SAT Reading and Math Scores Show Decline 4382

Anne & Lynn Wheeler

The challenge is that there are so many different social factors out there. I get nervous with statistical correlations that don't consider all these variables in the first place. For instance: 1) Does a kid have to work in college? 2) Does the kid have personal problems? 3) Does the kid have a good study environment? 4) Is the kid distracted by college party life?

Another issue is motivation. Lazy kids don't do as well, hard workers do better and that can overcome basic ability. In other words, there are smart kids who goof off or burn out in college and have lousy grades to show for it. No test can measure motivation.

I suspect if you isolate out a lot of that stuff the stats might be better.

When I took the SATs, I found it to be a very odd test with very strange questions.

But there is one key factor in the SATs and why they exist and are needed: standardization. Every kid is taking the same test. Grades and education achievement very tremendously from school to school. The SAT, however imperfect, provides some standard measure.

One could ask how well does high school grades predict future college performance. I dare say if tested the correlation would be less than the SATs because of school variations. (Ironically, for myself, my GPA was the same.)

compared our scores, the scores did reflect the relative smartness of most kids. In other words, the kids ranked pretty much where we'd expect them to rank--smart kids did well, dumb kids did poorly. (There were a few surprises).