GoBigOrange86
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2007
- Messages
- 15,172
- Likes
- 38,622
I’m not looking at it as an argument; I enjoy the discussion. It is my area as well. I’m just saying, if you have 2 students, A and B, and student A has a 4.0 and student B has a 3.3, but A went to one of the worst-performing schools in the state in terms of educational quality and took no AP classes and B went to one of the most rigorous schools in the state and took quite a LOT of AP classes, the GPA masks all that. 4.0 > 3.3. Standardized tests are an attempt to, well, standardize, and that serves an important purpose.Exactly. A standardized test looks at a single point in time, GPA is a picture of entire academic performance over an extended period. A student could study their ass off, pay for ACT prep classes, etc. and crush it, but still be a terrible student and woefully unprepared. I've seen it time and time again. Some schools do still put a lot of weight on those test and some research shows, particularly in the Ivy League, that those test can serve as predictors of success, but in many of those cases those students also have a high GPA to accompany those high test cores, so which is it? Most schools will like always use them, but not put as much weight on them and move to a more holistic admissions process. Anyway, not wanting to argue just offering my perspective since it's my area.
My university dropped the SAT/ACT requirements during COVID and, speaking for myself, there have been concerns with the quality of student admitted as reflected on various assessments.