability to teach to the new test!

I didn't really mean to start a debate on the merits of standardized tests - although I do tend to have my own pretty strong opinions on the subject.


I was mostly curious about what kind of recommendations others are getting and what they have decided to do.

My DD's class is also the first one required to pass the AIMS tests (Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards) to graduate. Not a problem for her as she got 'exceeding the standard' in all areas as a sophomore - but a lot of kids are pretty stressed about that as well.

 

[Sandy V.]

My daughter is a junior and her high school recommended that she take both versions of the SAT. So that's what she's doing.

She's our oldest and our "guinea pig" in all of this - she's a good test taker, and Colorado requires all juniors to take the ACT in the spring, so she'll be all "tested out" by June.

Unless they change their admissions/testing requirements, most "upper tier" universities still require the SAT II writing, SAT II Math I or Math II, and an additional SAT II test. My daughter will do the Chemistry one, right after she finishes taking the AP Chemistry exam this spring.

I don't have much experience in the review classes, but the one given here before the PSAT didn't help my daughter much. As others have indicated, taking practice tests seems to bring about the same results MUCH more cheaply.

 

[sharbear]

As for the ability to coach to the test - Princeton Review has stated that they are considering doubling their guarantee of a score increase of 100 points to 200 points after taking their course for the new SAT. Guess they're pretty confident in their ability to teach to the new test!

I would suspect that Princeton Review is offering a guarantee of a 200 point increase is because the test is going to be scored on a 2400 point basis instead of 1600 points.

I don't know about taking the old and the new SAT. I just know what my DS's guidance counselor told us. From what he said that colleges are going to require the new SAT for this years' junior's instead of the old SAT so don't bother. I not that worried. My DS is not going to applying to very selective schools and he will be fine with the schools he does want to apply to.

 

[SoonerKate]

I just took it for the second time on the 9th and it was no better than the first time. The vocabulary that is used in analogies on the old test is vocab that is barely even still in the dictionary.

Heh. If you think the SAT vocab is bad, just wait until you take the GRE.