I think a major counter point is how these tests can be improved upon individually without much improvement over other subjects. The first time I took the SAT, I went in totally blind and got 1320, a few months later, with a bit more practice with pre existing precalc, I was able to get 1490. I also had many classmate report similar trends of their score increasing as the number of retakes increases.
This has been studied. There is a retest effect on most "cognitive performance" tests: scores increase on the first and second re-test, then level off. (i.e. the test scores for the 3rd and 4th time you take the test end up about the same)
It measures your ability to perform on a new subject after studying for it, plus your willingness to study. The fact that you can study for it and improve your score (but not entirely - raw abilities still matter) is a feature not a bug.
But SAT is the aptitude test, and recognizing the importance of aptitude and working on that aspect would benefit the candidate greatly. You are supposed to be able to work and improve urself and benefit from it. A person is not an static object. What happened to `bring the best out of oneself`?
I'm not sure you're making the point you think you are. As I recall the SAT many years ago, there were definitely question forms like X:Y as A:? which rely on vocabulary to some degree but may also be hard (or at least take some extra time) if the form is unfamiliar. Also even a surface-level understanding of some areas of math you realize you sort of didn't really get can be useful. So with that fairly modest knowledge and refresh, you got what's a possibly useful but also relatively modest uptick.
Don't discount the bump from understanding the pacing and difficulty of the exam. You might have 25 questions in 30 minutes for a math section. Understanding that which sections are easy and which are hard allows a student who has seen the exam before to allocate their time more efficiently.
Sure. And even taking the test once under real live conditions is probably beneficial to complement a bit of study. Just as really giving a presentation to even a few people almost certainly beats just mentally walking through it in your head.
Obviously you can try to create a real simulation but it's probably not the same thing.
The increase from 1320 to 1490 is pretty significant when it comes to college rankings. Although 1490 isn't anything stellar, it's the top 10 or 5 percent at my school. My main point was just the fact that, by paying collegeboard more money for more retakes, your score will increase. The SAT doesn't seem like a great indicator of anything besides one's ability to perform on the SAT
There’s a range you can improve on. If you are an idiot you don’t have a chance of improving that much, but mommy and daddy can buy you a 4.0 at a private school. Can’t bribe your way to a 1600 SAT anywhere near as easily as the private school game can be played. And this is another reason why I like SATs over grades - the poor can get a leg up over the rich.
I'll take a standardized test over arbitrary grades any day. Grades are far, far easier to game in so many ways (switch to an easier major!) than the SAT. Just ask anyone gunning for med school or law school - they will opt for the easier class over the harder one if it means their GPA has less risk of dropping.
