 |
| Is there a relationship between the wavering Republicans and the wavering of College Board on the SAT format? |
It was a sad day when College Board starting their hasty retreat from critical thinking on the SAT.
The test, though it did change in 2005, primarily with the addition of a writing/grammar section, seems now on the verge of amalgamating with its archrival:
the ACT in its "de-emphasis of critical thinking", as one of College Board's reps put it a recent conference.
Of course this isn't the first change the SAT has ever been through. When I started
tutoring the SAT in 2004, it was a bit of a dread of mine to deal with
the then new English-oriented section of the SAT. After all, I had just helped a student improve his SAT score by 300 points in two weeks, and 470 points in one month, and now I had to deal with my own greatest nemesis: grammar. I had finished with a "D" on my English final exam as a freshman in high school, but I wasn't going to let that stop my transition to my life as a
professional tutor. Within a few short months my students were doing quite well on the new Writing section; in fact, it was soon after that I had students scoring perfectly on the
PSAT, SAT, and ACT English components of those respective tests.
The way I saw it, grammar was in great disrepair in American society and College Board was stepping up to the plate to knock our infamous reputation for not speaking proper English out of the park. After all, what better way to make students step up to the plate than to test them until they got it right? Well, with the latest murmurings from College Board (revealed in an email by the Summit Group to subscribers of
tutor.com), I really can't pretend any longer. College Board is jealous. I mean
avocado green jealous. With the ACT becoming the predominant test, with it finally being taken more by students in 2012 than those taking the SAT, the pressure was on College Board to make a decision:
toss ("de-emphasize") critical thinking skills, and add a science section to finally go completely over to the dark side, or
do a better job with marketing and make the whole test process easier. The latest round of news makes it clear what choice they made. Unfortunately, even grammarians can't be happy with the new format.
But, let's be objective for a moment: let's argue College Board needs to stay up with the times and the ACT's cutting edge test content and format (i.e. making the essay portion of the test optional, for example). Would it be the end of the world to make the essay
on the SAT optional, and just focus more on publicizing the need for
critical thinking in our society? No, make no mistake about it, the ACT corporation's
shrewd tactics of persuading several states to make the ACT a high school exit test gave a tremendous boost to the number of students taking the ACT. However, was it really necessary for College Board to start getting desperate when they started to see they were behind in the game for the first time?
I liken the whole ordeal to be much like our last
presidential election in 2012. The ACT can be likened to Mr Obama keeping a low profile until swooping in to steal the
election in 2008, he didn't really have much experience in public office, but was very likable. Able to get away with saying that there were
57 states in the USA, he might be likened to the ACT website itself, where
not one of my students has been able to print of a a practice test without getting formatting errors. Comparing Mr Romney in 2016 to the
perennial SAT might be a little too kind, though. The SAT, we must admit, has been consistent for some time while Mr Romney has been plagued by vacillation throughout his career. Held out by some as a champion of the Right, Romney was criticized for flip flopping and not really taking principled stands on issues like abortion, illegal immigration, involvement in international conflicts, and even his attitude toward bank bailouts.
The College Board and the SAT, it seems to me, are now faultering in a similar way: rearranging the decks on their titanic organization that is supposed to be buoyed up by critical thinking, they seem to be on the brink of making a decision to ditch critical thinking, the anchor of their ship, altogether (or at least give the appearance that critical thinking isn't that important after all). Many republicans stayed home in 2012 because they really didn't see Romney as standing for Republican values in an unequivocal way. Won't the same happen in 2016 when College Board forfeits its right to call a question that really makes one think an "SAT question"? I say stop trying to be like something else and focus on what makes you stand out as a winner in the first place. Or has critical thinking become a thing of the past?
