How exactly does committing/signing work

[LEsoftballdad]

I would guess that kids with crappy scores also don't do much to prepare for the test

Yeah, horrible take. Some people simply test well, and others do not.

 

[nikkilugi]

My issue is that a 1300 is NOT a crappy score - by any means whatsoever. That is the issue - too many people have too high of expectations. A 1300 puts a kid in the 87% percentile of students that have taken the SAT. Now will that %% get worse as less kids take the test - yes it will which also creates unrealistic expectations on everyone. Once you don't require the test, only the kids that will score up in the 1500's will likely be the ones taking it because, like it or not there are schools that still use the standardized scores for merit consideration if not admissions.

Grade inflation is real. I, personally, think the tests in some form should stay. Do I like College Board getting rich off of them? No but I do think there needs to be a standard all students are evaluated on. Regardless of whether they are "good test takers" or not. Again, I will use my daughter as an example because she's used to it. She goes to a public school in SE Virginia (not the bougie NoVA)..... she is ranked 24 out of 529 students which places her in the top 5% of her class. Her unweighted GPA is 3.97 and her weighted is 4.21 (or something like that). So she seems pretty smart. She scored a 1360 on her SAT....... I told her, that just doesn't match up. She knows my feelings - she is a smart kid in a school of mostly eeehhhhhh students. She struggles in math. We DID pay for tutors and they finally helped her understand math to the level she got her score up to that number after 6 dang tries. One tutor said, her math instructors really weren't very good. Well - she did have 2 years of Covid remote schooling where I'm sure she cheated on every math test possible because she hates Algebra so there is that.

So again - while 1300 is not a crappy score (lol my kid is in that range), I also feel like a top 5% student should score better unless they are in a school like my daughter's I guess. So now universities are looking at things like grades and rankings but are they looking at the high school profiles where these kids are coming from? Anyway I digress because as you can tell this has nothing to do with athletics. But to be honest my daughter's softball journey is only secondary to her educational journey which we made clear to her. In fact, softball was a means to an end, for her too. She will go on and play because it got her out of Virginia - she has already said she has no intentions of playing beyond 4 years, lol. So anyway - sorry for the rant and ramble but remember peeps - 1300 is NOT a bad score. It's actually pretty great when the highest you can get is 1600.

 

[_MIA_]

My issue is that a 1300 is NOT a crappy score - by any means whatsoever. That is the issue - too many people have too high of expectations. A 1300 puts a kid in the 87% percentile of students that have taken the SAT. Now will that %% get worse as less kids take the test - yes it will which also creates unrealistic expectations on everyone. Once you don't require the test, only the kids that will score up in the 1500's will likely be the ones taking it because, like it or not there are schools that still use the standardized scores for merit consideration if not admissions.

If you were basing this off of my post, for the purposes of my post the use of 1300 was random. My point is that some kids could be extremely knowledgeable in algebra, geometry,etc and still not be able to break a certain score (replace 1300 with whatever..) regardless of how much they studied for the exam..It is no different than saying that some kids could train to dunk a basketball for two years and still not be able to do it..doesn't mean they are bad basketball players.

 

[nikkilugi]

Thanks, that was educational for me.

I'm not asking for my kids, just asking more for the true studs. I mean Oklahoma is getting the girls they want. Football programs get the players they want. I'm certain corners are cut in many cases.

Honestly though not all programs get the players they want. You just don't hear about the football studs who have to go to community college to start because their grades don't qualify them for the university. This is why there are so many "football factory" community colleges out there - look at Hutchinson Community College and Dodge City Community College, both in Kansas and see how many of those players spend a year getting their grades up and then transfer into Power5. It happens more than you think.

There was a story about Haley Cruse, great Oregon player. Did you know that she originally verbally committed to Stanford? However, when the time came for admissions guess who didn't get accepted to Stanford? So there are instances where students, even STUDS, don't get accepted. There were some other issues going on with the Stanford softball program which also probably contributed but she was still rejected due to not being "academically eligible" according to admissions. Does it happen often? No, but it does happen. Since Haley was a stud and played for the right travel team with connections they knew Mike White who coached at Oregon at the time and the rest as they say "is history".

 

[nikkilugi]

If you were basing this off of my post, for the purposes of my post my use of 1300 was random. My point is that some kids could be extremely knowledgeable in algebra, geometry,etc and still not be able to break a certain score (replace 1300 with whatever..).

Well the things is if your talking about a test with a perfect score of 1600 then we should all know that 800 is "average". Was I basing my post on your number - yeah I was because frankly as a professor even if you say "it's random" I don't fully believe it because you know the average number as well as the perfect number.....lol. Let's be realistic here. However, if you say it's random then, ok - I'm not trying to bust your balls too much so relax. I'm just saying we (me included because I told daughter that her 1360 doesn't match her grades) are being a little too rough on our students.

 

[_MIA_]

Well the things is if your talking about a test with a perfect score of 1600 then we should all know that 800 is "average". Was I basing my post on your number - yeah I was because frankly as a professor even if you say "it's random" I don't fully believe it because you know the average number as well as the perfect number.....lol. Let's be realistic here. However, if you say it's random then, ok - I'm not trying to bust your balls too much so relax. I'm just saying we (me included because I told daughter that her 1360 doesn't match her grades) are being a little too rough on our students.

Actually I know very little about what constitutes a good SAT score in 2023 (I think the test has changed since I took it..) I have nothing to do with admissions. I just teach whoever shows up in my class.

That said I don't believe 800 is an average score since they are not scoring on a curve...You seem to know the percentiles..what is the 50% percentile score?

 

[nikkilugi]

Actually I know very little about what constitutes a good SAT score in 2023 (I think the test has changed since I took it..) I have nothing to do with admissions. I just teach whoever shows up in my class.

That said I don't believe 800 is an average score since they are not scoring on a curve...You seem to know the percentiles..what is the 50% percentile score?

Yeah - 800 is butts as daughter would say. 1050 is probably 50%.

 

[nikkilugi]

Yeah - 800 is butts as daughter would say. 1050 is probably 50%.

At some point I just called it for Haley taking the SAT. I was exhausted and I wasn't even the one taking the test. She was a good sport about it and in the end we knew what number we were shooting for to get her within the 70% (at the time) range according to the CDS for her school. The thing is, now that these scores are not being required, that number will just keep going up because like I said only the kids getting 1500 will be submitting. Then it becomes an issue where a college can "brag" about their SAT/ACT average admission scores. Seems like a big win for colleges frankly.

Did Haley get that academic scholarship because she's a recruited athlete? Hey, maybe, but I do know if she had left her score down in the 1100's she wouldn't have gotten squat. Even her future coach told her that when we visited. So in our case it paid off.

 

[_MIA_]

The thing is, now that these scores are not being required, that number will just keep going up because like I said only the kids getting 1500 will be submitting. Then it becomes an issue where a college can "brag" about their SAT/ACT average admission scores. Seems like a big win for colleges frankly.

If everyone submitting has a similar high score then there is nothing to brag about comparatively speaking....

School Y, who doesn't require SAT scores, isn't going to become Stanford (instead of school X who does require SAT) just because their average SAT score is going to go up. The hierarchy in higher ed is difficult to change. Could be related to the below (which used basketball as an example):

Universal law of basketball: Duke professor's theory unites physics, engineering, and March Madness

Many of the top-ranked teams competing in the 2011 NCAA Division I men's basketball championship tournament look familiar.

phys.org

 

[Vertigo]

The thing with college admissions is that they receive the HS profile sheet along with each student’s application. They can see how many AP classes are offered, how much weight is given to honors and AP courses, where former students matriculated, etc. They realize not all high school GPA’s are equal. They realize some kids take a much more challenging course schedule than others.